OBAMA GETS HIS RINO CHUCK HAGEL; AMERICANS LOSE Allahpundit explains the crazy votes:
The final vote: 58-41, which is a bit closer than the 71-27 margin on cloture earlier today. There are 15 Republicans who think voters are too dumb to realize that the cloture vote is the one that assured Hagel’s confirmation and that, by voting yes on that and no on the meaningless final vote, they can pretend that they “opposed” Hagel. And in fairness, they’re probably right; most voters likely are that dumb. But let’s name those 15 anyway:
Alexander
Ayotte
Blunt
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Collins
Corker
Flake
Graham
Hatch
McCain
Murkowski
Sessions
Thune
[...]
I can’t believe a single one of those 15, let alone the scores of Democrats who voted for this guy, seriously believes he’s prepared to run the Defense Department…The next time McCain and Graham pound the table about defense cuts or O’s foreign policy, remember that they both voted to send Chuck Hagel on to the final vote. That’s how serious they are.
As for Republicans voting yes, there were four: Cochran, Johanns, Shelby, and … Rand Paul, who voted no twice on cloture. That’s the most bizarre vote array on a nominee I could imagine.
Liberatarian Rand Paul Voted for Chuck Hagel
Allahpundit writes:
Here’s Paul’s reasoning:
“I voted no because I wanted more information and I think that part of what the Senate does is try to get information about the nominees,” Paul told reporters …“There are many things I disagree with Chuck Hagel on…but the president gets to choose political appointees,” Paul said. [...]
If “the president gets to choose political appointees” is sufficient reason to vote yes, then (a) we should get rid of the Senate’s advise-and-consent responsibility and (b) at the very least we should not be filibustering nominees, as Rand Paul voted to do twice. Even if he did that purely to squeeze the White House for more information, why would he vote yes on the final vote when they never gave him that information? And if the president’s entitled to his nominee of choice, why would Paul demand more info about Hagel in the first place? Just rubber-stamp him. Vote yes on every vote, no questions asked.
OBAMA ERA: WEAPONS FOR ISLAMIC RADICALS BUT NOT FOR AMERICANS
All Democrats and several RINO-Republicans in the U.S. Senate voted yesterday to block an amendment trying to stop Obama from sending $1 billion worth of F-16 fighter jets and Abrams tanks to the Islamic radicals now in power in Egypt. (Scroll down to see how each Senator voted.)
The U.S. Senate Thursday defeated an amendment that aimed to prevent the Obama administration from transferring F-16 fighter aircraft and Abrams tanks to an Egypt in disarray.
A vote to block the measure proposed by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) – an amendment to the debt limit bill – passed by a 79–19 vote.
In a strong-worded floor statement Paul questioned the wisdom of providing the sophisticated weaponry at a time when “many see Egypt descending into chaos.”
He based his argument on the Egyptian government’s conduct, President Mohammed Morsi’s expressed radical views, and the possibility that the weapons could be used in a future conflict against Israel.
“I think this is particularly unwise since Egypt is currently governed by a religious zealot, a religious zealot who said recently that Jews were ‘bloodsuckers’ and ‘descendants of apes and pigs,’” he said. “This doesn’t sound like the kind of stable personality that we would be sending our most sophisticated weapons to.”
SEE HOW YOUR SENATORS VOTED
A ‘No’ vote here would have stopped Obama from transferring these advanced weapons to the Egyptian regime.
Roll call vote: YES = 79, NO=19, Not Voting=2 on the motion to table (to block) Senator Rand Paul’s Amendment No. 9 whose purpose was to “prohibit the sale, lease, transfer, retransfer, or delivery of F-16 aircraft, M1 tanks, or certain other defense articles or services to the Government of Egypt.”
[M]any see Egypt descending into chaos. What is President Obama’s response to this? To send them some of the most sophisticated weapons we have: F-16 fighters and Abrams tanks. I think this is particularly unwise, and this legislation will stop it.
I think this is particularly unwise since Egypt is currently governed by a religious zealot, a religious zealot who said recently that ‘Jews were bloodsuckers and descendants of apes and pigs.’ This doesn’t sound like the kind of stable personality we would be sending our most sophisticated weapons to.
I think it is a grave mistake to send F-16s and tanks to a country that detained American citizens on trumped up political charges. On a country that currently is still detaining Egyptian citizens on trumped-up political charges.
I think it is a blunder of the first proportion to send sophisticated weapons to a country that allowed a mob to attack our embassy and to burn our flag. I find it objectionable to send weapons, F-16s and tanks, to a company that allowed a mob chanting “death to America” to threaten our American diplomats.
RUBIO’S PROPOSAL FOR AMNESTY
Republican Senator Marco Rubio joined RINO’s and liberal senators to unveil today their immigration reform plan to provide instant legal status to millions of illegal aliens and to secure a path to citizenship. Below is the text of their proposal:
Bipartisan Framework for Comprehensive Immigration Reform
Proponents:
“Gang of Eight”
Senators Marco Rubio (R-FL), John McCain (R-AZ), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Dick Durbin (D-IL), and Michael Bennet (D-CO)
THIS IS WHY LIBERALS LOVE RON PAUL
During today’s Republican debate, Ron Paul demonstrated why he can’t be U.S. president: He blamed the United States for 9/11. (H/t: Weasel Zippers)
Libertarian Ron Paul – 9/12/2011:
Video mark 2:49:
“This whole idea that the whole Muslim world is responsible for this and they are attacking us because we are free and prosperous, that is just not true. Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda have been explicit … they have been explicit and they wrote and said that “we attacked America because you had bases on our holy land in Saudi Arabia, you do not give Palestinians fair treatment and you have been bombing (audience boos) … I didn’t say that. I’m trying to get you to understand what the motive was behind the bombing. At the same time we had been bombing and killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis for ten years. Would you be annoyed? If you’re not annoyed then there’s some problem.”
