6 thoughts on “GOP Senators Put Nation’s Security at Risk

  1. Because Democrats gave President Bush everything he wanted, no questions asked right?

    So now Democrats think it’s ok to use national security as a political issue? Guess they’ve changed their tune.

      1. I seem to recall quite a few Bush nominees to the courts were held up, not receiving an up or down vote.

        In 2003 Harry Reid wanted his nuclear waste adviser, Gregory Jaczko, to be nominated to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. When Bush did not make the nomination, Reid put a hold on Bush’s nominees for more than a month. A year later when Bush did nominate Jaczko for the post, but didn’t move quickly enough through the Environment & Public Works Committee, Reid put a hold on nominees for environmental agencies and bills originating in that Senate committee. He then expanded it to a hold on ALL of Bush’s nominees for the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Interior, Justice, Labor, and the EPA.

        When Obama was a Senator, he put a hold on Bush’s nominations to the EPA and the Federal Election Commission. As part of a dispute over lead paint regulations, Senator Obama announced that he would “block the appointment of every nominee to top EPA jobs until the agency satisfied his demands.”

        Also, when it came time to nominate Miguel Estrada back in 2001 some memos later surfaced from when the Democrats were running the Senate Judiciary Committee, from a staffer to Sen. Dick Durbin:

        “You are scheduled to meet with leaders of several civil rights organizations to discuss their serious concerns with the judicial nomination process. The leaders will likely include: Ralph Neas (People For the American Way), Kate Michelman (NARAL), Nan Aron (Alliance for Justice), Wade Henderson (Leadership Conference on Civil Rights), Leslie Proll (NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund), Nancy Zirkin (American Association of University Women), Marcia Greenberger (National Women’s Law Center), and Judy Lichtman (National Partnership). . . .

        “. . . The primary focus will be on identifying the most controversial and/or vulnerable judicial nominees. The groups would like to postpone action on these nominees until next year, when (presumably) the public will be more tolerant of partisan dissent.”

        “{The groups} also identified Miguel Estrada (D.C. Circuit) as especially dangerous, because he has a minimal paper trail, he is Latino, and the White House seems to be grooming him for a Supreme Court appointment. They want to hold Estrada off as long as possible.”

        1. Again, I’m not talking about one or two nominees here and there; I’m talking about the blocking of 70+ nominees at once. What’s worse, these nominees weren’t even held up for ideological reasons; they were held up because Sen. Shelby wants a handout for his state.

Comments are closed.