It's useful to be reminded every now and then that Barack Obama and the Democrats don't have a stranglehold on stupid:
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) has put an extraordinary "blanket hold" on at least 70 nominations President Obama has sent to the Senate, according to multiple reports this evening. The hold means no nominations can move forward unless Senate Democrats can secure a 60-member cloture vote to break it, or until Shelby lifts the hold.
.....
According to the report, Shelby is holding Obama's nominees hostage until a pair of lucrative programs that would send billions in taxpayer dollars to his home state get back on track. The two programs Shelby wants to move forward or else:
- A $40 billion contract to build air-to-air refueling tankers. From CongressDaily: "Northrop/EADS team would build the planes in Mobile, Ala., but has threatened to pull out of the competition unless the Air Force makes changes to a draft request for proposals." Federal Times offers more details on the tanker deal, and also confirms its connection to the hold.
- An improvised explosive device testing lab for the FBI. From CongressDaily: "[Shelby] is frustrated that the Obama administration won't build" the center, which Shelby earmarked $45 million for in 2008. The center is due to be based "at the Army's Redstone Arsenal."
Republicans should always remember that Barack Obama is President of the United States largely because of people like Richard Shelby (and George W. Bush)... Republicans who talk about "fiscal restraint" to the gullible while engaging in the exact behavior they decry in Democrats.
Fuck 'em.
Shelby is another walking advert for term limits.
Posted by: Eric Blair | February 05, 2010 at 08:29 AM
That tanker deal has been in limbo since 2004. Not surprisingly while the Bushies were in power there was an ethics scandal that resulted in prison terms for a former Boeing company executive and a former Air Force official after the first award. As I recall they tried to bilk the taxpayers badly on the lease.
So of course in 2008 the Air Force rigged the second contract to give the deal to AirBus (European Aeronautic Defense/Northrup) pissing off the Boeing folks.
Meanwhile those Eisenhower era KC-135s (Boeing 707s) just keep getting older. Defense contracting is a dirty business but all in all Boeing builds a pretty good plane. There are B-52s and KC-135s probably older than anyone commenting here still in service. Might want to go with that track record instead of AirBus which the WTO has ruled illegally subsidizes their plane sales.
Posted by: Lefty | February 05, 2010 at 09:30 AM
I hate to agree with Lefty on anything, but those KC-135R models just won't break. When I was fixing C-5's at Altus in Herr Klintoon's Luftwaffe, we used to call the guys on the 135 line "Maytag Repairmen". While we were on 12 hour shifts keeping Lockheed's giant shitpiles running, they were sending people home early cause there was nothing to do.
Hell, their engine troops used to schedule engine changes and other maintenance on perfectly good equipment just to remain current on training, which requires you do the task in question at least once every calendar year.
I'm with Eric Blair. Term limits for everyone. I'll go a bit further and say that no one should ever hold the same office twice.
Posted by: Randy Rager | February 05, 2010 at 10:57 AM
As you point out, Dennis, it's not always about party affiliation and ideology. There are the corrupt to tolerable R's and D's, but it's the party of I's that most often offend-- not Independents, but Incumbents with their I-first self-serving all-politics-is-local parochial interests.
Term limits as an Amendment projects failure to me. Maybe a Tea Party-like, non Ross Perot movement could take up the cause of backing candidates who voluntarily promise (yeah, right) to limit their time in Congress, with TV ad jeers upon their inevitable reneging.
That proposed, there's still the need for institutional learning curve time and memory, and responsiveness to constituent needs. I especially wouldn't want the Presidency limited to one term, ever. He/she/it needs to be answerable to the electorate in a follow-up run.
Like cardigan Carter.
Posted by: 1/ 59 millionth dumb American | February 05, 2010 at 11:57 AM
Doing away with elections entirely and selecting our representatives at random would give us better governance than we've got now.
The longer they're in office, the more corrupt they get. At least with term limits we could keep the corruption down to a dull roar.
Easing the restrictions on recalls would be a nice way to put some more responsiveness in the system.
Posted by: Randy Rager | February 05, 2010 at 12:24 PM
But Carter was so bad that people voted him out just to be rid of him, not necessarily because he reneged on promises.
President Obama, he's gone off and reneged on promises. And he's incompetent to boot. Nasty combination.
OTOH, He might not matter so much (or at all) if Congress wasn't such a giant cesspool of (as you most ably point out) "Incumbents with their I-first self-serving all-politics-is-local parochial interests". Not to mention being just plain corrupt, too.
Posted by: Eric Blair | February 05, 2010 at 12:25 PM
This is what a lot of people don't get about the "tea party." People hate this kind of bullshit, regardless of party.
OTOH, if if pisses off the left, it can't be all bad. I didn't know "Boy" Josh Marshall had an apoplectic vein in his furrowed brow left to pop.
Posted by: David | February 05, 2010 at 12:32 PM
Eric, right about Carter. I ineptly tried to say it's important for Presidents to face re-election (theoretically) to constrain their policy and performance in office, for that first term. Which is a bogus point on my part, b/c the Presidency is term limited.
Perhaps imposing a moratorium on Congressional lifers from getting half their states named after them would disincentivize their staying on and on and on. Monumentalism. Too much of that serious deliberation thing is about buttressing egos with coin and recognition.
I appropriate, therefore I am.
Posted by: 1/ 59 millionth dumb American | February 05, 2010 at 02:20 PM
What, we don't need an IED testing device?
And let's not forget the role of that great reacher-around, er, asile-crosser, John McCain in messing up the tanker replacement program...
Posted by: richard mcenroe | February 05, 2010 at 03:16 PM
*gr*
asile = aisle
device - facility.
Hey, I'm working at a handicap here...it's a borrowed computer...
*sigh*
working at a handicap = hanging curve ball...
Posted by: richard mcenroe | February 05, 2010 at 03:20 PM
Shelby's action stinks; the tanker deal(s) stink. I really don't know if the Republicans will have increased seats in the Congress this year. People are so ticked off that, if you're an incumbent of either the R or the D variety, people aren't going to vote for you. If we really cleaned house, I suppose we'd have inverted majorities after a while. We apparently can't make a tanker deal because the Air Force procurement process has become so politicized that it is impossible to actually negotiate and complete a contract.
Posted by: Mike Myers | February 05, 2010 at 03:31 PM
In my opinion, only individuals with a violent aversion to politics should be elected – they’ll avoid the job like the plague and will bail at the first opportunity. A self-limiting process, as it were…
Failing that, we should implement something I read about in some obscure SF novel back in my misspent youth; politicians, upon election, should be fitted with tamper-proof explosive collars with radio receivers. Voters will have a website or phone number where they can register a “Approve” or “Disapprove” vote. Get enough “Disapprove” votes and we’re having new elections. Obviously, the system will need tweaking but I see no reason for lab testing, let’s go straight to a field beta to validate the hardware and software and then full production rollout upon the first successful detonation.
Posted by: Uncle Fester | February 05, 2010 at 05:41 PM
Given recent news, Shelby should insist on an intrauterine explosive device testing facility.
Even Sully could get behind that.
Posted by: wombat | February 05, 2010 at 05:46 PM
You're singing to my choir, Dennis.
Posted by: Daphne | February 05, 2010 at 07:32 PM
Meh, the entire DoD procurement process has become politicized. The AF is obvious only because there are so few aircraft manufacturers.
Hang 'em all, says I. And if we can't hang 'em, I'll settle for tar, feathers, and a ride on the nearest railroad.
Posted by: JeffS | February 05, 2010 at 08:23 PM
As a former Alabama resident, I just want to point out that Richard Shelby was first a Democrat.
Uncle Fester, I wish my Uncles were like you.
Posted by: Occam's Razor | February 07, 2010 at 11:41 PM