Really? Like the same thoughtful scrutiny you gave 0bamacare before you jammed it through the House without a single Republican vote? And took over 15% of the American economy? Remember this one, Nan?
This sort of "thoughtful scrutiny"?
Not a big deal. The number of years of separation is something Congress pulled out of their magic hat.
Who cares what she thinks?
The Democrats will shut down the government? We win either way!!!
At least you know what's in the bill, Nancy. Unlike 0bamacare. For example.
I don’t read anything in the constitution that says he needs a waiver.
The point is that Congress acknowledges & approves the validity & value of the person, within the spirit of the restriction. Mattis isn’t being approved by POTUS alone in some quid pro quo, he’s approved because he’s a legitimate leader & advisor.
Besides, if Congress hadn’t gotten itself so deep into stupid spending predicaments, this “trick” couldn’t be used. Play stupid games, get stupid prizes.
Why would this not be the purview of the next Congress seated in January??
We have to make Gen. Mattis SecDef before we know whose ass he’ll kick, Nanzi!
Semper Fidelis!
Highly overrated
If not for a couple of hundred thousand votes in a few states, the military would be the only thing that could stop the Hildabeast from looting and plundering and destroying the USA.
While I am glad that they are going to get a waiver for General Mattis in this manner, I cannot help but wonder why this tactic has never been utilized to eliminate or largely cut back on the onerous provisions of the National Firearms Act of 1934 or the Gun Control Act of 1968. What excuse do our Representatives have for failing to do this?
What does “speed-up” mean? Just faster consent?
US Snooze trying to make something of nothing.
’ “House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Wednesday that most Democrats won’t oppose compromise language in a stopgap spending measure aimed at expediting consideration of President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for Defense secretary.
“I don’t think that will be an obstacle — maybe for some,” Pelosi told reporters Wednesday.” ‘
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/309265-pelosi-dems-ok-with-mattis-compromise-language#.WEhjZpn7mRM.twitter
Well, since it was ok for George Washington, and Dwight Eisenhower to be President, I fail to see the problem.
We are at war with a radical enemy - seems appropriate to have effective people in charge who know this enemy and know what they are doing.
Really? Like the same thoughtful scrutiny you gave 0bamacare before you jammed it through the House without a single Republican vote? And took over 15% of the American economy? Remember this one, Nan?
This sort of "thoughtful scrutiny"?
How great does it feel to have a Trump who either orchestrated, or at the minimum inspired, the GOP congress to play the same no holds barred style that the Dems have been playing for years.
America would not have seen this if it was was another Marquis of Queensbury wimp like the Bushes or the #nevertrump gang.
As much as I agree with the necessity of the waiver, above all else, I abhor and detest earmarks.
How much effort does it take to move that waiver and pass it on its own?
Should the Dims decide and manage to vote it down, then they best be ready to accept the consequences.
Even Trump has a limit to taking one-sided "bipartisanship" so far.
Elections have consequences.
If the winners act like ignorant uninspired idiots, the Dims will be happy to accommodate them.