In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

In response to MattyScornD's comment:

bump

Senate GOP = Israel First, America Second

The history of GOP obstructionism and non-governance gets a new chapter.

Bwa hahahahahah ha ha.

What did Rahm Emanuel's dad do for a living?

Dear god, Matty, you're better thant that man

BWAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Wow.

Now THAT is a non-sequiter.

"The sins of the father...."

How do you think this looks to the casual voter?  During a time of war, 40 Republicans block the nomination of a Secretary of Defense.  A nominee who just happens to be a Republican?

Good luck shaking the obstructionist label, headed into the mid-terms.

Hmmm, last time I checked one could be moral and not be religious.

Do you have morals? I would think so. You can't tell the difference between a "nation" being governed by terrorists and one being governed by a vote of its people? Hmmm. 

Why does that quote explain why he should not  get the job? If he said "The State Department is controlled by communists" would you have a problem with that? Do you think that the State Department is really an adjunct of Israel's Foreign Ministry? Are you given to conspiracies? 

What is not in our best interests that comes with your imagined influence from Israel?

Is there anything that Obama can do that you will not defend? 

I am beginning to smell something.

They've traditionally been the only democracy (now Iraq and hopefully others but I'm not confident) in the region, they're an outpost of western civilization, and they are most definitely our only real ally in the region. Does that help?

In response to Newtster's comment:

Hmmm, last time I checked one could be moral and not be religious.

Do you have morals? I would think so. You can't tell the difference between a "nation" being governed by terrorists and one being governed by a vote of its people? Hmmm. 

Why does that quote explain why he should not  get the job? If he said "The State Department is controlled by communists" would you have a problem with that? Do you think that the State Department is really an adjunct of Israel's Foreign Ministry? Are you given to conspiracies? 

What is not in our best interests that comes with your imagined influence from Israel?

Is there anything that Obama can do that you will not defend? 

I am beginning to smell something.

What you smell is the friction of the Senate GOP grinding a rather mundane bit of congressional business to a halt for NO GOOD REASON.

Absolutely NONE of the questions or hypotheticals you ask here have anything to do with the topic-at-hand: confirming our next Secretary of Defense.  Zero.

And this is during a war AND in the middle of sensitive defense budget negotiations.

This is not about Obama either; though saying it is implies that it's purely political kabuki and not about the nominee's qualifications.

When people ask how DC is broken, this little episode is a perfect example.

In response to StalkingButler's comment:

I just don't understand this slavish devotion to Israeli

They've traditionally been the only democracy (now Iraq and hopefully others but I'm not confident) in the region, they're an outpost of western civilization, and they are most definitely our only real ally in the region. Does that help?

P.S.  The 'tradition' of Israel as democracy only goes back to 1947.  Before that, it was Palestine.

In response to skeeter20's comment:

In response to MattyScornD's comment:

In response to Newtster's comment:

Hmmm, last time I checked one could be moral and not be religious.

Do you have morals? I would think so. You can't tell the difference between a "nation" being governed by terrorists and one being governed by a vote of its people? Hmmm. 

Why does that quote explain why he should not  get the job? If he said "The State Department is controlled by communists" would you have a problem with that? Do you think that the State Department is really an adjunct of Israel's Foreign Ministry? Are you given to conspiracies? 

What is not in our best interests that comes with your imagined influence from Israel?

Is there anything that Obama can do that you will not defend? 

I am beginning to smell something.

What you smell is the friction of the Senate GOP grinding a rather mundane bit of congressional business to a halt for NO GOOD REASON.

Absolutely NONE of the questions or hypotheticals you ask here have anything to do with the topic-at-hand: confirming our next Secretary of Defense.  Zero.

And this is during a war AND in the middle of sensitive defense budget negotiations.

This is not about Obama either; though saying it is implies that it's purely political kabuki and not about the nominee's qualifications.

When people ask how DC is broken, this little episode is a perfect example.

Why is it that there are no democrats capable of being sec. Of defense? Havel is the second republican in a row for Obama.

Now that is HILARIOUS!!!

Hey barbie, it's the wingnuts who don't think a wingnut is capable of filling the position.

The inescapable truth is that if PotUS had nominated a Dem, the wingnuts would've confirmed him/her immediately, like they did with Sen Kerry.

But hey, keep your head buried, it's worked soooo good thus far.

In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

In response to skeeter20's comment:

In response to MattyScornD's comment:

In response to Newtster's comment:

Hmmm, last time I checked one could be moral and not be religious.

Do you have morals? I would think so. You can't tell the difference between a "nation" being governed by terrorists and one being governed by a vote of its people? Hmmm. 

Why does that quote explain why he should not  get the job? If he said "The State Department is controlled by communists" would you have a problem with that? Do you think that the State Department is really an adjunct of Israel's Foreign Ministry? Are you given to conspiracies? 

What is not in our best interests that comes with your imagined influence from Israel?

Is there anything that Obama can do that you will not defend? 

I am beginning to smell something.

What you smell is the friction of the Senate GOP grinding a rather mundane bit of congressional business to a halt for NO GOOD REASON.

Absolutely NONE of the questions or hypotheticals you ask here have anything to do with the topic-at-hand: confirming our next Secretary of Defense.  Zero.

And this is during a war AND in the middle of sensitive defense budget negotiations.

This is not about Obama either; though saying it is implies that it's purely political kabuki and not about the nominee's qualifications.

When people ask how DC is broken, this little episode is a perfect example.

Why is it that there are no democrats capable of being sec. Of defense? Havel is the second republican in a row for Obama.

Now that is HILARIOUS!!!

Hey barbie, it's the wingnuts who don't think a wingnut is capable of filling the position.

The inescapable truth is that if PotUS had nominated a Dem, the wingnuts would've confirmed him/her immediately, like they did with Sen Kerry.

But hey, keep your head buried, it's worked soooo good thus far.

So, you see the problem?  No democrat is capable of being secretary of defense.  Obama kept on Gates, now goes to Hagel.  Pretty funny that NO DEMOCRAT has any cache with defence, at least not one who can also perform the duties of the job.

Hagel, who is a RINO, is as close as Obama can get to having "his guy" in that position.

Before 1947 "palestine" was a place that was sparsley populated mostly by nomadic Arabs and some town dwelling Arabs, Christians, and Jews. There was no political entity called "palestine", that was just the name given to a region of what was known as Trans-Jordan. There were no people that considered themselves "palestinian." Fortunately for many Jews that were being ethnically cleansed from Arabic nations in the region there was a place for them to go to escape repression and then, of course, came the mass migration from Europe after the attrocities commited by the Nazis.

The modern state of Israel has ALWAYS been a democracy an, based on that fact alone, it is worthy of our support.

In response to StalkingButler's comment:

Before 1947 "palestine" was a place that was sparsley populated mostly by nomadic Arabs and some town dwelling Arabs, Christians, and Jews. There was no political entity called "palestine", that was just the name given to a region of what was known as Trans-Jordan. There were no people that considered themselves "palestinian." Fortunately for many Jews that were being ethnically cleansed from Arabic nations in the region there was a place for them to go to escape repression and then, of course, came the mass migration from Europe after the attrocities commited by the Nazis.

The modern state of Israel has ALWAYS been a democracy an, based on that fact alone, it is worthy of our support.

Yep.  I get it.  the liberals on these boards don't.  Their "version" is that arabs have controlled the region forever, only to be interupted by a UN mandate creating Israel.  I guess I can't really blame them, as that's probably what their socialist/Israel-hating professors taught them.  The same institution to which they want to turn over U.S. sovereignty is the same institution that created Israel.  That contradiction must cause their heads to explode.

When confronted with the truth, the just start hurling personal insults.

In response to skeeter20's comment:

In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

In response to skeeter20's comment:

In response to MattyScornD's comment:

In response to Newtster's comment:

Hmmm, last time I checked one could be moral and not be religious.

Do you have morals? I would think so. You can't tell the difference between a "nation" being governed by terrorists and one being governed by a vote of its people? Hmmm. 

Why does that quote explain why he should not  get the job? If he said "The State Department is controlled by communists" would you have a problem with that? Do you think that the State Department is really an adjunct of Israel's Foreign Ministry? Are you given to conspiracies? 

What is not in our best interests that comes with your imagined influence from Israel?

Is there anything that Obama can do that you will not defend? 

I am beginning to smell something.

What you smell is the friction of the Senate GOP grinding a rather mundane bit of congressional business to a halt for NO GOOD REASON.

Absolutely NONE of the questions or hypotheticals you ask here have anything to do with the topic-at-hand: confirming our next Secretary of Defense.  Zero.

And this is during a war AND in the middle of sensitive defense budget negotiations.

This is not about Obama either; though saying it is implies that it's purely political kabuki and not about the nominee's qualifications.

When people ask how DC is broken, this little episode is a perfect example.

Why is it that there are no democrats capable of being sec. Of defense? Havel is the second republican in a row for Obama.

Now that is HILARIOUS!!!

Hey barbie, it's the wingnuts who don't think a wingnut is capable of filling the position.

The inescapable truth is that if PotUS had nominated a Dem, the wingnuts would've confirmed him/her immediately, like they did with Sen Kerry.

But hey, keep your head buried, it's worked soooo good thus far.

So, you see the problem?  No democrat is capable of being secretary of defense.  Obama kept on Gates, now goes to Hagel.  Pretty funny that NO DEMOCRAT has any cache with defence, at least not one who can also perform the duties of the job.

Hagel, who is a RINO, is as close as Obama can get to having "his guy" in that position.

Now that is HILARIOUS!!!

Hey barbie, it's the wingnuts who don't think a wingnut is capable of filling the position.

The inescapable truth is that if PotUS had nominated a Dem, the wingnuts would've confirmed him/her immediately, like they did with Sen Kerry.

But hey, keep your head buried, it's worked soooo good thus far.