Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: Nevertheless, She Persisted

  1. #1
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    2,897
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Nevertheless, She Persisted

    NYTimes: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.23e99919843e

    Senator Warren was rebuked on the floor of the Senate while reading a letter from Martin Luther King Jr's widow into the record -- in opposition to Senator Session's nomination as Attorney General. This has gotten a lot of attention. A couple of points that many are missing:

    -She wasn't rebuked for reading a letter from Correta Scott King; she was rebuked for violating Senate Rule XIX, which prohibits impugning a sitting Senator while speaking on the floor, she had called him a "disgrace to the Justice Department". The letter was later read in its entirety by a different Democrat Senator who refrained from calling Sen Sessions a "disgrace".

    -Senator McConnell in rebuking her, made this a big deal when it really wasn't ... no one would have paid attention to the late night debate (really stalling the eventual confirmation) had he not rebuked her. The event creating a new motto "Neverless, She Persisted" and actually enabling a fundraising boost for the DNC and Sen Warren.

    -Sen Warren's face when she was told to "take a seat" was funny.

    I think the Dems are fighting the wrong fight with President Trump's cabinet ... expending capital when they may need it later. Based on the rule change (nuclear option) in 2013, they can slow it down, kick and scream ... he will get his cabinet. Even with the opposition to the Education Secretary, the 2 Republicans that dissented did so as a 'face save' with their constituents, if needed they would have voted to confirm. The current Supreme Court nominee if confirmed will not ideologically shift the Court from when Justice Scalia was there, the next Supreme Court nominee will be where they will need to / want to dig in.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  2. #2
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,983
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    She was not shut down while reading the letter...and the "she persisted" crap all over social media is annoying as hell. She was allowed to complete the letter...not sure why they said that's when it happened. Guess it makes a better story.

  3. #3
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    2,897
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sandsjames View Post
    She was not shut down while reading the letter...and the "she persisted" crap all over social media is annoying as hell. She was allowed to complete the letter...not sure why they said that's when it happened. Guess it makes a better story.
    I thought it was while reading it and didn't make it all the way through.

    Yes, it makes a better story & hash tag though to say it was during it (if she finished) and to say the rebuke was for the letter and not her lead-in to the letter (which was her words ... not Mrs. King's) ... in the same way that it is a better story to call the travel restrictions from President Trumps EO a "Muslim ban" vice that it targeted specific countries (yes predominantly Muslim ones) with higher than average radical extremism.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  4. #4
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,983
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    I thought it was while reading it and didn't make it all the way through.

    Yes, it makes a better story & hash tag though to say it was during it (if she finished) and to say the rebuke was for the letter and not her lead-in to the letter (which was her words ... not Mrs. King's) ... in the same way that it is a better story to call the travel restrictions from President Trumps EO a "Muslim ban" vice that it targeted specific countries (yes predominantly Muslim ones) with higher than average radical extremism.
    Guess we can't expect things to be much different though...overt lies are the norm, whether coming from the media or from the administration. The assumption from most now is that the majority are just going to look at the headline and not pay attention to the entire story (as happened with you on this story). Unfortunately, there's no where to go to get a non-opinionated, non-partisan news story about anything. There are NO options.

  5. #5
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    2,897
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sandsjames View Post
    Guess we can't expect things to be much different though...overt lies are the norm, whether coming from the media or from the administration. The assumption from most now is that the majority are just going to look at the headline and not pay attention to the entire story (as happened with you on this story). Unfortunately, there's no where to go to get a non-opinionated, non-partisan news story about anything. There are NO options.
    Media, administration & opposition.

    I didn't get my opinion on it from the headline, when I watched the video of it, I thought (still think) she was reading from the letter.

    EDIT: Sen Warren's Facebook stream of her reading the letter had more (of the letter) than what she got out on the floor ... I don't think she had finished it (maybe was interjecting her out thoughts at points) ... not sure.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Bos Mutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,543
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    -She wasn't rebuked for reading a letter from Correta Scott King; she was rebuked for violating Senate Rule XIX, which prohibits impugning a sitting Senator while speaking on the floor, she had called him a "disgrace to the Justice Department".
    I get not wanting to be "impugning" the other Senators during the normal course of business.

    But, it seems like that rule should be suspended when they're having a hearing about one particular Senator. How can you have a fair hearing if negative information is not allowed in the hearing?

    Also, does he vote on his own nomination?
    The Voice of Reason

  7. #7
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    2,897
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    I get not wanting to be "impugning" the other Senators during the normal course of business.

    But, it seems like that rule should be suspended when they're having a hearing about one particular Senator. How can you have a fair hearing if negative information is not allowed in the hearing?
    Negative information can be debated on/introduced into the record (technically the period for Senators to give their speeches for or against is called "debate" for purposes of actions on the floor) ... but there is a difference between calling someone unqualified and calling them a disgrace. As I have been reading about it, what ran Senator Warren afoul of Rule XIX (McConnell) was her own comments (calling Sessions a disgrace) prior to staring the letter from Mrs. King.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    Also, does he vote on his own nomination?
    In theory he could, however he did not, he voted "present". I don't know of any Senator who ever has voted for their own confirmation, it was a question that came up in a discussion forum with the Clerk's Office when I was working there. There is no rule against it.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Columbus, ohio
    Posts
    3,299
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    What gets me is even AFTER being warned reading from that letter violated rule XIX, she and DOZENS of other Dems still persisted to read from it.
    SO WHAT was the damn point in ordering her to stop, for violating the rule, if NOT A DOG GAWD DAMN THING happens to her for persistently violating that rule??

  9. #9
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,983
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by garhkal View Post
    What gets me is even AFTER being warned reading from that letter violated rule XIX, she and DOZENS of other Dems still persisted to read from it.
    SO WHAT was the damn point in ordering her to stop, for violating the rule, if NOT A DOG GAWD DAMN THING happens to her for persistently violating that rule??
    Good lord, man...do you pay any attention to any news? Even the fake stuff? It wasn't about the letter...it was about the comments she made in conjunction with the letter that violated the rule.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Rainmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    on a Marl Road
    Posts
    3,876
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sandsjames View Post
    Unfortunately, there's no where to go to get a non-opinionated, non-partisan news story about anything.
    There never was a such thing as unbiased media. The only difference is people are aware of it now.

    But, we're far better off that the leftist monopoly on information's been busted.

    Because at least now we can hear some counterpoints to the globalist narrative & try to draw informed conclusions.
    Last edited by Rainmaker; 02-09-2017 at 07:48 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •