Hey Shelby, Get your ass in gear!
Posted on 02/25/2013 4:58:01 PM PST by Nachum
The Steering Committee of the Alabama Republican Party has taken the rare step of officially demanding that one of the state’s two GOP U.S. Senators change a publicly announced position in a high-profile Washington battle. Specifically, the state party leaders have passed a resolution demanding that Sen. Richard Shelby “reconsider and reverse his decision to support Senator [Chuck] Hagel to be Secretary of Defense.” The resolution, passed early this afternoon, blasts Hagel for statements “favorable toward” countries “that we believe to be enemies of the United States of America,” and also criticizes him for “not being a supporter of Israel, the only dependable ally the United States of America has in that part of the world.” It notes, too, that “many Alabama citizens have expressed outrage at Senator Shelby’s decision.”
This is big stuff. Sen. Shelby is a powerful politician, and the state party long has been supportive of him. But his support of Hagel seems to really have created a backlash.
“It has been an outpouring from people across the state,” State Republican Chairman Bill Armistead told me. “There have been phone calls from a lot of people, plus we’ve all been approached by people we know at churches and in our communities. I haven’t seen anything this strong in opposition to something done by one of our representatives in Congress in a long time.”
(Armistead stressed that this does not indicate opposition to Shelby in general, but only that it was very strong opposition to this one decision.)
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Prime example of why the 17th Amendment needs repealed.
/johnny
Why ? Do you want an even more liberal and statist Senate ?
He used to be a Dem if I’m not mistaken. I’m going to vote his ass out next time. Hope he has a challenger.
He’s not up until 2016.
More importantly, term limits need to be implemented.
More importantly, term limits need to be implemented.
I highly doubt the senate would be more liberal if appointed by state legislatures. As things are now, they are free agents, responsible to no one after winning a single race every six years.
Several of them just buy their seats, having enough money to ruin anyone who challenges them in the primary. John McCain is a great example. He is not an Arizonan, his wife is, and she is also a very wealthy beer heiress, who enjoys the Beltway cocktail party circuit.
As far as being more liberal, there is a problem with that as well, because much of the liberal agenda supports enormous federal power at the expense of the states. And this comes directly out of the hide of state legislators who do not like it one bit.
Speaking out of ignorance is never a good thing.
It was originally intended for the State legislatures to pick their Senators so the state would have representation in fedgov. This was to assist in balancing power between the states and fed.
27 state legislatures are Republican controlled....ie both houses. (24 have R controlled governments - ie 24/27 have a pubbie gov too)
17 are dem controlled.
5 are split. Of those 1 has a R governor.
1 state legislature, Nebraska, is "non partisan."
Which would most likely mean the R's would have 54 in the Senate........to break this down for you, that would mean they'd have the majority they don't have.
We currently have two Houses at the federal level that are elected by popular vote.....ie mob rule and have the ability to vote the fruits of one's labor unto another.
There is no representation of the state at the federal level.
By returning power to the State, you would be less likely to see fedgov bullying the States ie raise the drinking age to 21 or you lose highway funding, or you must set the speed limit to 55mph or you lose xxxxx etc.
Further, you probably wouldn't have the GOP steering committee in SC(?) threatening their dumbass Senator for supporting cloture for Hagel's nomination vote.....in other words, the Senator would already be beholden to their State.
If the 17th Amendment were repealed today, the Republicans would have a distinct advantage. They currently control 27 state legislatures and the Democrats control only 18. That doesn’t mean we’d get rid of the Shelbys, but it would certainly mean Republicans would control the US Senate. It’s a good starting point.
http://ivn.us/infographics/2013/02/07/which-party-controls-the-state-legislatures-and-governorships/
I meant Alabama, not SC......
I was thinking along the lines of TX (and others) putting forth legislation preventing federales from enforcing federal firearms laws within their respective state(s)....essentially stating the right of the state trumps fed law ala SC pre-Civil war. And mashed it into the topic at hand with Alabama.
But, I meant to add the above points as well, and accidentally hit "post" before I was done proofing.
The point is, the states (legislatures) would already have their ability to check fed power and wouldn't be trying to pass legislation after the fact to combat fed laws.
Repeat Offender, I could’ve spared you all that typing. This has been discussed repeatedly. I suggest reading this thread: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2986688/posts
and a bit of a follow-up in this one:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2989575/posts
Simply put, the belief that you’d get a better Senate with repeal of the 17th is a fallacy (or fantasy), because it runs smack into the political reality and dynamics of today. The likelihood of getting Conservatives committed to smaller government elected from a state government body desirous for big federal gov $$ is next to zero. Texas, for example, wouldn’t be sending Ted Cruz, it would be sending big government liberals like Karl Rove (as a thank you to Dubya) and David Dewhurst (the rich Lt Governor and establishment liberal who ordered the legislature to help elect him over Cruz at all costs).
And it in no way currently represents the entrenched aristocracy feared in Senators by the Antifederalists.
There was a reason the Founders put it in the original Constitution.
because it runs smack into the political reality and dynamics of today.
Liberals during the "Progressive Era" said as much during the debate leading up to the passage of 17th Amendment.
They're saying the 2nd and 10th run smack into political reality and dynamics of today.
good for Alabama!!!!!!!!!!!
any senator still supporting Mr. Hagel after all the bad stuff that’s come out about him (undisputed and/or not proven false... )......
should be voted OUT of the senate, asap!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
American Jews supported Obama by 69%.
F em
I am Jewish.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.