Administration snubbing Democrats and appointing GOP candidates for US Attorney

[nichomachus]

http://www.mainjustice.com/2011/07/11/administration-ig... /

The Barack Obama administration will consider another Republican nomination for a U.S. Attorney position – the latest case of the Democratic administration deferring to Republican-recommended appointees.

The Obama administration is vetting David Barlow, currently the legal counsel to Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), for potential appointment as U.S. Attorney for Utah, the Salt Lake Tribute reported.

On Friday, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) announced that he recommended Barlow to the White House. ... Todd Taylor, executive director of the Utah Democratic Party, told the Tribune that Barlow’s nomination ignored the state's many talented Democratic attorneys, some of whom he recommended to the White House himself.

And this isn't the first time the White House has ignored its party's suggestions for U.S. attorney nominees. President Barack Obama snubbed Texas Democrats last month by nominating Republican picks for all four U.S. Attorney's Offices in Texas. ... Home-state senators typically recommend candidates to the White House, unless both of the state's senators are of different parties than the president – as in the case of Utah and Texas. In those cases, the administration usually looks to its party's House members for recommendations, but Obama has bucked that trend with recent nominations.

[librechik]

1. with Republicans refusing to confirm anyone with a D after their name

I don't know what choice he has, if he wants some of ihis own appointees in place. It sucks, and it's more evidence that a tiny minority uses tricks and obscure rules to hold the nation hostage.

[nichomachus]

3. Then he should go on TV and say this

Name names. Stop playing nice.

[PragmaticLiberal]

8. It wouldn't do any good....

[arcane1]

4. And I suppose the Dems are NOT refusing to confirm the R's

:(

[msongs]

7. poor helpless obama boo hoo hoo. nt

[RKP5637]

18. My thought too. How did the dems ever advance at all. I'm tired of catering all

of the time to the republicans. In office, out of office, we're almost getting the same.

[Bandit]

50. In ways we are getting worse

If we had a Republican President Democratic Senators would balk and do what Republicans are currently doing. They would halt all these Republican appointments and Republican policies that they are currently acquiescing to because a "Democrat" is promoting them..

[RKP5637]

53. And endless gridlock. Often I think a strong third party is needed by some group to

break up the gridlock. Often I feel like we're just watching an endless domestic argument go back and forth perpetually.

[deutsey]

52. +1

[indepat]

47. Or just one of numerous indications of actual political persuasion?

:patriot:

[fascisthunter]

2. but, but, but... they are being fair, ya see

[TheWraith]

5. Newsflash: this is standard proceedure. Always has been.

Except when somebody wants to try and use it to slam Obama.

Anyone ever wondered how Democrats get appointed US Attorney under a Republican administration? It's because 99 times out of 100, Senators get to pick their own nominees.

[nichomachus]

9. Really?

Home-state senators typically recommend candidates to the White House, unless both of the state's senators are of different parties than the president – as in the case of Utah and Texas. In those cases, the administration usually looks to its party's House members for recommendations, but Obama has bucked that trend with recent nominations.

[TheWraith]

40. Yes, really. The House has nothing to do with it.

The article is wrong. US Attorneys aren't confirmed by the House, so they have no real dealings with the House. House members typically only recommend judges.

[Bandit]

51. And just how many Democratic appointments were made under Bush*?

:shrug:

[JoePhilly]

6. Why does Obama hate America??

[Dragonfli]

11. He doesn't, he only hates the common folk, Corporations he lurves /nt

[Vincardog]

26. Obama does not hate America. He just hates LIBERALS

[Scurrilous]

48. Because he's worse than Hitler?

:o

[RC]

10. Obama should at least try.

I did not vote for a Republican President, but apparently we have one anyway.

[Dragonfli]

13. We are all Free Traders Now ! as well, or did you miss all the D memos on that?

[RKP5637]

21. It sure seems that way. I've told people here that

I almost felt more comfortable under Bush/Cheney because I knew they were going to fuck up everything and it would be horrible. My hope was better times were coming and we would have all dems in office for the most part. Anymore, I get a lot of disappointments. Sure, it could be far worse, but IMO it could also be far better.

[Horse with no Name]

28. It wasn't as bad because at least I didn't vote for it

so the fucking up the country wasn't my fault and I had a reason to fight it.

With this? Well, I voted it and I am responsible for it. THAT is what pisses me off most.

[RKP5637]

29. Yep!!! Same here! n/t

[RufusTFirefly]

12. Gosh, I just know that this will finally convince the Republicans to stop hating him

All you Obama naysayers will be eating crow when he shouts out "Checkmate."

Any day now.


The Republicans are in their last throes.

[Dragonfli]

14. He may have sacrificed all the pawns, but it was so worth it! /nt

[Enrique]

15. he has no choice

for some reason someone will explain...

[mod mom]

16. yeah, just like * had no choice but to chose brown shirt republicans.

:mad:

[Poll_Blind]

17. Actually, they'll just post links without commentary and pretend there's an answer, some...

...great rebuttal perhaps, buried within them.

:rofl:

PB

[Enrique]

20. ah yes, the non-debunking debunking

a classic tactic. ;-)

[INdemo]

19. Does Obama really want a second term?..We compare him to

the crazies and know he is better than our alternative but yet he keeps showing the Democratic base(whats left of it) that he doesn't really care. We make excuses for him and about the time it seems he may be gaining some support back he stabs us in the back again.. So just maybe he does not want another term..So why not just step aside and allow us to support a real Democrat?Would a Republican ever support a Democrat for a key position?

[RKP5637]

23. Your last sentence sums it up exactly. "Would a Republican ever support a Democrat for

a key position?"

I think not. I'm tired of this compromise BS. Take no prisoners.

[kentuck]

22. Republicans will love him now...

especially Orrin Hatch.

[SidDithers]

24. Oh look. It's this thread again...

This article is almost 3 months old.

Sid

[ProSense]

32. It's coming

from a certain group that supported Hillary.

Why not mischaracterize one of Obama's strengths as a weakness: Why Does the President Do This.

The right does it all the time. Be sure to read the comments.

[Creideiki]

41. They never really LOVED Him!

[bvar22]

25. Another easy WIN for the Obama Administration.

Quick.
Somebody add it to
" #396. President Obama successfully appoints another US Attorney."


Eric Holders FIRST priority after being appointed as Attorney General was getting corrupt Republican Ted Stevens out of jail.
But unfairly jailed Democratic Governor Don Siegelman?
...never heard of him.




You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.

Solidarity!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Tarheel_Dem]

27. So justice should be dispensed according to party affiliation? Isn't that what Karl Rove

did? Politicize the DOJ? Would you agree that justice should be blind? Remember Monica Goodling? I, for one, am glad this president can't be accused of "stacking" the DOJ. As a constitutional scholar, he probably knows that doing such a thing would be abhorrent to fair minded & apolitical people. Not everything should be political, and the DOJ is certainly one of those things.

I find it strange on a site that routinely rebuffs & rebukes "party discipline" & that anyone would seriously argue that only Democrats should be considered for a DOJ spot. When the WH changes parties, would you want the new president to only consider one party for DOJ or court appointments? Does that sound fair to anyone?
:shrug:

[Horse with no Name]

30. The republicans STACKED it

some dilution would be nice...instead, Obama continues to feed the crimson wave through the judiciary.

Because we ALL know that the republicans are ALWAYS nice and fair.

AND we know that courts stacked with them ALWAYS dispense justice which is why we KNOW that no innocent person WILL ever be executed. Right?

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[madfloridian]

36. So you admit a Dem president is not needed after all?

Because we don't want to do what they did? Think about what you are saying.

[Tarheel_Dem]

38. MF, you & I can't even agree on the time of day, so I'm not gonna go there with you.

:hi:

[TheKentuckian]

37. So, you favor turning over Justice and the courts over to the TeaPubliKlans?

They aren't playing your game and have an advantage because in addition to this one sided blame game they have more of their people in place because they have held the White House more plus have a structural advantage with these low population states.

If appointments don't matter and policy doesn't matter then we may as well fold the party since its purpose is functionally just to facilitate the opposition.

[Tarheel_Dem]

43. Okay, so you advocate doing it, because they did it first as well?

I get faint just listening to the contortions of people who were outraged that a formerly trusted division of the government, whose very integrity depends on its ability to dispense justice evenly, and without "loyalty oaths" to a political party, or any president now seem to be arguing that since they did it first, it's okay. In your opinion, is there any branch of government where we should draw a clear line at politics & one upsmanship?

Emotionally, I know what you guys are saying. I'm as partisan as the next person, but I do realize the need for DOJ not to be.

[TheKentuckian]

54. But it is partisan, partisan for Republicans and you are content to continue to stack it for them.

Are you claiming that the TeaPubliKlans are finished with the tactic and now it will balance and become non-partisan over time?

How is a Republican Justice department "non-partisan"?

[madfloridian]

33. As a matter of fact....that is one reason many of us worked hard for Dems.

Because of the judges...remember all the lectures we heard about being careful or the GOP would get to appoint all the judges???

Well, effing guess what. Our Democratic president is appointing them for the GOP!!

[TheKentuckian]

35. The Republicans have stacked Justice, the tact you support means we only get Republicans

Who are fucking terrible, authoritarian, pro-corporate beyond all imagination, and theocratic.

We are way past having the luxury for phony high minded, fake bipartisanship.

If you are reluctant to "stack" then appoint independents because Republicans are a waste of skin and full of wickedness and dirty tricks.

[INdemo]

42. Well if a Republican was in the White House you know full well that

a Republican would be appointed to all levels of Gov't ...There is nothing fair about what the Republicans sitting on the Supreme Court did to this country in 2000..Was that fair to anyone?
Hell yes Obama should have appointed a Democrat..
He should have appointed all Democrats to fill administration positions but most are Republicans ..and just how did that work out for us?

[lovuian]

39. obama's Justice Department is about No Justice

no trials on the banksters
no trials on the torturers

no trials no trials no trials

Justice in America doesn't exist

[JoeyT]

44. Well that's good.

A few years from now when the godawful ultra-right rulings start pouring out of these shitheels it can all be prefixed with "Judge A, an Obama appointee" and we'll never have to listen to the nonsensical argument about appointing judges that will do the right thing again.

And we can stick it on The List as a victory. We appointed judges! Winning!

[dmosh42]

45. To the highest bidder!

[ProSense]

46. Cool graphic on the President's judicial nominees

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.