Shelby has likely overplayed his hand. The reason holds work is that they’re small enough, and rare enough, that they never rise to the level of something the majority can’t live with. Shelby, in putting a hold on all pending nominations, just made holds very big indeed. And he did it for the most pathetic and parochial of reasons: pork for his state. If the Democrats have any sense at all, Shelby’s hold is about to become as famous as Nelson’s deal.
Uh-oh. Maybe Shelby will denounce himself and demand that Harry Reid ensure that malfeasance like his never happens again? Otherwise Obama might have to learn to live without nominees.
Shelby’s move is a natural response to the Democrats’, and particularly Obama’s near-pathological instinct for conflict avoidance. Find another frustrating example here. If you push them and they don’t push back, then you push them a little harder. If they still don’t push back then you give a real shove. That’s party politics.
Some shift in the national atmosphere (take your pick) has rendered Senate traditions obsolete. Americans as a whole don’t care about this stuff, but they do care that Democrats have a huge majority and yet Republicans still ritually humiliate them. If Harry Reid cannot adapt to this new world and fix the problem, then insane moves like Shelby’s will just become part of the landscape. At least until Republicans get a majority back and once again govern like Republicans.
pablo
“Dick” Shelby is looking for a role in a new movie….
TR
It helps that one of the two things Shelby is throwing a tantrum over is an earmark he made in 2008 for a $45 million explosives training center for the FBI.
Republicans have been complaining about earmarks for a while now, and seeing Shelby grind things to a halt over one isn’t going to sit well with people.
Senyordave
The Dems should make this huge, force a confrontation with Shelby. But it has to come from the Senate.
Martin
@TR: Even better is the $40B threat for the tanker contract that has already sent 2 people to prison over and is currently in bidding. Further, it’s a contract that got McCain in trouble with Gates for interfering with the bidding process. It’s been in the news on and off for years now, so the media already has a lot of icky guilty-by-association stuff that would stick to Shelby like glue – it’s an easy story for them to run.
Personally, I think Obama should call him out on it – directly and publicly. I know that’s considered rude in DC, but it’s what the voters want. Maybe wait for the GOP to filibuster the jobs bill and then do a prime-time presser asking voters to engage with their Senators because that place is fucked up, and then roll out some examples.
The Senate gets away with this crap because it’s largely invisible. That needs to change.
Zifnab
What is so staggeringly amazing is that Republicans, just four years ago, were gleefully writing the playbook on how to circumvent Democrat obstruction. Senators saw military bases slammed shut by the DoD as punitive measures to round up votes. The Homeland Security Department was pork project ground zero, funneling billions to friendly House districts while short-changing areas like Washington D.C. and NYC specifically because of their liberal representatives. The power of the purse was used viciously to kneecap and corral waffling Dems.
Now the Democrats take the reigns and start trimming the fat, and the party currently running full tilt on “Say No To Porkulous!” is happy to throw down the gauntlet to… wait for it… defend that pork!
Dems have hit a serious soft spot. But rather than drive the blade home, they’re going to back off, apologize, and try to find a “compromise” that keeps the jackass Richard Shelby happy enough to cull his blanket hold down… what exactly? It’s not like Obama’s nominees were getting rushed out the door anyway. Have we even seated our head of TSA yet? Restocked the committee that handles campaign finances (not that that’s even useful now that the SCOTUS has gutted it)?
A fucking worthless Senate. And I can count the number of Democrats that are the problem inside two hands.
Violet
I hope a Senator makes a huge stink about it. Perhaps someone with an election in the future that needs to be seen “working for the people” will see this for the golden opportunity it is.
bcinaz
As much as I hate the idea of recess appointments – President Obama can now pull an ace out of his sleeve – and use “Blanket Recess Appointments” as a teachable moment.
He can address the nation in prime time to explain why he is taking the most extreme Constitutional liberty to fill vacant positions within the government, fight earmark abuse, and overcome naked obstructionism.
I’d watch. I’d even stay tuned for the Republican response defending the 41-59 supermajority.
El Cid
No — it’s okay for Republicans to abandon any Senate tradition they don’t like, but for Democrats to even contemplate changing the rules in the favor of majoritarian Senate work, OMG, THEY’Z TRYIN’ TA KILL DEMCRAZEE!
Darius
If Harry Reid cannot adapt to this new world and fix the problem, then insane moves like Shelby’s will just become part of the landscape.
Agreed. This isn’t about policy or ideology; this is about simply allowing the government to function on its most basic level. If the Democrats cave on this, then they are truly worthless as a political entity.
Evinfuilt
This is kinda exciting. We’ve got a moronic move from a Republican predicated on the spinelessness of Harry Reid. I mean, if Obama and Reid don’t do something with this, there really isn’t much hope. Of course if they do, it will be brilliant to watch.
I want fireworks damn it!! I’m afraid of course that I’ll get an explosives testing ground instead.
El Cid
Ladies and gentlemen, the Honorable Senator Richard Porkwall Shelby from the Great Confederate State of Alabama, just a few weeks ago:
Clearly the Obamunists could clear all these suspicions of Stalinist taxandspending up by simply guaranteeing all of these funds were to be expended in Alabama.
So, remember, facilitating rural broadband throughout the nation = Obamahitlertaxandspend.
Holding up 70 federal nominees to grab $85 million for federal contracts earmarked to Alabammy = superdemocracy.
dmsilev
First response from the White House:
-dms
AhabTRuler
[email protected]: TSA candidate withdrew his name, citing the broken political process as reason.
Rhoda
This entire year, the senate has basically been on the sidelines. They haven’t passed the president’s agenda and they haven’t defended the president actually throwing him under the bus on terror issues IMO.
This is their moment. Either they’ll throw a punch and start a food fight over Republican obstructionism and fight to get shit done and forget bipartisanship; or they’ll curl up in the fetal position and call on Obama to come and provide leadership (ie fight this fight for us).
The last good opportunity they had, Republicans holding up unemployment insurance, they didn’t take. If they don’t do something on this; they deserve everything that comes at them.
Osprey
I think they need to turn Al Franken loose. Seriously, he’s the only D Senator who can really communicate with your average American. Listening to Reid is going to put people into comas. Obama will just speechify and bipartipussianship the whole thing.
Load Franken up with a lot of Red Bull and Vodka, and everytime somebody like Shelby pulls this shit, prop Franken in front of the news cameras and have him go all Les Grossman (Tom Cruise’s character from Tropic Thunder) on them.
Taken from Wikiquotes and edited a few lines.
Darius
@dmsilev:
It’s a good start. But the Dems need to do more. Reid should be scheduling a vote to break the hold right this very minute. And Obama should hold a press conference to blast this unprecedented abuse of the system.
danimal
Force the confrontation. Every day. Make it a political circus.
Imagine you’re a GOP senator, say Judd Gregg. Do you want to go on national tv day after day to support filibustering every Obama nominee for another state’s pork? But if they have to vote for cloture on each nominee, the entire focus of the Senate becomes centered on this process. For weeks. Do you think Judd Gregg wants to do this? Remember, they can’t lose one vote, they have to march in lockstep or they risk giving the Dems a series of victories.
Shawnzilla
Did anyone else catch Franken yesterday talking to I think it was the No Child Left Behind appointee. McCain put a hold on him in July and Franken was asking said appointee, did you receive any written questions of any kind from the person that is basically keeping you from doing your job? – No sir. So basically McCain places a hold on the guy for no real reason.
Martin
@El Cid: It’s not $85M. It’s $45M + $40 billion.
Martin
@dmsilev: Gibbs is too weak. Seriously, it’s time for Obama to get all over this shit.
Froley
Chinese mines cave-in less than the Dems.
TR
Is it true that Shelby has no Democratic opponent? Seriously?
Church Lady
Tim, it’s not “Americans” that worry about the Republicans being able to “ritually humiliate” the Democrats. It’s the Democrats.
Brien Jackson
@Darius:
What exactly are they supposed to do to “not cave” on this?
Zandar
This works specifically because Richard Shelby has the safest Senate seat in the country right now. He is running unopposed this year and will earn another six-year term in November because there’s nobody running against him at all. No Teabaggers in the primary, no Dems in the general. You’ve got this asshole until January 2017 at the minimum.
Throughout this entirely justified but ultimately futile wave of outrage, I have yet to see even one person explain to me what price Shelby’s going to pay from anyone until 2016 at the absolute earliest…and by then who gives a damn?
There’s a reason Richard Shelby pulled this trigger on the day Scott Brown was sworn in (early).
He’s already won.
dmsilev
@Darius: Oh, I agree. Obama holding a press conference, getting up in front of the cameras and basically restating what Gibbs said, is the logical next step.
Stick a rhetorical knife into Shelby’s belly.
That, and Reid should schedule a cloture vote ASAP. That’ll either blow the hold out of the water or force the GOP to go on record agreeing with Shelby. At that point, Obama goes on TV again and says “hey, I tried bipartisanship. I spent over a year trying. Enough is enough. All these appointments are going through as recess appointments.”.
-dms
Martin
@Froley: Well, at this point it’s not caving in. An optimist would say that the GOP is getting baited with the jobs bill. We’ll see which way it goes. And no, I wouldn’t put money on a good outcome to this, but I think their best opportunity to fundamentally change the narrative with voters for 2010 is coming up on Monday. We’ll see if they rise to it.
Sentient Puddle
@Darius:
Not how this thing goes down. If Reid did this and Shelby didn’t back down, the Senate would be in session from now until the election processing these confirmations. And they wouldn’t be able to do anything else.
El Cid
@Martin: I think I meant to type billion. Oh well.
THE POINT IS EVIL FEDRUL GUBMIT MONEY STOP DA SPENDIN’ EXCEPT GIMME MO MUNEEEEE…
El Cid
@Froley: Ba-dump-bump.
Brien Jackson
@Darius:
So let’s see, 36 hours of ripening plus 30 hours of debate, twice per nominee, that works out to 132 hours (5.5 days) per nominee. Time 70 nominees, you’re talking about 385 days in total, but with 2 items on the floor at a time, that works out to 193 days. Assuming you win every cloture vote.
Where are we squeezing in HCR, jobs bills, financial reform, etc. in this?
cat48
Dick is using the “terrorism card”. Says Obama doesn’t want to fight terrorism and is delaying war on terror by not building the plant to test terrorist’s explosive devices. They always play the terror card.
pillsy
Senator Shelby is not a dog, and the Democrats are not his frustrated owners. If he decides to take dump on the rug, it’s not the fault of Harry Reid or Barack Obama because they’ve failed to rub his nose in his shit vigorously enough. He’s a grown man and a United States Senator. He’s got agency. He’s got more responsibility for the state of the nation than roughly 300 million other Americans.
If he decides to act like a cross between a mob bagman and a spoiled six year-old, it’s his own fucking fault. If you want the Democrats to be a more partisan in the face of ridiculous Republican intransigence and soft corruption, well, hell, maybe you should try being a bit more partisan in the face of ridiculous Republican intransigence and soft corruption.
These people are adults, and they’re doing what they’re doing because they think it works. Maybe, just maybe, one of the reasons it works is that no matter how outrageous their behavior is, we always decide to blame our own side for it.
scav
@Zandar: Then again, who gives a shit if Shelby individually is safe if he provides the curiously relevantly named vulnerable point where somebody can knee the Rethugs as a group. His personal sense of safety can lead to some unforced errors for the team. Exploit ’em, and we could still maybe divide and conquer. There’s even the possibility of a wild-card anti-govt tea-bagger that could queer the deal for him on his own pitch.
Darius
@Brien Jackson:
If the Dems can’t stand up to a single Republican senator who’s clearly stepped way over the line here, what makes you think they’ll fight for HCR, jobs bills, financial reform, or anything else for that matter?
Anyway, it won’t actually take the full 193 days; Shelby will be forced to back down long before that. (Just like Gingrich did back in ’95 – and he had a Republican majority.)
Sentient Puddle
@Darius:
You don’t understand. It’s not a question of whether or not Democrats stand up to Shelby. It’s a matter of what parliamentary procedure allows them to do. If Reid challenges him on the holds, that situation that Brien describes is exactly what happens.
feebog
So what can Reid do about this right now? He can schedule a cloture vote, and he may or may not win. What he should do is to get in front of the American people and promise to break this strangle hold by changing the rules in the next congress. No more filibuster, no holds beyond 30 days, no multiple holds. And then point out this is only going to happen if Democrat retain a majority in the Senate.
Brien Jackson
@Darius:
Bringing up an apples-to-oranges comparison as stark as that doesn’t really do much to demonstrate that you have any the first beginnings of a clue what you’re talking about.
Brien Jackson
@feebog:
Please learn what a hold is, the history of unanimous consent, etc. Then we’ll talk.
TooManyJens
@feebog: Now that, I like.
Of course, in the meantime, jobs are going unfilled because the Republicans are assholes, which is no trivial thing.
Pig Tralin
Keep calling Shelby’s DC office at (202) 224-5744- his staff is getting TESTY.
Colin Laney
This is the same Richard Shelby who siphoned off Katrina reconstruction money to build luxury condominiums in his hometown, which experienced no damage worth mentioning from the storm.
Martin
@pillsy: This.
The only real way out of this is to get someone who can truly turn this into a public spectacle – like Obama – to explain what’s going on in plain language to the voters. The public doesn’t really care about the sausage making and the media will never report it as cleanly and honestly as it needs to be. It’ll just come out as ‘DC is busted, and the Dems are running things, therefore the Dems are fucking up’. And honestly, we’re feeding that narrative.
The leadership in Congress just doesn’t have the platform or really, the voice to do it because everything goes through the Tweety/Hannity filter. But it’s Obama’s gift – rhetorically, the guy can turn shit into gold, and he has the platform because he can plow clear over the top of the media and he can do this in a way that sounds (and is) nonpartisan. Everything else turns into finger pointing, which is exactly what the GOP wants.
Lolis
Many of us live in red states with Republican senators. Today, I am going to call both my Republican Senators from TX and ask them to condemn Richard Shelby’s pork barrel projects. When they get calls about procedural stuff it scares the crap out of them. They think the public doesn’t notice. They’re at lunch now, but after lunch I am calling.
Sloegin
Simple majority vote can rewrite Senate rules, neh?
Dump the frikin supermajority already. The fallout from that can’t be any worse than the current state of affairs.
Zandar
@scav:
It’s possible.
But then again, the Democrats have been paying the price here for Republican obstruction, not the Republicans. The solution to Republicans like Shelby has been for the voters to reward the GOP and kick out the Dems in charge for not getting anything done.
Once again, I fail to see how the GOP loses this.
Zifnab
@Sentient Puddle:
Parliamentary procedure lets the Senate take a big hatchet to the budget of every bill with an earmark in it that stands by Senator Shelby. Then, when the Republicans are filibustering the entire defense bill, we’ll see how the public takes it.
Use Colorado Springs as an example. If the Republicans want to cry about pork, start trimming the fat. When they squeal – like Shelby is squealing now – it means they’re in pain. You’ve hit a nerve. You don’t back off that. You press on it.
Maybe Shelby’s state needs a military base to close. Maybe his neighbors in Mississippi or Texas don’t like a Naval base. We’ve got a 59 vote majority in the Senate, a majority in the House, and a President. If Shelby is willing to cripple the entire Senate over an $80 million contract, imagine what a few more flexible Republicans would do over a couple hundred million. How are the Utah Senators feeling about the filibuster all of the sudden?
Hell, if you want to have some real fun, go tell the Tea Baggers what you’re doing. Let’s see how long that movement lasts when budget cuts start hitting their own districts. I’m sure there are enough idiots out there that’ll hit the GOoPers from the right for defending their own state’s pork. That’ll be fun to watch.
GambitRF
Guys, guys, it’s okay! Shelby is only doing it to fight the terrorists!!
This is absolutely repulsive.
Dave C
I said this in the open thread already, but we really need to start referring to the GOP exclusively as the “Banana Republicans.”
Darius
@Sentient Puddle:
When the Dems held up a couple of Bush’s judicial nominees a few years back, did the Republicans wring their hands about “parliamentary procedure”? Hell no! They raged to high heaven about “up-or-down votes” and threatened to invoke the “nuclear option”. And in the end, they got their way.
This isn’t about rules or procedures; this is about whether the Democrats will stand up and fight for even the most basic of principles.
Brien Jackson
@Zifnab:
Could we at least try to keep this out of the realm of total fantasy? This whole idea of playing Senate politics with military bases is ridiculous. I mean seriously, you don’t think that might bite the Democrats in the ass?
Notorious P.A.T.
Time for Obama to write a sternly-worded letter to Shelby, like he did with Wall Street.
Chad N Freude
@GambitRF: Repulsive is an understatement:
handy
And they were no better as a minority party. Remember all those “strongly worded letters” they were famous for writing? Not to mention AUMF.
Bill In OH
@Brien Jackson: So Brien, what’s your solution? Yet another capitulation? Give up and go home? Call Shelby a meaniehead? I understand the process, and your assessment of the difficulties (while a bit smugly stated) is accurate. So, I ask again (in all sincerity). What do you suggest that the President and/or the Senate Dems do?
I agree with Darius. If the Dems can’t figure out what to do about this one obstructionist senator, then “HCR, jobs bills, financial reform, etc.” are already dead. Why the hell would you assume otherwise?
The only solution I can see, and of course I’m just a poor dumb DBA, so what do I know, is to force the Republicans to own this. No other work getting done? You can blame the R’s. Country going to hell? Ask your Republican senator why they’re grandstanding on appointments rather than doing the country’s business. Use the bully pulpit to put it front and center every single day. It may not work, but Jeebus, at least go down fighting.
I await your undoubtedly much better solution.
onceler
Careful, I don’t think you’re allowed to post about “Obama’s near-pathological instinct for conflict avoidance.” here…
Chad N Freude
@Brien Jackson: Maybe, maybe not.
Brien Jackson
@Bill In OH:
I know our Great Modern Activists aren’t much interested in it, but what it’s going to take to end this is, well, activism. And not the FDL kind of activism where you write lots of over the top blog posts and send internet petitions to the White House Chief of Staff, a real public activist campaign. Among other things, the media narrative surrounding these things has to be changed, and voters have to be better informed about the ways the mechanism of Senate obstruction works. Now that’ll be a long hard slog, as it were, but that’s the only realistic way, short of winning 80+ Senate seats, that you’re going to be able to enact sweeping rules changes affecting minority power today.
On the other hand, it’s entirely possible that the liberal wing of the Democratic Party could bait Republicans into ending the filibuster, but the GOP would have to have a decently hefty majority first.
pillsy
@Darius:
That’s right. And you remember who the Republicans were raging against? It wasn’t Bill Frist and it wasn’t George W. Bush—it was the Democrats who were holding things up.
It worked for them, and it can work for us. I think Tim F. is right about the hanging curve, but I don’t see any reason to wait around for Harry Reid or Barack Obama or Zombie FDR to step up to the plate. I wanna take a swing at that fucker too.
You wanna see a backlash against Shelby and the Republicans for pulling something this venal? Then show the rest of us how a backlash is done.
Martin
@onceler:
Obama gets into conflicts where he’s reasonably assured of a win. He can’t control the key Senate Dems, so that conflict just gives guys like Lieberman even more power as a veto agent. Getting in a 4 year Clinton/Gingrich style war of attrition isn’t going to help Dems since *they’re* the ones that have the seats to lose.
Going after SCOTUS gave him a win by bringing media attention to something that wouldn’t have gotten it otherwise. Obama needs to see that such a conflict will turn voters against the GOP, not against the Dem majority. That’s a dicey proposition because it requires a lot of education of voters. If it doesn’t get handled right, it’ll backfire.
Jay B.
@Brien Jackson:
Always an answer. Never, ever, ever a solution. You sum up the problem with the Democrats, always logical, never creative.
Obviously nothing you say here is wrong. Yet all it does is make it easy to do nothing and then wonder why voters gave up on the Democrats one year in. It’s this mentality that ensures the cycle.
Sure the Republicans didn’t do shit like this before, but they’re well within the rules to do it now, so, really, what do you think the Senate can do? Reid’s hands are tied. And Obama’s presence would be unwelcome in solving a Senate dispute. All irrefutably correct.
Me, I’m a rank sentimentalist. I don’t believe politics is always about logic. I don’t believe successful policy making always has to be led by process rather than emotion. If Republican successes over the past 40 years have taught us anything is that emotion trumps process every fucking time.
When the Democrats talk like they give a shit about the issues instead of pointing out the hopelessness of addressing them, the politics and the political calculations will change.
Or we can keep doing it your way Brien.
Edit: Or what Bill in OH wrote. And, as Brien responded, it’s now up to the activists to understand Senate procedure. Right. The Senate being helpless to address it, apparently.
moe99
I’ve sent emails to both newspapers in Seattle, home of Boeing, asking why they have not covered this stuff, and I got nothing. You would think that at least Boeing, who’s trying for the same contract that Shelby’s friends are, would make some noise, but noooo…..
Zifnab
@Brien Jackson:
Ask Bush. He was doing it all through 2005 and 2006. With the BRAC.
http://rawstory.com/exclusives/byrne/lautenberg_brac_base_closures_520
El Cid
This isn’t about greed for Big Gubmit Munee.
It’s about Senator Porkwall Shelby protecting America from Obama’s embrace of terrorism.
If only one day we could be as safe as under Republican leadership when we had 2 World Trade Centers, a 5 sided Pentagon, and no hijacked planes crashed into the ground.
Clearly Bill Clinton & Barack Obama erred grievously in reading Richard Reid the Shoe Not Bomber his Miranda rights and putting him through one of those gay wimpy civilian trials rather than a manly, leather thong wearing, sandals and robe-clad military tribunal.
[Yeah, that’s right, a sitting Senator just basically accused the President of not giving enough money to Alabama because he loves terrorists. The Democrats better hurry up and make a bipartisan box lunch so they can huddle around and talk this through.]
Chad N Freude
Nothing like a little cognitive dissonance to get things moving. IMHO, President Obama should take the bully pulpit and do a little bullying. Sound bites factually pointing out the obstructionist tactics and their effects on the teabaggers’ country, pointing out what is not getting done in their interests, would be difficult for the media to ignore and difficult to refute.
pillsy
@Jay B.:
I’m guessing you’re a Democrat, right? So focus on the problem.
The problem is that Senator Dick Shelby thinks that the only reason the US government exists is to funnel money into his state. The problem is that 40 other Republican Senators either agree with him, or simply don’t care because they’d rather see the fall into ruin than let a Democrat accomplish something.
The problem isn’t you, or Brien Jackson. It’s not Barack Obama. It’s not even Harry Reid. It’s the fucking Republican Party, and if you want people to know that, say it.
Gregory
@dmsilev:
Fixed.
Seriously, what the hell happened to the 50-state strategy? Why is this jerk running unopposed? Why is there no one to reap the benefit of this kind of political stumble the way Brown did in Mass.?
Clifton
@onceler:
Funny, the example Tim provided links to Rahm disagreeing with Holder’s decision to try KSM for fear of disappointing Graham. How did that turn out… Doesn’t really seem pathological to me, and shows nothing of Obama’s instincts… but hey the quicker we make asinine statements and links that do nothing to back up our asinine statements we show how independent minded we are.
Right?
JohnR
“If …, then insane moves like Shelby’s will just become part of the landscape.”
I’m not sure why you bothered with the “with .. then” clause here in your prediction. It looks like a safe bet to me. Better than the stock market, anyway.
BombIranForChrist
Here’s how it works:
1. Democrats get a majority.
2. Republicans obstruct them.
3. Democrats are voted out of office because they can’t get anything done.
4. Republicans get a majority
5. Democrats attempt to obstruct them, but are thwarted by asshats like Lieberman, Bayh, Feinstein, and other “centrist” hand-wringers who don’t want to be kicked off Andrea Mitchell’s party list, etc. etc.
6. Republicans stay in power until their incompetence threatens the very existence of the country.
7. Voters reluctantly elect Democrats.
8. Repeat.
Ailuridae
@Chad N Freude:
The White House has the statement up today. Gibbs addressed it very well in his press conference. Now, we just need someone in the mainstream media, or better yet, someone like Michael Smerconish to ask the president about it. Smerconish will likely be sympathetic and find Shelby’s actions outrageous and having a conservative talker ask the question makes it not look like a plant.
I’ve mentioned before how bad the democrats are at messaging – let’s hope they don’t blow this as well. It is a real gift if they manage it well.
Ash Can
@Martin: “The only real way out of this is to get someone who can truly turn this into a public spectacle – like Obama – to explain what’s going on in plain language to the voters.”
Conveniently, Obama’s weekly address is tomorrow. It’ll be interesting to hear what he has to say about this.
KCinDC
@Zifnab, that’s fine, but you need to explain how we change the media rules under which it’s okay for Republicans to do things like that, because it’s a law of nature that Republicans are strong on defense, whereas the opposite applies for Democrats. That’s what we’re up against.
Kryptik
@Gregory:
Because the 50-State strategy was deemed obsolete once Kaine replaced Dean, apparently.
Jay B.
@pillsy:
I think the problem is that the Democrats are only slightly less culpable than the Republicans. I mean really, they’re blindsided by Republican obstructionism? How is that fucking possible? I’ll assume that they are at least somewhat intelligent, so we’re left with two possibilities, they really were surprised that Republicans are mean, vicious political fighters OR they think that mean, vicious Republicans give them cover for their own timid approach (or worse still, they’re happy not to pass things).
And so we see utterly predictable things like this. The Democrats caught flat-footed at a Republican acting like a screaming child while the Republicans’ strategy, to date, has been a rousing success.
Remember two other things: 1. When Bernake looked for a moment that his reappointment was in trouble, the word was that he’d only need 50 votes. and 2. When Chris Dodd put a hold on some catastrophic domestic spying thing — telecom immunity maybe — and Reid ignored it, letting the bill fly through. What’s the difference between Dodd’s hold and this one? Why is a supermajority needed for Health Care, but not the Fed Chairmanship?
Jay B.
@Clifton:
What do you mean, how did that turn out? Holder’s getting rolled on a principled decision from the Justice Department, the Democrats are caving on civilian prosecutions of terrorist suspects and Lindsey Graham is still a preening blowhard. So…The rule of law gets the shaft, a common sense approach to restoring the Constitution dissolves under the weight of truly idiotic presumptions (we can’t try terrorists on U.S. soil!) and Obama appears for all the world like he’ll fold on pushback when a Republican gets his panties in a knot.
How do you see it?
Ailuridae
@Jay B.:
Remember two other things: 1. When Bernake looked for a moment that his reappointment was in trouble, the word was that he’d only need 50 votes. and 2. When Chris Dodd put a hold on some catastrophic domestic spying thing—telecom immunity maybe—and Reid ignored it, letting the bill fly through. What’s the difference between Dodd’s hold and this one? Why is a supermajority needed for Health Care, but not the Fed Chairmanship?
FFS, read up on cloture. Dodd never had 60 votes to support his hold. He and Reid both knew it and the legislation passed with 67 or 68 votes. Reid didn’t ‘ignore’ his hold.
A supermajority was needed for health care because there are now 41 republicans who will vote against cloture on any motion. There were never 40 votes against Bernanke and since some of the opposed mentioned that they would vote for cloture while still voting nay on the nomination there were even fewer. To wit, he was reconfirmed 70 to 30 but cloture vote was 77 to 23.
Look, our side is supposed to be informed and not ignorant. It would be awesome if posters here would learn what the fuck they are writing about rather than the same weak sauce arguments time and again.
mds
(1) He’s already the de facto Teabagger candidate, complete with the smirking dumbfuck hypocrisy.
(2) While it is disappointing that no one from the Dem side wanted to be a sacrificial lamb, because you should contest every seat, I’m not exactly clear on how a Democratic candidate applies the heat in Alabama to someone who combines loud opposition to the foreign-born Negro Muslim communist’s left-wing agenda with a play for $40 billion in pork for his state.
Jay B.
Dodd never had 60 votes to support his hold.
Right. But Shelby does? Reid ignored the hold and brought it up for vote on the floor, this is fact. What is preventing him from doing exactly the same thing now?
pillsy
@Jay B.:
See, this shit is exactly what I’ve been talking about in the whole fucking thread so far. Democrats are always more eager to get angry at other Democrats for being insufficiently resilient in the face of the Republicans being a bunch of swollen assholes instead of getting pissed off at the Republicans for actually being a bunch of swollen assholes.
You’ve got Dixie’s answer to Boss Tweed trying to derail the whole government over an 11 figure pay-off, and you’re still taking the time to rail at those poor beige fuckers from the Neutral Planet? How the hell is that even any fun?
Brien Jackson
@Jay B.:
He wrote it backwards. You don’t need 60 votes to support a hold, you need 41.
Ailuridae
@Jay B.:
Sorry 40 votes.
Reid ignored the hold and brought it up for vote on the floor, this is fact
Reid did not ignore the hold. Stop repeating this. Reid can’t ignore the hold. Either he moves and its given unanimous consent or its greeted with one or more objections. If its the latter its subjected to the cloture vote. Please stop repeating stupid FDL nonsense.
What is preventing him from doing exactly the same thing now?
To invoke cloture requires 40 votes. If you have been following the Senate you know that there is a very good chance that Shelby may have the entire Republican caucus behind him. Because of the rules of the Senate even the process of invoking cloture will take 3-4 days per nominee.
tavella
I think Punchy pretty much called it: Obama is not going to get a single major piece of legislation through in four years. Which you’d think would mean that he’d make an effort to push for the one piece that he wasted the entirety of his 60 seat majority time on, instead of shrugging his shoulders and saying ‘whatever’.
maus
Someone let the Senate know, because Reid knows better than you and me, and these gentlemens’ agreements will seemingly last as long as seniority matters.
mds
Er, if there’s a very good chance that Shelby may have the entire Republican caucus behind him on something this transparently piggish and self-serving, why are you even talking about all the other more important things Democrats have to worry about? Not a single one of them will pass anyway. Or are you suggesting that the optics of getting as quickly as possible to Senate Republicans killing a jobs bill will be better, even though you apparently disapprove of Democrats trying to make hay out of Repub obstructionism?
Tonal Crow
Two words: Nuclear Option. Ask for it by name.
Jay B.
@pillsy:
Oh boo-hoo. I fucking despise the GOP. They’ve actively ruined the country, nearly unchecked, for the previous 8 years. And we opposed them every step of the way. Vocally. Financially. We had to drag the spineless “opposition” party along with us, even after their catastrophic failures on Iraq, civil liberties and tax cut mania. Others shared my anger to the point where we, collectively, delivered historic Democratic majorities — and for fucking what? Excuses as to why the mean ol’ Republicans can still run our fucking lives?
I’m sorry if some of us are a little peeved. Of course, it’s on us too. We, at least on some level, believed they’d fight for us. That’s funny.
And now it’s up to us, again, to oppose the Republicans. Because our own party can’t get its shit together enough to do it in any sustaining, meaningful way? They get some good shots in now and again, even Reid, but to little effect. And the Democrats, again, are going to come around and ask us for more time, more money. What’s their pitch? With just a few more Democrats, we’ll get them this time?
Bill In OH
@Brien Jackson: That sounds like a great plan. Can I assume you’re organizing this activist campaign as we speak? I’ll be happy to donate some $$$ (time is a bit short right now, but that may change) as soon as you let us know where to send the checks.
pillsy
@Jay B.:
OK, you’re right. It is all up to us. How is whining about Harry Reid or Rahm Emmanuel or Barck Obama going to help us fight the Republicans?
Tonal Crow
@Jay B.: Hear hear! And let’s get on those phones and demand the Nuclear Option with the Harkin Rule, modified to require 55 votes to enact cloture for lifetime nominees (only).
xian
@danimal: I agree. In fact, if the Republicans in the senate are committed to halting government and preventing any single element of the entire Obama agenda or even the staffing of the administration from passing, then what is the downside to playing the political theatre to the hilt? You weren’t going to get anything done anyway?
Are ram things through where possible. I think Dems in DC are in an echo chamber thinking citizens care about filibusters and the traditions of the senate.
Jay B.
@pillsy:
Because they’re the Democratic Leadership! Jesus fuck, if they won’t or can’t effectively fight against the Republicans, to say nothing of presiding over an actual Democratic agenda, what do we say? Majority Leader Reid has his hands tied by this dastardly minority party, let’s give him an even bigger majority of preening egomaniacs who’ll overmatch him at every turn with conflicting agendas!
Sure, the White House hates us and calls us retarded, but goddammit, their half-measures and backtracking are fucking stirring.
And yet what you say is true, the Republicans are awful. One would hope that the Democrats who reside in DC would join us in this monumentally obvious observation and stop “reaching out” to them in a search for “bipartisan solutions”. It tends to undercut our anti-Republican message.
EDIT:
Word. Now that’s a creative approach. Like it. If I were a House member and a liberal, I’d start the fight to abolish the Senate, not because it would win, but it would be so ghastly and radical, it might actually get some airtime in this environment and put the focus on what, exactly, is wrong.
kay
@pillsy:
I think people are bored with process arguments, so they won’t pay attention to the mechanisms, so using arguments like “the filibuster is undemocratic!” is just a waste of time.
However. I do think Democrats can drag down the GOP Congressional approval numbers by highlighting the bickering, blocking and horsetrading, see: Shelby.
That matters, because the generic ballot numbers “Do you want to see Republicans or Democrats control Congress?” actually are predictive going into a midterm.
So this is one time where I would use a process argument against them.
The Senate process is ugly, whether it’s Max Baucus preening for the cameras and stonewalling, or Shelby holding a gun to everyone’s head to secure an earmark. There’s no downside to drawing attention to the fact that GOP Senators are now bickering, blocking and horsetrading.
But it has to be simple. “Shelby is holding America hostage for hundreds of millions of dollars”.
This is one time that might work, in terms of the generic ballot.
pillsy
@kay:
I think you’re right. I mean, I’m bored to tears by process arguments myself. It’s actually not particularly interesting why the Shelby Shakedown is possible according to Senate rules. The point is that he’s holding up 70 appointees in an attempt to extort billions (with the ‘B’) from American taxpayers.
I mean, OK, whatever, it cuts to the heart of our democracy and cloture votes and broken institutions and ungovernable nation and none of it fucking matters because what’s actually happening is that this is an epically venal move that’s been possible for decades but Dick Shelby (R-Airbus) has decided that he wants to be the guy who makes history by being an asshole in new and creative ways.
I’d love to live in a country where Kevin Drum and Ezra Klein could set the national agenda by saying smart things about a stupid system, but I don’t live in that country, and I’m reasonably certain I never will.
So let’s go with a simple story. A story Americans of all races, creeds and colors can get behind. A story that will appeal to the residents of forty-nine (49) states. That simple story, my friends, is, “Fuck Dick Shelby for being a fucking fuck!”
brendancalling
if the democrats won’t push back, they deserve the ritual humiliation.
hell, i’m happy to join in: the democrats are a bunch of gutless pussies with no convictions or principles. the only thing that makes them an improvement over the GOP is that they’re not batshit insane, but their cowardice more than makes up for that.
richard wang
“Dr. Klein, Dr. Maddow–please report to the operating theater for a testicular and spinal transplant for the democratic leadership…”
It’s even hard to write this because the democrats clearly don’t have any leadership….
Were democrats always this bad? I first voted in 1976 and I have a hard time remembering when democrats actually fought for anything worthwhile…
pillsy
@Jay B.
You know, for all that this course of action is very difficult and frustrating and involves biting back your anger over years of slights and failures, it has one singular, shining advantage over your, “Everybody complain about Rahm Emmanuel!” plan. The advantage is, in the relatively unlikely event we actually pull it off, it will make it more likely that you get what you want.
I mean, dude, if you think what we Democrats need is more partisanship, be more partisan.
kay
@pillsy:
I spend a lot of time here droningly defending process while at the same time knowing most people could care less.
It’s the sort of thing I like, but I’m not silly enough to think people are going to get all outraged about the filibuster, or sit still while I explain a “hold”.
But the generic ballot numbers do matter, and they’re affected by broad perceptions: there was a 9-15 point advantage for “Democrats” in 2006 on the generic ballot polls, and I think a good part of that was due to democrats ably using the “culture of corruption” theme against Republicans. The generic ballot numbers NOW are about even, and Republicans are going to need an a big pro-GOP edge there if they want a “wave election” in 2010. They don’t have one yet. I think it would be a good time to draw attention to how horrible, IN GENERAL, Republicans are, and we have this lovely example to exploit.
So, we’ve done this. We’ve succeeded at this, and recently, in 2006. We made Republicans horrible and corrupt to voters. Democrats are generally inept but not always.
No reason we can’t try it again, if we want to hold their Congressional pickups down. Instead of “culture of corruption” we can use “hostage taking earmarking hypocrites”. It’s not a lot of leverage, but it’s something.
Gibbs came out swinging, so maybe they get this already.
richard wang
Tell me, is it the “moderate” repiglicans pulling the football away from the democrats, Holy Joe and the other conservadems pulling the football away from the rest of the democrats or is it the Democrats pulling the football away from their base and the progressive movement in the US. I am really starting to wonder….
Cassidy
Yes, because our elected leadership has done so well in being the voice of the electorate so far.
Honestly, we just need to start the culture war and make these cowardly little shits put their money where their mouth is. Personally, I look forward to the day that I can pop a teabagger in the mouth and make him cry.
kay
@pillsy:
Well, or, they say they’re fiscal conservatives but they engineer back room deals and use Senate “technicalities” to funnel federal earmarks to their home states.
I like “technicalities” because conservatives here use “he got off on a technicality” to describe things like, oh, the 4th Amendment bar against illegal search and seizure. Minor technical matters.
“he used that tricky lawyer scheme to get off!”
Trust me. They hate process. It’ll be easy.
Cain
@Zandar:
Sounds to me that we can fuck up Alabama pretty good. If he’s running unopposed, we can pretty much take all federal dollars out of there. If he wants to play chicken, let’s do it. Isn’t Alabama one of those poor states that take in more of our fed tax dollars than it gives?
Let’s see how it plays out for him politically in Alabama. The tea baggers are going to complain anyways regardless, we might as well make it work for us.
cain
mclaren
No, the Democrats will whimper and cringe and cave in and then crawl back in their holes.
Shaming Republicans never works. They have no shame. Republicans would rape a 15-year-old girl on the capitol steps and then call a press conference to declare it a victory for motherhood.