Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Skidmore

(37,364 posts)
Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:15 PM Nov 2012

Two things re: Susan Rice. Actually three things.

1. She has not yet been appointed to the job.

2. The lame duck congress will not be the congress confirming her appointment.

3. I think it was Richard Wolff yesterday who said that the President would have the number of votes necessary for confirmation.

I'm starting to think that this bunch of crap has more to do with stacking the Senate and detracting from this tax/fiscal hiccup/bump/hill/curve/slope/cliff/precipice/whatever thingy.

Let's get a grip and focus.

4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Two things re: Susan Rice. Actually three things. (Original Post) Skidmore Nov 2012 OP
Especially to #1 +1,000,000 Agschmid Nov 2012 #1
And it also detracts from the FACT that Darrell Issa exposed classified info that C-Span aired. n/t Tx4obama Nov 2012 #2
She's the context to the filibuster talks. Bucky Nov 2012 #3
Good point. I think you are onto something there. Skidmore Nov 2012 #4

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
1. Especially to #1 +1,000,000
Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:18 PM
Nov 2012

No one has resigned, as of right now nothing has changed. This is ridiculous.

Also we are bringing up the 1998 bombing now... WTF Collins and Ayotte?!?

Bucky

(54,005 posts)
3. She's the context to the filibuster talks.
Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:30 PM
Nov 2012

If McCain can stir up some real shit out of these events, which I reckon he and Howdy-Doody are trying to do, then he can eat away at that "number of votes necessary for confirmation" Obama has. If he doesn't, he can threaten the filibuster.

This is why the filibuster debate now is so critical. There's still a significant backlog in nominations to judicial posts left over from the first Obama administration. I imagine they'll probably end up with some compromise to protect the filibuster as an institution. But if they do and McCain talks against Rice (or merely threatens to, as is solely required now), the Dems may still go nuclear later in the session.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Two things re: Susan Rice...