Motley Moose – Archive

Since 2008 – Progress Through Politics

Me to GOP: Tough. YOU don’t get to choose.

In the wake of Eric Holder’s announcement that he will be stepping down as Attorney General, the media is filled with right-wing bloviating (no, right-wing, Eric Holder’s Justice Department is NOT “scandal ridden” … any more than “Romney won Ohio”).

This headline from The Hill stomped on my last nerve:

“GOP to Obama: Don’t replace Holder in lame-duck Congress”.

That article includes this quote from Ted Cruz:

“Allowing Democratic senators, many of whom will likely have just been defeated at the polls, to confirm Holder’s successor would be an abuse of power that should not be countenanced”.

“This shall not stand!” proclaims man whose freshness date expired months ago. “Abuse of power” and “should not be countenanced” are, of course, code words for impeachment. Go with that, GOP!! It has worked so well for you in the past. If the Republicans want to waste their time on impeachment to please their shrinking base, let them. The country needs a strong, intelligent, principled, Democratic replacement to continue the important work that Eric Holder started; if we have a better chance to get that now rather than later, with a thinner majority, we should do it.  

Oh, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell? May I say this about your comment:  “I will be scrutinizing the president’s replacement nominee to ensure the Justice Department finally returns to prioritizing law enforcement over partisan concerns.” With apologies to bubbanomics, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! The Justice Department that was replaced in 2009 was the most partisan in recent memory. A Republican Party operative, Karl Rove, directed the firing and replacement of 7 U.S. Attorneys who refused to go after Bush Administration political enemies. That is the very definition of “partisan”.

And one more thing, leaders of the Party of Southern White Males Still Bitter Over Losing The Civil War: Attorney General Eric Holder did uphold the law, the most important laws of the land: protecting the right to vote and the right to equal justice. Simply because it ran counter to the Republican Party’s plan to hang onto power by disenfranchising (and incarcerating) likely-Democratic voters, does not make it partisan. Yes, the citizens who need more protections than most tend to vote for Democrats — mainly because they are minorities, the poor, and women, people who feel, on a daily basis, your party’s disdain for them and for their concerns.

The Minoritea Party … now and for the foreseeable future:

The relative liberalism of Millennials translates into a greater likelihood of affiliating with or leaning toward the Democratic Party compared with those in older generations. Today, about half of Millennials (50%) are Democrats or lean to the Democratic Party, while just 34% affiliate with or lean to the GOP.

So a party that is anti-women, anti-people-of-color, anti-LGBT, anti-working-class, anti-education is not so popular with young people?

Who could have predicted that?


22 comments

  1. princesspat

    Why oh why would anyone vote for the R’s? Needless to say the polls tightening while expected is alarming.

    In current polling conditions, the Senate Meta-Margin has left Democratic territory for the first time since mid-August. Not much to say about that for now, except that the sharp movement was driven by fresh polls in Alaska and Colorado. If you  have questions, read about Meta-Margins here

    .

    http://election.princeton.edu/

  2. Attorney general confirmation process is fractious even before it’s begun

    “Rather than rush a nominee through the Senate in a lame duck session, I hope the President will now take his time to nominate a qualified individual who can start fresh relationships with Congress,” Sen. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa), the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said in a statement.

    Those relationships were ruined by Congress, Senator Grassley. How would you propose that the new nominee start fresh relationships … by promising to run the Justice Department as a Republican???

  3. Portlaw

    bureaucrats balk at replacing someone as important as an Attorney General? Have they no love for justice? It boggles my mind.  

  4. From the NY Times:

    Frequently mentioned candidates to replace Mr. Holder include Kathryn Ruemmler, the former White House counsel who remains close to Mr. Obama; Gov. Deval Patrick of Massachusetts; Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr.; former Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm of Michigan; Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, a former prosecutor; Preet Bharara, the United States attorney for the Southern District of New York; and Loretta E. Lynch, the United States attorney in Brooklyn. Mr. Patrick on Thursday said that it was not the right time for him to take such a job.

    White House officials said that Mr. Obama had not yet decided on a successor, with one official saying the president was “a long way” from an announcement. In a ceremony in the State Dining Room on Thursday, Mr. Obama said Mr. Holder had promised to stay in his job until a successor was confirmed.

    I saw a Tweet with a rumor about choosing Labor Secretary Tom Perez, who had been in charge of the Civil Rights Division (the post that the Senate rejected Debo Adegbile for). He knows the Justice Department and, more importantly, knows justice. He has been completely vetted and has already been confirmed several times for other posts; he should win easy confirmation with at least the needed 51 votes.

  5. Tough sh*t!! Wait, that’s my response.

    White House Dismisses Ted Cruz’s Call To Wait To Replace Holder

    “There is a precedent for presidents making important cabinet nominations and counting on Congress to confirm them promptly even in the context of a lame duck session, if necessary,” [White House Spokesman Josh] Earnest said, pointing out that a Republican-led Senate confirmed President George W. Bush’s nominee for secretary of defense, Robert Gates, in December 2006, just weeks before Democrats claimed control of the chamber.

    “This is a priority. This is something that my White House colleagues are already hard at work on,” he said. “We would hope that members of Congress will act with the same sense of urgency to confirm Attorney General Holder’s replacement.”

    Sen. Jefferson Beauregard Sessions (R-Sons of the Confederacy) said that it is unfair to not allow Republicans to stomp their little feet in a pique over the president choosing his own team:

    Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) is also gearing up for battle, calling on all senators to “firmly reject” any AG nominee unless he or she opposes Obama’s planned executive action to halt deportations of certain undocumented immigrants. If his argument gains traction, it could further complicate the confirmation.

    “No Senator should vote to confirm anyone to this position who does not firmly reject the President’s planned executive amnesty”

    So the confirmation will be about immigration and deferred deportations, another good reason to tell the GOP to go jump in a vat of boiling oil lake.

    A reminder: the 50+1 rule for nominations is the Democratic Senate Majority’s rule for the current congress. A Republican Senate could make whatever rules it wants. So even if there are principled Republicans left who feel that a president should be able to choose his own cabinet and sub-cabinet, the votes would not be there to confirm any Attorney General.

  6. raina

    Hello Meese.

    Wanted to let y’all know that I’m a new grandma. DD gave birth in the wee hours Friday morning to a baby girl, Charlotte and she shares my middle name.

    Chelsea Clinton also named hers Charlotte. Hmm…

  7. Top GOPer: Senate Must Wait Until New Congress To Replace Holder

    Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY), the No. 4 Senate Republican, on Sunday said that the Senate must wait until the new Congress starts in January to vote on Eric Holder’s replacement as attorney general.

    The senator slammed Holder as a divisive attorney general and said that Americans need someone different.

    “And if they try to do this in the lame-duck session, this will clearly poison the well and will define what we’re going to see for the next two years, the final two years of the presidency of Barack Obama,” Barrasso concluded.

    Poison the well??? Is he kidding? That well was filled in  by Republican obstructionists in January 2009 and there has been nothing but dust to drink for 6 years.

    Hey, Sen. John Barrasso, elected in 2012 by 185,250 voters to represent a state with 582,658 people, YOU don’t get to choose either!! President Barack Obama, elected by 65,915,796 voters in 2012 and the Senate Democratic majority, elected by 112,000,000+ voters in the elections of 2008, 2010, and 2012, get to choose.

Comments are closed.