Specter’s Fine Whine
Via Steve Benen, it seems Barack Obama hurt Arlen Specter’s feelings:
Specter said in prepared remarks Tuesday that Obama did not consult with him before choosing Eric Holder Jr. to be attorney general, and he tells Legal Times that Obama also did not consult with him or notify him before announcing four other Justice Department nominees Monday.
“History demonstrates that presidents who seek the advice of members of the Senate prior to submitting a nomination frequently see their nominees confirmed more quickly and with less controversy than those who do not,” Specter (R-Pa.) said…. “In contrast, on the nomination of Mr. Holder, President-elect Obama chose not to seek my advice or even to give me advance notice in my capacity as Ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, which is his prerogative.”
Maybe Specter forgot that he’s in the minority party in the Senate and his party lost control of the White House, too. But to review, Holder’s last government appointment was as Deputy Attorney General where he served for four years. Try as conservatives might to huff and puff over him, that’s the very model of a banal choice of a well-qualified candidate. The idea of having lengthy discussions with people about whether or not a guy who was unanimously confirmed as Deputy Attorney General could be qualified to serve as Attorney General is a little silly. The Transition has a lot on its plate what with the two wars and the economic crisis.
38 Responses to “Specter’s Fine Whine”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
January 8th, 2009 at 9:02 am
We all know how the Bush administration consulted with ranking Democrats on the judiciary committee about appointments . . .
January 8th, 2009 at 9:14 am
could someone–tpm or someone with staff–just start a wiki of the sickening, deferential bullshit that the senators spouted for eight years under the bush presidency?
so that every time an asshole like specter pops his head up, we can bludgeon him with 43 of this earlier quotations about how a president deserves to have his choices respected, how it is the president’s prerogative to appoint his own team, blah blah blah?
and another wiki containing ‘up and down vote’ quotations for the first time these slimey bastards attempt a filibuster?
this is going to be one of those times when the media will do its job, or not. it will hold political players accountable for the same standards under dem administrations as republican administrations, or it will go along with the iokiyar rules.
actually, there’s no suspense about how it will turn out. the traditional media–the broders and kellers–have already rolled over, as witness the bolton/yoo op-ed.
it’s up to the non-traditional media to do the media’s job.
January 8th, 2009 at 9:21 am
I think with the radicalization of his own party, and his state inching further leftward, Specter is having a hard time seeing how he will be relevant anymore. It’s a sad time to be Arlen Specter. Is there any reason anybody would want to know what he thinks?
January 8th, 2009 at 9:24 am
I totally agree with Matt said, but I’m a bit surprised, given the way Obama has set himself up to be the great uniter and listener, that he wouldn’t have at least given advance notice to them. Not that he should have to, but it sort of breaks with his MO, no?
January 8th, 2009 at 9:24 am
I think the Senator from Comcast needs to go back to doing what he does best: investigating spygate.
Ever notice that Arlen’s biggest $$ comes from Comcast?
Ever notice that Comcast was in a huge bruhaha with the NFL last year over the NFL network and Sunday Ticket?
Ever notice how the Sen. from Comcast sought to punish the NFL by launching his investigation right before the superbowl last year? Ever notice how the Sen. from Comcast threatened to take away the NFL’s anti-trust exemption while the NFL was negotiating with comcast? Ever wonder why the fine Senator from Comcast does what he does?
Oh did I call him the Senator from Comcast? I meant to call him Senator Magic Bullet
January 8th, 2009 at 9:26 am
To take Njorl’s point another step, I hope anyone planning to run against Specter is mocking him in the PA press every time he lifts his head and says something like this. Now is the time to crush him when he tries to obstruct a very popular incoming Pres., not 2 years from now.
January 8th, 2009 at 9:32 am
MY FEELINGS.
January 8th, 2009 at 9:35 am
“We all know how the Bush administration consulted with ranking Democrats on the judiciary committee about appointments . . .”
And how did that workout for them, rea?
January 8th, 2009 at 9:37 am
8 years ago, when Matt was in jr high, a very highly qualified lawyer, former governor and former senator was nominated for the AG spot. The very model of a banal choice. And yet that nomination faced opposition right from the start from the minority party. It’s almost as if politics is part of this, and Matt only notices it occasionally.
kid, you’re a fucking moron. You guys won with these tactics. Democrats successfully filibustered judicial nominees. There were no up or down votes. Hypocrisy is a fair charge, but the right response is, hey, you guys were right–I’ll happily concede the legitimacy of the Democrats’ tactics over the last 8 years.
And Matt’s bit about two wars and a financial crisis–absolutely perfect. Matt, we’ve faced those circumstances for awhile. Why should it lead to deference now? Cluelessness like this is too hard to fathom.
January 8th, 2009 at 10:00 am
Let me say something important here about Arlen Specter. Specter’s main interest isn’t obstructing Obama because he’s an obstructionist Republican. Specter’s main interest is obstructing Obama because he’s all about Arlen Specter. This is Specter throwing a temper tantrum because he wasn’t given what he feels is his “due”. I’m a conservative (a disgruntled one), and there was a point where I registered independant because I was unhappy with the Republicans. I re-registered in Pennsylvania when I lived there for the express purpose of voting against Arlen Specter in the primary. So yes, he’s tone deaf, but that’s because to Specter, Specter is more important than the country.
January 8th, 2009 at 10:21 am
There were no up or down votes.
Uh, what?
There were hundreds of judges confirmed by the Senate in the past eight years.
January 8th, 2009 at 10:24 am
And how did that workout for them, rea?
Democrats successfully filibustered judicial nominees.
Actually, the Republicans were quite successful in getting Bush adminstration nominees confirmed, and I’m hard pressed to think of an example of the Democrats successfully filibustering one. Certainly anyone who, like me, has to practice in front of federal judges on occasion will acknowledge, if she or he is candid, that the federal bench is full of right wing nutjobs.
January 8th, 2009 at 10:25 am
8 years ago, when Matt was in jr high, a very highly qualified lawyer, former governor and former senator was nominated for the AG spot. The very model of a banal choice.
Of course, that candidate had also just lost his reelection bid to a dead man and had a well deserved reputation as an extremist. And really, that “Let the Eagle Fly” thing should have been disqualifying on its own. But other than that, they’re exactly alike.
January 8th, 2009 at 10:36 am
There were no up or down votes.
I am relentlessly familiar with Republican talking points and here people repeat them, and I am well aware that the right-wing brainwashed their gullible, lemming-like believers into thinking that “there were no up or down votes,” while in fact the congress quickly confirmed almost all of Bush’s judicial nominees and far fewer were blocked under Clinton. It is a testimony to your ignorance about politics that you would write something like this. It is a testimony to your insularity that you would think we wouldn’t laugh at this for the self-evidently false statement that it is.
I’m curious whether you actually BELIEVE this, or whether you thought it would slip by without anyone noticing. My guess is that you’re so socially isolated from reality and receive so little daily pushback on your right-wing rantings that it’s gotten to the point where you actually believe stuff like this that has no basis in fact but were in fact falsehoods planted in the pliable brains of right-wing followers like yourself.
January 8th, 2009 at 10:37 am
You guys are missing the most hilarious aspect of Arlen’s complaint: Arlen was the guy who inserted a clause into the Patriot Act allowing President Bush to make interim US Attorney appointments with unlimited terms of service. That , in turn, allowed the dismissal of 8 US attorneys general for political reasons and replacement of those attorneys with appointees who were more..er.. political flexible.
See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dismissal_of_U.S._attorneys_controversy
and especially this subsection:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dismissal_of_U.S._attorneys_controversy#Revised_interim_appointment_process_in_March_2006
January 8th, 2009 at 11:31 am
The good news: Congress is back from its eight-year vacation.
The bad news: Congress is back from its eight-year vacation.
January 8th, 2009 at 11:32 am
Aren’t you glad that Arlen’s hair is growing back after his chemo?
It is one thing to think and talk like an asylum escapee but to also look the part… now that was sad!
January 8th, 2009 at 11:35 am
Tyro, actually believe what? That those nominees who were filibustered were denied an up or down vote? Yeah, I believe that, because that’s what happened. There was a deal made to get some confirmed, but the others were denied a vote. So, yeah, I actually believe that what happened happened. I don’t know what you believe, or why it’s so inconsistent with the actual facts.
spot check, the man won something like 6 statewide elections in Missouri. Doesn’t sound like an extremist to me.
rea, are you kidding? You can’t think of any nominees successfully filibustered? Start with Estrada, singled out for a filibuster because he’s hispanic.
January 8th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Specter may deserve mockery, but Obama should still be cultivating his support, given that he’s one of a very small handful of Republican Senators whose votes may be up for grabs on critical issues. I’m thinking specifically here about EFCA–Nate Silver has had a couple recent posts pointing out the fix Specter is in on that issue in particular.
January 8th, 2009 at 11:48 am
Thomas, you are actually claiming that there were no up or down votes for any of Bush’s nominees, when in fact they happened all the time, whereas a small group were filibustered. It is a testimony to the right-wign noise machine that you are apparently convinced that the Democrats somehow stopped Bush from getting any judges confirmed– either (a) you’ve allowed you mind to be stolen and handed over to right-wing propaganda, or (b) you’re simply repeating the talking points you’ve been fed, and the myths about how there were “no up or down votes”, despite all of the scores of federal judges appointed by bush going to the bench, in the hopes that this will somehow make you the “hep cat” of right-wingers. In any case, it make you look like an idiot to everyone but the ignorant right wing douchebags you choose to associate with.
January 8th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
Tyro, jesus christ. I mean, it’s a fucking blog comment, not a law review article. There were no up or down votes on those nominees filibustered. Clear enough? Meanwhile, a smart guy like rea–I mean that–doesn’t know the facts, and you, the liberal hipster, can’t be bothered to correct him, instead focusing on a really narrow and absurd reading of a blog comment. Hooray for you.
January 8th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Thomas, how do you explain the change in blue slip policy from the Clinton years to the Bush years?
January 8th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
Thomas, you have a moral obligation not to lie. You lied in favor of simply repeating maniacal right-wing frothing-at-the-mouth talking points about how Democrats weren’t approving any of Bush’s nominees. We do not accept that BS here– keep such BS among your ignorant, angry right wing friends or use to to harrass and annoy your liberal relatives who already hate you. The reality is that the Democrats were perfectly happy to approve almost all of Bush’s nominees– a greater portion than the Republicans approved Clintons, many of whom were secretly held up. Your frothing-at-the-mouth right-wing dishonesty about how there were “no up or down votes” is just yet another example of how those who trade in right-wing talking points are some of the most ignorant, dishonest people around. Your mindless repetition of crap you hear and are told to repeat is just another reason why people regard you as nothing but a joke and a jackass.
Look, we all know the talking points that you have been TOLD TO REPEAT. They only hold any currency among like-minded right-wing ignoramuses you atr trying to ingratiate yourself with. For the rest of us, it causes us to regard you as an ignorant fool… if you want to be taken seriously, maybe cribbing some dishonesty talking points outrage from 2002 probably isn’t the way to go about it. The Republicans lied as a means to attack Democrats over judges. That doesn’t obligate you to repeat their talking point propaganda.
January 8th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Tyro, I didn’t lie. There were no up or down votes on filibustered nominees. The filibustered nominees were denied an up or down vote. Definitionally true. You misunderstood my comment, which is fair enough, and you’ve made your point several times.
Your assertion that there’s some right wing talking point going around that no Bush nominees were approved is kind of funny. It’s also a lie, I should say. I mean, people are familiar with John Roberts, for example. Similarly, it’s a lie when you say that I’ve told to repeat (or, as you would have it, TOLD TO REPEAT).
I don’t doubt that you think I’m an ignorant fool. You don’t know anything, so you don’t know better. Go back to eating rea’s bs.
January 8th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Thomas, in the pre-Bush years judicial nominees were blue slipped. In the Bush years a few of nominees were filibustered because Hatch eliminated blue slips.
January 8th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
“Tyro, I didn’t lie. There were no up or down votes on filibustered nominees.”
Yeah, no shit. We get that. Filibustered nominees were by definition, filibustered.
What you orginally wrote:
“You guys won with these tactics. Democrats successfully filibustered judicial nominees. There were no up or down votes.”
Now you either 1)can’t write for shit, 2)are deliberately using obfuscatory language, or 3)have no fucking clue what you’re talking about.
What you’re pretending not to understand is that Bush had far more of his judges confirmed than Clinton despite Democrats ‘tactics’. This isn’t complicated.
Where’s that Not As Stupid as Thomas guy?
January 8th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
As suual Thomsd is either deliberately lying and not arguing in good faith or is stupider than a fence post, either way discussion with him is pointless, don’t feed the trolls.
January 8th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Woohoo! Thomas can come up with a single example of a Bush judicial appointee not confirmed! And of course, adds the gratuitous nonsensical claim that the reason he was not confirmed was not because he was Ann Coulter’s boyfriend, with views to match, but because he was hispanic!
We’re teetering on the brink of acheiving wingnut bingo, here . . .
January 8th, 2009 at 7:53 pm
…and, when he became AG, promptly covered up the statue of Justice to hide her shameful boobies.
Though, we should not forget that this singing senator who lost to a dead man and covered up the statue of Justice was probably about the best of Bush’s horrible appointments. Even in his hospital bed, he thought we probably should not adopt fascism.
January 9th, 2009 at 12:50 am
Njorl, I think you mean that, in every circumstance he exercised independent judgment. That’s not something that could be said about Gonzales, Reno or Holder.
rea, you can google the rest of the cases, I don’t need to do your work for you. Lazy and ignorant is no way to go through life. Everyone knows that Estrada was filibustered because of his ethnicity. Oh, it’s more complicated–they were worried that his ethnicity would lead Bush to nominate him to the Supreme Court, and that it would be hard to oppose him for that spot, so they had to oppose him at the DC circuit. But it really did boil down to, he’s hispanic–though no, we were all assured, authentically hispanic, and he’s hot-headed, a stereotype come to life–and we can’t have that. That’s your party.
Waingro, read the two sentences together, with the basics of interpretive charity, which is to say, if a fact is almost universally known, assume the author knew it. That’s how to read.
March 1st, 2009 at 6:47 pm
cialis
I want to say – thank you for this!
March 11th, 2009 at 4:46 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
March 12th, 2009 at 11:36 pm
Incredible site!
March 17th, 2009 at 2:29 am
Incredible site!
tramadol
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:19 am
tramadol
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
March 22nd, 2009 at 10:31 am
buy viagra online
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
April 9th, 2009 at 6:30 am
I want to say – thank you for this! viagra
April 19th, 2009 at 9:00 am
fCaUij ijcybcfrrcty, [url=http://vkqntixlmxna.com/]vkqntixlmxna[/url], [link=http://txxqmbwcebga.com/]txxqmbwcebga[/link], http://puhbiaoiwqpg.com/