Greg Orman (D* CAND, Kansas-SEN): Oh, yeah, sure, Obama can have whoever he wants.

This is not an unreasonable position for a Democrat to take, of course; or, rather, it is unreasonable, but it is not particularly unexpected. But since Greg Orman is still urinating on people’s legs and telling them that it’s bipartisanship, well

Democratic Senate candidate Greg Orman said that he would allow the president to choose whomever he “feels he needs to pick” to serve in cabinet positions.

“At the end of the day, we sort of let to need chief executives, whether they are Republicans or Democrats, pick the team that they feel like they need to pick to run various cabinet agencies,” Orman said during a Kansas Senate debate with incumbent Pat Roberts (R., Kan.) on Wednesday.

Put another way: Greg Orman just told Kansans that he would have voted for Tom Daschle, Janet Napolitano, Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton, Tim Geithner, Bill Richardson, Eric Shinseki, Steven Chu, Kathleen Sebelius.  Also, Van Jones, Elizabeth Warren, and Lisa Jackson, probably.  And, again: we expect that kind of rubber-stamp behavior from Democrats under a Democratic President.  Republicans under a Democratic President, on the other hand**…

Moe Lane

*Still not going to pretend.

*Yes, I know that many of the people on that list were confirmed in a pro forma fashion.  But many of them were not; and a few were not actually confirmed at all. Time to pull out the flow chart:



3 thoughts on “Greg Orman (D* CAND, Kansas-SEN): Oh, yeah, sure, Obama can have whoever he wants.”

  1. You should label that flow-chart ‘How to establish your mushy moderateness in 3 easy steps’…

  2. You could be right, but there is a good chance you’re wrong on this Moe (if Republicans take the Senate).

    Remember, if the Republicans take the Senate, then McConnell is the one actually setting the agenda. That means, McConnell would get to decide what actually gets to be discussed and potentially put up for a vote, not Reid (and from what I remember McConnell doesn’t exactly like Reid).

    It would be very easy for the House to start passing legislation, and then forcing the Democrats in the Senate to engage in a lot of votes that really put Senate Democrats on the spot (even if they fillabuster, it would still put them on record). Things that the public would not consider contraversial, but Obama doesn’t want.

    All they need to do is just keep scheduling work on the budget, legislation, things that the American People would support, but Obama does not, and watch the Democrats start fighting amongst themselves.

    Heck they don’t even have to provide any funding to Obamacare in a continuing resolution if they control the Senate, they can just vote down any Democrat amendment to fund Obamacare, and push for the House Bill to be passed as is. The media would have a hard time portraying it as Republican obstructionism when they are voting to pass a resolution, but it would be very easy to paint things as Harry Reid and/or Barack Obama are just throwing another tantrum.

Comments are closed.