• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

There he goes again

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I've never seen a President have so much disrespect for the nation he serves. Bush has just nominated Tracy Henke for DHS Disaster Chief while the Senate is at recess. Not only does it not give the Senate a chance to debate the nomination, the nominees work experience does not qualify her for the position she is assuming. This is Michael Brown all over again. It's getting ridiculous. This is just my opinion, but I don't think George Bush gives a damn about this country. You do not put unqualified people in positions where their decisions may have to do with life and death consequences.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...13DA3CAB25ED549E862570EE00181252?OpenDocument
 

jallman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,915
Reaction score
11,283
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Billo_Really said:
I've never seen a President have so much disrespect for the nation he serves. Bush has just nominated Tracy Henke for DHS Disaster Chief while the Senate is at recess. Not only does it not give the Senate a chance to debate the nomination, the nominees work experience does not qualify her for the position she is assuming. This is Michael Brown all over again. It's getting ridiculous. This is just my opinion, but I don't think George Bush gives a damn about this country. You do not put unqualified people in positions where their decisions may have to do with life and death consequences.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...13DA3CAB25ED549E862570EE00181252?OpenDocument
But you know, billo, at this stage in the game any move the Prez makes is going to be met with similar sentiment. Surely the woman has something that makes her stand out...do you really think he can afford another Michael Brown?
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by jallman:
But you know, billo, at this stage in the game any move the Prez makes is going to be met with similar sentiment. Surely the woman has something that makes her stand out...do you really think he can afford another Michael Brown?
I realize that. And I don't have a problem with making appointments during a Senate recess. It's not that he's blazing new ground there. But it's the fact that she has no disaster relief experience at such an important position. I'm sure she's a very hard worker and a very intelligent person. But you got to have the experience to do the job. You do not want a mailman showing up to fight a fire. You don't want a pizza delivery boy responding to a burglery. You don't want an English teacher teaching calculus.

I'm un-employed right now. I've sent out my resume's and gone on interviews. This is done because a company wants to make sure I've got the stuff to do what they need done. If I don't, I do not get the job. This is the logical and pragmatic way you fill a position. This is not what Bush is doing. And I think that is a result of incompetance from the top down.
 

jallman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,915
Reaction score
11,283
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Billo_Really said:
I realize that. And I don't have a problem with making appointments during a Senate recess. It's not that he's blazing new ground there. But it's the fact that she has no disaster relief experience at such an important position. I'm sure she's a very hard worker and a very intelligent person. But you got to have the experience to do the job. You do not want a mailman showing up to fight a fire. You don't want a pizza delivery boy responding to a burglery. You don't want an English teacher teaching calculus.

I'm un-employed right now. I've sent out my resume's and gone on interviews. This is done because a company wants to make sure I've got the stuff to do what they need done. If I don't, I do not get the job. This is the logical and pragmatic way you fill a position. This is not what Bush is doing. And I think that is a result of incompetance from the top down.
I realize what you are saying, but I dont see anything wrong with this woman's qualifications. Here, I will explain why and put it in resume`type rhetoric...

Her objective is to supervise the administration of a government disaster relief agency as a division of the department of homeland security. Her job duties, most likely, are to represent the agency, supervise the upper administration of the agency, budget for the agency, and coordinate maximizing the response capacity of the organization.

She will NOT be fighting fires nor providing first response to natural disaster or terrorist attacks. She will, however, be responsible for filling the positions that will have those duties and directing the budgets and performance assessments of said members of the agency.

As to her qualifications? Well, she has made a career of government service working closely with a senator, eventually becoming a chief policy advisor for Bond. She works closely with interagency comittees, a range of government agencies and contractors, and her hard work brought her an invitation by Ashcroft to the Justice Department.

Basically, I cant see a problem with her qualifications...I think the entire hooplah is just objection to how she was appointed and the disfavor plaguing the president is just rubbing off on all his nominations.
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by jallman:
I realize what you are saying, but I dont see anything wrong with this woman's qualifications. Here, I will explain why and put it in resume`type rhetoric...

Her objective is to supervise the administration of a government disaster relief agency as a division of the department of homeland security. Her job duties, most likely, are to represent the agency, supervise the upper administration of the agency, budget for the agency, and coordinate maximizing the response capacity of the organization.

She will NOT be fighting fires nor providing first response to natural disaster or terrorist attacks. She will, however, be responsible for filling the positions that will have those duties and directing the budgets and performance assessments of said members of the agency.

As to her qualifications? Well, she has made a career of government service working closely with a senator, eventually becoming a chief policy advisor for Bond. She works closely with interagency comittees, a range of government agencies and contractors, and her hard work brought her an invitation by Ashcroft to the Justice Department.

Basically, I cant see a problem with her qualifications...I think the entire hooplah is just objection to how she was appointed and the disfavor plaguing the president is just rubbing off on all his nominations.
I see your point. I also might add, you stated it very well. While I disagree with her qualifications, I certainly hope you are right on this one. We do not need any more tragedys.
 
H

hipsterdufus

The bigger story her is that Bush made 17 recess appointments a la John Bolton. Even Joe Lieberman complained. :shock: Maybe he want's to rejoin the Democratic Party. Too little too late Joe.

Bush has no regard for the confirmation process. It's the same line of thinking that he has with disregarding FISA rules. Is it 2008 yet?

Henke was among 17 recess appointments President George W. Bush made late Wednesday while the Senate was not in session, bypassing the normal process of Senate confirmation. Administration officials said the jobs needed to be filled and that the Senate was not acting quickly enough.

Her appointment was criticized Thursday by Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., the ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which held a hearing on Henke's nomination last month.
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...13DA3CAB25ED549E862570EE00181252?OpenDocument
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by hipsterdufus:
Bush has no regard for the confirmation process. It's the same line of thinking that he has with disregarding FISA rules. Is it 2008 yet?
I don't think his ego permits him to have any regard for this country. In fact, there is only one bigger ego than his.........Chaney's.
 

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
hipsterdufus said:
The bigger story her is that Bush made 17 recess appointments a la John Bolton. Even Joe Lieberman complained. :shock: Maybe he want's to rejoin the Democratic Party. Too little too late Joe.

Bush has no regard for the confirmation process. It's the same line of thinking that he has with disregarding FISA rules. Is it 2008 yet?


http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...13DA3CAB25ED549E862570EE00181252?OpenDocument
Do you have a problem with this executive privilege, or is it only when Republicans exercise this right? Let us all know when he passes Clintons recess appointments.:roll:
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by Deegan:
Do you have a problem with this executive privilege, or is it only when Republicans exercise this right? Let us all know when he passes Clintons recess appointments
Clinton was qualified to be President. Bush isn't even qualified to be a Refuse Engineer.
 

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Billo_Really said:
Clinton was qualified to be President. Bush isn't even qualified to be a Refuse Engineer.
This coming from an unemployed bum, gotcha.;)
 

jallman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,915
Reaction score
11,283
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
hipsterdufus said:
The bigger story her is that Bush made 17 recess appointments a la John Bolton. Even Joe Lieberman complained. :shock: Maybe he want's to rejoin the Democratic Party. Too little too late Joe.

Bush has no regard for the confirmation process. It's the same line of thinking that he has with disregarding FISA rules. Is it 2008 yet?


http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...13DA3CAB25ED549E862570EE00181252?OpenDocument
Now see, I think that is the core issue with all the appointments...he has a habit of disregarding the senate altogether when he thinks they are going to disapprove. He also has a very arrogant demeanor toward even his own constituency. Add to that an inflated self importance "justified" in his mind because he is the "9-11/war on terror" president and I believe you got a bad combination lately. Its like he thinks his job of defending this country is so important that he can by-pass the senate...like nomination debates are just a suggestion for him and recess appointments are how its really supposed to be done.

I'm just saying, dont attack this poor woman who seems to actually be qualified...but at the same time, there is no excuse for Bush's habitual disregard for the senate.
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
He appointed Julie L. Myers to be Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security (Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement). Here's some background on her:

Her uncle is Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, the departing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. She married Chertoff's current chief of staff, John F. Wood, on Saturday.

This is what Michelle Malkin said about the Myers nomination (prior to the recess appointment):

NO MORE CRONYISM: BUSH DHS NOMINEE DOESN'T DESERVE THE JOB

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/003576.htm

George Bush makes me fukking sick!
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Billo_Really said:
I've never seen a President have so much disrespect for the nation he serves. Bush has just nominated Tracy Henke for DHS Disaster Chief while the Senate is at recess. Not only does it not give the Senate a chance to debate the nomination, the nominees work experience does not qualify her for the position she is assuming. This is Michael Brown all over again. It's getting ridiculous. This is just my opinion, but I don't think George Bush gives a damn about this country. You do not put unqualified people in positions where their decisions may have to do with life and death consequences.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...13DA3CAB25ED549E862570EE00181252?OpenDocument
Give me a break, every president does the same thing and you know it.......
 

libertarian_knight

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
997
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The whole point of recess appointments was necessity when congress was away for months at a time. Not convienience because congress would not consent to the appointments. Regardless of who the president is, this provision of the consitution is being abused.

If you'd imagine it is legitimate for the president to do this constantly, why did the founders bother with the "advice and Consent" clause?

Really, the congress should just stop funding the departments, most are useless anyway. Look at FEMA, did more harm than good.

You apologist do realize, should congress ever grow a pair of balls, the could politically rape this president on TV and get great ratings for it. They control the checkbook. The can dismantle EVERY federal agency, they can abolish the lower courts, they can start the amendment process, they can DISBAND AND DEFUND THE ARMIES. Congress can abolish the Secret Service. Congress can abolish the Federal Reserve, the Treasury, and the staff that washing the preisdent's underwear.

they won't, but the reality is CONGRESS HAS THE POWER. I think, they are merely tolerating Bush until the next guy comes along. Problem is they'll likely just tolerate that guy too.
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by Navy Pride:
Give me a break, every president does the same thing and you know it.......
I absolutely agree with you. Bush just does it more often with more arrogance.
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by libertarian_knight:
The whole point of recess appointments was necessity when congress was away for months at a time. Not convienience because congress would not consent to the appointments. Regardless of who the president is, this provision of the consitution is being abused.

If you'd imagine it is legitimate for the president to do this constantly, why did the founders bother with the "advice and Consent" clause?

Really, the congress should just stop funding the departments, most are useless anyway. Look at FEMA, did more harm than good.

You apologist do realize, should congress ever grow a pair of balls, the could politically rape this president on TV and get great ratings for it. They control the checkbook. The can dismantle EVERY federal agency, they can abolish the lower courts, they can start the amendment process, they can DISBAND AND DEFUND THE ARMIES. Congress can abolish the Secret Service. Congress can abolish the Federal Reserve, the Treasury, and the staff that washing the preisdent's underwear.

they won't, but the reality is CONGRESS HAS THE POWER. I think, they are merely tolerating Bush until the next guy comes along. Problem is they'll likely just tolerate that guy too.
You are so right on the money on this one. I've said several times that Congress needs to go down to the local sporting goods store and pick themselves up a set of balls. They are, collectively, just as powerful as the President. They set the rules of engagement in everything. They set the rules the President MUST obey!
 

libertarian_knight

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
997
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Billo_Really said:
You are so right on the money on this one. I've said several times that Congress needs to go down to the local sporting goods store and pick themselves up a set of balls. They are, collectively, just as powerful as the President. They set the rules of engagement in everything. They set the rules the President MUST obey!
pick up a pair of balls.

lol that's a great protest campaign.

How about this, everyone start buying the congress some balls.

Everyone send each congressperson (male or female) a pair of balls, or if you would prefer a backbone of some vertabrate. I will Send some to Hillary, she is my Senator. Yes I know, I am sorry for me too. Could be worse though, I could have had her for a mother.

So, I got six balls to buy when I got shopping.
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by libertarian_knight:
pick up a pair of balls.

lol that's a great protest campaign.

How about this, everyone start buying the congress some balls.

Everyone send each congressperson (male or female) a pair of balls, or if you would prefer a backbone of some vertabrate. I will Send some to Hillary, she is my Senator. Yes I know, I am sorry for me too. Could be worse though, I could have had her for a mother.

So, I got six balls to buy when I got shopping.
You might want to get a set of knee-pads for those lawmakers that kiss a little too much ass!
 

libertarian_knight

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
997
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Billo_Really said:
You might want to get a set of knee-pads for those lawmakers that kiss a little too much ass!
Yeah but isn't the hope that if they have balls, they will stop kissing ass?
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by libertarian_knight:
Yeah but isn't the hope that if they have balls, they will stop kissing ass?
Yes we do. But just in case things don't change over night, we have to have something to hold over their heads.
 

libertarian_knight

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
997
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Billo_Really said:
Yes we do. But just in case things don't change over night, we have to have something to hold over their heads.
I thought we wanted to put the pads on their knees? What good to cushions do when being held over their heads? We hope they are gonna fall asleep on them? i dunno. I just don't know.

We could hold buckets of whale sperm over their heads, that might compell them some. Well, most would be afraid of getting it dumped on them, I can think of a few that would do the right thing to actually HAVE IT dumped on them. but that's niether here nor there, nor over their heads there in DC.
 
Top Bottom