Jump to content

Senate confirmation of Biden's nominees

Mrs Whiggins

By Mrs Whiggins
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Shady Ray

Shady Ray 1633

Posted
Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Thanks for the sources. It’s not like I would ever preface any statement in polite conversation with, “According to Shady Ray on SurlyHorns...” and expect anyone to take me seriously.

Regarding openly advocating for the seizure of Libyan oil, that’s not true as displayed in the pic of an email hosted by The Intercept that you posted. George W. Bush said Iraqi oil would pay for the war. Donald Trump said we should just take the oil in Syria because we could...and because he’s a crook. Tanden suggested maybe we might get paid for our services from another country’s oil wealth. I don’t see that as a disqualifying factor, I see it as a means of maybe persuading Lisa Murkowski to vote to confirm. Are you kidding me? That’s a silly line of dissent.

Regarding all the BuzzfeedNews articles, they have a habit of sensationalizing things if you haven’t noticed. What I learned is that Benton Strong has no business in the public sphere. But Neera Tanden? We knew the victim went by Mary, and that was part of her real name, and Tanden accidentally said her real name, and apologized for her mistake, and that’s supposed to disqualify her?

The union admitted that CAP “eventually” took the appropriate steps but grumble, grumble, grumble, it should’ve happened sooner. Blah, blah, blah. Typical rhetoric.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/sarahmimms/inside-a-divisive-fight-over-how-a-top-progressive-think

Neera said she was sorry.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/sarahmimms/center-for-american-progress-head-says-she-is-deeply-sorry

And that was three years ago and Neera was blindsided by the memo and, reading through a bunch of articles, all hosted at buzzfeednews.com, it doesn’t seem all that scandalous  

As far as the Netanyahu stuff, who gives a fuck? I’m atheist. I’m certain that the god of Abraham is a human invention. I think Benjamin Netanyahu is an asshole and a very bad man. I don’t think it’s disqualifying for an American politician not to share that view. Sometimes in politics you have to let the asshole speak. And that wound be another issue that should appeal to the Republicans.

Finally, about Bloomberg and surveillance of Muslims, what does that have to do with Tanden? Is it possible that you’re a crank?

 

That's quite some mental gymnastics to justify supporting a nominee with so little upside/unique talents (and as easily replaceable) as Tanden, but hey if it works for you, good on ya. Glad you feel at ease with her.

 

As far as whether I am a crank...no. But I probably would be if I wouldn't have emigrated from the US a decade ago to a place where the candidates from the political party I support - along with every other political candidate from those parties with which I vehemently disagree - don't show their asses by bickering on twitter, or waste taxpayer money on bombing runs over brown people, or need to apologize for pushing around subordinates (because they'd never have done it in the first place), or give PR cover to right-wing human rights abusers who showed up on the floor of the Bundestag to stunt efforts made towards peace with Iran (even with 1/3rd of their constituents being atheist, most of whom base their objections on Netanyahu's systematic violation of the human rights abuses of fellow men instead of justifying their indifference by irrelevant arguments about fantasy Gods of Abraham or something), or any other of the litany of objectionable beliefs/actions that Tanden has held/engaged.

 

But if expecting my political candidates to actually support my values and not simply just despise the same opponents as I do makes me a crank in your eyes, fuck yeah I am one.

Edited by Shady Ray
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28713

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Shady Ray said:

That's quite some mental gymnastics to justify supporting a nominee with so little upside/unique talents (and as easily replaceable) as Tanden, but hey if it works for you, good on ya. Glad you feel at ease with her.

 

As far as whether I am a crank...no. But I probably would be if I wouldn't have emigrated from the US a decade ago to a place where the candidates from the political party I support - along with every other political candidate from those parties with which I vehemently disagree - don't show their asses by bickering on twitter, or waste taxpayer money on bombing runs over brown people, or need to apologize for pushing around subordinates (because they'd never have done it in the first place), or give PR cover to right-wing human rights abusers who showed up on the floor of the Bundestag to stunt efforts made towards peace with Iran (even with 1/3rd of their constituents being atheist, most of whom base their objections on Netanyahu's systematic violation of the human rights abuses of fellow men instead of justifying their indifference by irrelevant arguments about fantasy Gods of Abraham or something), or any other of the litany of objectionable beliefs/actions that Tanden has held/engaged.

 

But if expecting my political candidates to actually support my values and not simply just despise the same opponents as I do makes me a crank in your eyes, fuck yeah I am one.

Are you a Bernie Bro?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shady Ray

Shady Ray 1633

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Are you a Bernie Bro?

No. 

At this stage, I have been removed from the US long enough that I consider myself merely an interested observer as far as US domestic policy goes. Sure, as someone who enjoys the benefits of a robust social democratic system with significant restraints on corporate power/big-monied influence over policy-making, I agree with some of his positions. But if the very American people who are most negatively impacted by the lack of these checks and balances want to spend their time bickering in Twitter fights about national anthems or “wars on Christmas” or transgendered people in bathrooms while ignoring the royal dicking they are receiving by their “betters“ with respect to healthcare, workplace protections, and their rapidly shrinking influence over policy, then so be it. No skin off my nose. They chose that by being idiots who get their marching orders from FoxNews or MSNBC...or some politician who knows how to utilize Twitter effectively.

But I do care greatly about a completely misguided US policy foreign policy that I view as a destabilizing, overly-meddlesome force across the globe which wastes the resources of the American people in order to line the pockets of/reward the donor class and attempts to influence policy here in Europe to the detriment of Europeans, as that is what impacts me here in Germany. And on that front, there is essentially no major political movement in the US with which I identify. That area is completely dominated by D.C. elites/policy makers/think-tanks/lobbiest/corporations etc, and it doesn't really matter who is in the Executive, the war machine rolls on at the behest of the Uni-Party either way.

The “Uni-Party” in the US disgusts me, and Tanden is the walking embodiment of the sold-out, centrist, interventionist, beltway insider pretending-to-give-a-fuck, who not only benefits from the status quo, but will do anything to keep it that way. But my dislike of her has nothing to do with some Bernie Bro spat that she had in the past. I honestly doubt Bernie has the balls to end her nom anyway, which he could today if he wanted to. 

Edited by Shady Ray
  • Hook 'Em 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bullneck

Bullneck 18987

Posted
Posted
On 2/25/2021 at 9:31 PM, WhatTheBuck said:

Content comes with a citation. Otherwise it’s just words written by a stranger on the internet. 

He seems to know at least something about his subject matter.  Might be true, might not, but as someone said, there are many capable people for the opening.  Rep hypocrisy on full display, but what's new?

TBH, I'm not interested enough to research it.  Wash Park was against her but never bothered to say why.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
washparkhorn

washparkhorn 9935

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Bullneck said:

I did, and I found nothing.  What are you bent about?

I was attempting to not clog the thread. My apologies. 

Spoiler

 

Annoyed gif 10 » GIF Images Download

My objections as fleshed out in this opinion piece: 

First - the nuanced part that is difficult to understand, so I will use an opinion writer's words with my formatting to combat my lack of language skills.

First, Neera has embraced the right wing economic policy that created this mess we find ourselves in:

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/12/why-is-the-center-for-american-progress-betraying-the-left

  • The phrase “progressive” is often associated with the left wing of the Democratic Party, by contrast with its “moderate” wing, and progressives are typically skeptical of corporate influence in politics.
  • The Center for American Progress, however, is cozy with some of America’s largest and most controversial companies.
    • Though it is quick to emphasize that corporate donations constitute only a small part of its funding, in 2013 alone CAP received support from Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, Coca-Cola, Citigroup, the American Beverage Association, Comcast, BlueCross BlueShield, weapons manufacturer Northrop Grumman, and Walmart.
    • The government of the United Arab Emirates (which regularly carries out forced disappearances and torture) has given over $500,000.
  • Investigative journalist Ken Silverstein, in an important 2013 investigation of CAP’s funding, was told by multiple former staffers that when CAP was seeking support from Saudis it muted its criticism of the Saudi kingdom. (CAP continues to conceal the identities of many of its largest donors.)
  • CAP president Neera Tanden has described herself as “a loyal soldier” for Hillary Clinton and despite heading a “nonpartisan” think tank, worked behind the scenes during the 2016 primary to try to erode Bernie Sanders’ support.
    • Leaked internal emails reveal Tanden’s own political instincts to depart from what is typically considered “progressive.”
    • She advised the Clinton campaign against a $15 minimum wage, and in one disturbing instance, as Glenn Greenwald has reported, argued “that Libyans should be forced to turn over large portions of their oil revenues to repay the U.S. for the costs incurred in bombing Libya, on the grounds that Americans will support future wars only if they see that the countries attacked by the U.S. pay for the invasions.”
  • The Center for American Progress does not just accept shady donations. It also gives them. Journalist Andrew Perez reported that according to financial disclosure forms:
    • CAP donated $200,000 last year to the American Enterprise Institute.
    • The AEI is a right-wing free-market think tank perhaps best known as the longtime home of racist social scientist Charles Murray.
    • It is unclear why CAP is giving AEI $200,000.
  • The reports Tanden links [as a defense] are more like extended op-eds than scholarly works, and involve no original research.
    • They both focus not on “authoritarianism” as Tanden says, but on what they call “authoritarian populism.”
    • This is important, because while Tanden suggests that nobody could object to “defending democracy from the rise of authoritarianism,” we know that to the American Enterprise Institute, “democracy” and “authoritarianism” do not necessarily mean what they mean to you and me.
    • When the AEI speaks of democracy, it means “laissez-faire capitalism” and when it speaks of “authoritarianism” it means “minimum wage laws” or any mildly redistributive social policies that could threaten American Enterprise.
    • Tanden wants to wave away concerns about the collaboration, because after all everyone agrees democracy is good. But the question is—what are we actually “defending” here?
  • The CAP/AEI report “Drivers of Authoritarian Populism in the United States” defines what it means by “populism”: “political parties and leaders that are anti-establishment and that divide society into two groups: self-serving elites and good, ordinary people.”
    • By that definition, Bernie Sanders clearly falls under the “populist” umbrella—he is anti-establishment and believes that ordinary people are being fleeced by self-serving elites.
    • The report says that populism is not inherently bad, and emphasizes that it is targeted against the bigoted form of populism.
    • But in the CAP/AEI discussion of European “authoritarian populism,” it’s clear that economic leftists are included in the category:
      • A 2017 study, which looked at elections across Europe between 1980 and 2016, found that there is an asymmetry in drivers of support for right- and left-wing authoritarian populists. While the right wing seems unresponsive to changes in objective economic characteristics, the support for left-wing extreme populists, such as Syriza in Greece or Podemos in Spain, is sensitive both to rates of economic growth and to unemployment. The rise of the Labour Party in the United Kingdom, under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, can be viewed in a similar fashion.
      • Podemos, Syriza, and Corbyn—“authoritarians”? Why? What could possibly put them in a category alongside Viktor Orbán?
      • The CAP/AEI reports are actually extremely vague, saying they believe in “a market economy with shared prosperity” and “economic openness” but not making it particularly clear what that means. After all, who is against “openness” and “prosperity”? Who wants to be closed and poor?
      • But it’s clear that what they’re actually talking about is free market capitalism. Corbyn, Syriza, and Podemos are only “authoritarian” if you subscribe to the radical libertarian theory that wealth redistribution is totalitarian.
      • CAP/AEI are cagey about saying that they’re teaming up to defend capitalism from leftists, but that’s precisely the implication of the reports’ statement that left parties are “authoritarian populism” that needs defeating in order to preserve “democracy.”

Second objection (my inelegant words now) - the nature of the OMB (made famous by David Stockman when promoted voodoo economics) reflects its power as a cutoff valve for progressive programs and an open spigot for those who cozy up with Neera buddies. 

Neera and her buddies are corrupt.

While not as garish as Trump's cronyism (and Neera can be garish), they are similarly grotesque.  There is no stomach among the populous for the cozy deals anymore. 

Finally, I understand economics better than Neera - and you do not want me running the OMB. Technical ability is needed.  Neera is a back slapper (or a puncher if one disagrees with her). She doesn't have the drive to get in the weeds with the numbers and she does not show an understanding of current economic theory. She is a wheeler-dealer, like Trump.  The nation needs a technocrat in the spot, not a social media influencer with bad habits. 

 Neera will land on her feet just fine. She will probably end up in a position that does not require Congressional approval. Fair enough.  I objected to her when she was put up by Biden for the OMB spot.  We need an unbiased technocrat in that spot, not an AEI worshipper.

So - too long didn't read - many of the same reasons cited by @Shady Ray who is much more elegant than me.

I loathe the Neera topic. 

Annoyed gif 10 » GIF Images Download

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kevwun

kevwun 15653

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Sasse a no vote in committee- I guess just to prove he’s a hack despite the occasional rational sound byte 

It's what he does.  He sounds reasonable and then votes with the other Republicans.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank Scorpio

Hank Scorpio 17723

Posted
Posted
On 2/27/2021 at 11:47 AM, Shady Ray said:

No. 

At this stage, I have been removed from the US long enough that I consider myself merely an interested observer as far as US domestic policy goes. Sure, as someone who enjoys the benefits of a robust social democratic system with significant restraints on corporate power/big-monied influence over policy-making, I agree with some of his positions. But if the very American people who are most negatively impacted by the lack of these checks and balances want to spend their time bickering in Twitter fights about national anthems or “wars on Christmas” or transgendered people in bathrooms while ignoring the royal dicking they are receiving by their “betters“ with respect to healthcare, workplace protections, and their rapidly shrinking influence over policy, then so be it. No skin off my nose. They chose that by being idiots who get their marching orders from FoxNews or MSNBC...or some politician who knows how to utilize Twitter effectively.

But I do care greatly about a completely misguided US policy foreign policy that I view as a destabilizing, overly-meddlesome force across the globe which wastes the resources of the American people in order to line the pockets of/reward the donor class and attempts to influence policy here in Europe to the detriment of Europeans, as that is what impacts me here in Germany. And on that front, there is essentially no major political movement in the US with which I identify. That area is completely dominated by D.C. elites/policy makers/think-tanks/lobbiest/corporations etc, and it doesn't really matter who is in the Executive, the war machine rolls on at the behest of the Uni-Party either way.

The “Uni-Party” in the US disgusts me, and Tanden is the walking embodiment of the sold-out, centrist, interventionist, beltway insider pretending-to-give-a-fuck, who not only benefits from the status quo, but will do anything to keep it that way. But my dislike of her has nothing to do with some Bernie Bro spat that she had in the past. I honestly doubt Bernie has the balls to end her nom anyway, which he could today if he wanted to. 

You’re a weird fucking dude Shady Ray. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
washparkhorn

washparkhorn 9935

Posted
Posted

sanders the trusted objected with nary a word. The Party held rank behind progressive objections. As it should. The nature of power sharing grinds forward. Trust in one another held for the day. 

an empty void will claim the scalp and sow seeds of division

~ McCarty Cormack (old scottish nightmare)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85112

Posted
Posted

Gina Raimondo confirmed 84-15

Lloyd Austin is still the big winner at 93 yes votes.  Vilsack at 92.

Austin 93
Vilsack 92
McDonough 87
Buttigieg 86
Raimondo 84
Yellen 84
Haines 84
Thomas-Greenfield 78
Blinken 78
Cardona 64
Granholm 64
Mayorkas 56
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
19 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

so now all of a sudden we are worried about twitter propriety?

fuck outta here. 

i know nothing about neera tanden, but if she said means things on twitter, then what the fuck was the last four years, republicans?

Neera's politics are terrible

And it's not just about her posting on Twitter, it's her awful treatment of staff, bad politics, and vindictive nature (getting people fired for criticizing her, etc...)

And the propriety and professionalism of the individual DOES matter. It matters less if that person is a unique talent in other ways, something Tanden is absolutely not. I'll put up with a diva at WR if he can jump over a corner and catch a ball with two fingers. I won't put up with a diva at WR if he can't get separation and drops passes that hit both his hands. Tanden is the latter.

The meaner one of these people is publicly, the worse their fanboys are.

Here is one of Neera's defenders going after Liz & Matt Bruenig (and their child).

(Neera got Matt fired years ago and people (rightfully) hate her for it)

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85112

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, TheStoicPaisano said:

Schumer just added Fudge, Garland, Haaland and EPA Admin to next weeks schedule. Straight to exec session on Tuesday.

Fudge’s last House vote will likely be the COVID Bill then. Her and Garland should get Wednesday confirmations. Resign Wednesday, sworn in Thursday 

Finally almost at the point we can finish the cabinet and start on judges. Start vetting those SCOTUS lists bc once the current SCOTUS term is up in the summer, Breyer needs to retire. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...