GOP Infighting Holding Up Key Defense Posts

by: Richard Allen Smith

Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 15:00:00 PM EDT


If I were an elected member of the minority party, I wouldn't want to be the guy that blocks the nomination of members of my party to key posts in Government:



President Obama named Rep. John McHugh (R-NY) in June as his nominee to become the next Secretary of the Army. [...] However, that vote never took place because Kansas Sens. Pat Roberts (R) and Sam Brownback (R) placed a hold on McHugh over an issue unrelated to his nomination:

   Concerned that their state could become the home for some Guantánamo Bay detainees, Kansas' two Republican senators have placed a hold on the nomination of Rep. John M. McHugh as Army secretary. That means a litte more time as candidates in waiting for the people gearing up to run for McHugh's seat in an upstate New York district.

   Sens. Pat Roberts and Sam Brownback are seeking answers from the Obama administration about the possible moves of some detainees to the prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kan.

The Kansas Senate delegation is also holding up nominations of nine other Justice and Defense nominees over NIMBY issues. I guess I could understand this if I subscribed to unfounded fears that the most secure prisons in the United States are unable to hold more terrorists in addition to those already held at those prisons.  But even then, I don't think the Secretary of the Army has any authority over this decision.

Richard Allen Smith :: GOP Infighting Holding Up Key Defense Posts
Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

"Somewhat" related (0.00 / 0)
Nice catch, RS.  This is unfortunate -- typical of our "esteemed" Congressional representatives.  However, comma, does this remind you of what happened during the Bush presidency, when he had a hell of a time getting federal judges posted?  The majority votes were in Congress, but the Dems prevented Senate votes just because they could.

This kind of dance is apparent on BOTH sides of the aisle.  The fact that it relates to a DOD case is relevant for us, but also highly indicative of your type of political profiling.


Holding up federal judges is a different matter entirely. (4.00 / 1)
Your comment is what we call "false equivalence" because there is NO equivalence between the two examples.  Those Dems opposed federal judges on the grounds for which those judges were being appointed.  

These Republicans are holding up a REPUBLICAN for reasons UNRELATED to the appointment.  And no doubt, we will hear about how these Kansas senators "support the troops" whenever they get a public microphone come election time.  Nevermind that this country is involved in two war theaters.  That's quite a difference from a new judge taking over a federal docket.

We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America. -Barack Obama


[ Parent ]
Some agreement here......... but.. (0.00 / 0)
Your comment is what we call "false equivalence" because there is NO equivalence between the two examples

Sorry, but there is definitive equivalence here.  The equivalence is that the votes are there for passage of a majority resolution but deferred because of partisanship.  The federal judge appointees were all ABA qualified and recommended, but the majority (up/down) vote was prevented not only due to ideology but more for political payback.  That makes the crux of the issue just as "unrelated" as the current fiasco with McHugh.

The fact that we have "two wars" on the burners is somewhat relevant in appointing a Secretary of the Army but not as vital as you would hope.  Finally, ALL politicians are glued to a microphone and "supporting the troops come election time."  Come on!

In closing.... the purpose of my original comment was aimed at the skillful ability of RS in unearthing and throwing around political hot potatoes.  He does excel, doesn't he!  And thanks for your reply.


[ Parent ]
VetVoice on Social Media
Follow rockrichard on Twitter

VoteVets.org on Facebook
  • VetVoice Recommends

    "The War I Always Wanted,"
    By Brandon Friedman

    "The welcome mat for memoirs by veterans of operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom might never wear out so long as they write with the savvy of Brandon Friedman . . . Friedman's take is vivid, frank, precise and dramatic." --Military Times

    "Add Brandon Friedman's The War I Always Wanted to the ranks of outstanding non-fiction produced by officers from elite combat units in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Always truthful, often excruciatingly so, The War I Always Wanted rises at numerous points to the level of literature." --Steven Pressfield, author of Gates of Fire

    Buy The War I Always Wanted here.

    "A Time To Lead,"
    By General (Ret.) Wesley K. Clark

    "A Time To Lead confirms the rewarding benefits of military service at a time when such service is experiencing considerable strain. It also includes a comprehensive description of America's current national imperatives, which deserve serious consideration." --General Alexander M. Haig, Jr., former Secretary of State

    "This is a primer on leadership forged in battle and by decades of experience. . .This isn't just a book; it's a manual for leading people and living a good life." --Barry McCaffrey, General, USA (ret.)

    Buy A Time to Lead here.

    "Love My Rifle More Than You,"
    By Kayla Williams

    "Whip smart, sassy, with a mouth as foul as a sailor's, 28-year-old Sergeant Kayla Williams. . .tells what it's like to be a female soldier in Iraq." --Booklist

    ". . .echoes military memoirists from Julius Caesar to Ernie Pyle." --Publishers Weekly

    ". . .a shocking, on-the-ground view of one military woman's experience in Iraq." --Bookmarks Magazine

    Buy Love My Rifle More Than You here.

    "How to Break a Terrorist,"
    By Matthew Alexander

    "...a riveting, fast-paced account that reads like a first-rate thriller." --Publisher's Weekly

    " ...an absorbing behind-the-scenes look at the secret intelligence war within a war." --Military.com

    Buy How to Break a Terrorist here.

    Search

    Advanced Search

    RSS Feed Links

    Subscribe to VetVoice in a feed reader!

    Subscribe to VetVoice by Email!

    Diaries and comments at VetVoice do not necessarily represent the views of VoteVets.org. VetVoice will strive to remove any illegal material as soon as it is flagged. Similarly, VetVoice will use its discretion in determining whether to remove exceedingly offensive material. However, between posting and removal, any offensive or illegal material does not reflect the condoning or endorsing of said material by VoteVets.org or VetVoice.
    Similarly, the views expressed on this website are those of the authors alone. Opinions on this website do not necessarily represent the views of the Department of Defense or any of its components.
    Menu

    Front Page Writers
    PTSD Resources
    TBI Resources
    IRR Information
    Casualty Reports
    VA Information
    Support the Troops
    Veteran Candidates We Support
    Congressional Committees
    Contact Your Elected Leaders
    Sites We Like

    Paid for VoteVets Political Action Committee. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. VoteVets Action Fund is a 501(c)(4) organization which primarily focuses on nonpartisan education and advocacy on behalf veterans and their families. VoteVets Political Action Committee is a federal political committee which primarily helps elect Iraq and Afghanistan war veteran candidates and educates about veterans and military issues aimed at influencing the outcome of the next election.

    Site Design: Articulated Man

    VoteVets Political Action and Vote Vets Action Fund are separate organizations.

    Powered by: SoapBlox