HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Tim Scott just stopped Th...

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 07:28 PM

 

Tim Scott just stopped Thomas Farr's nomination in it's tracks!

Thanks to all who called his office!

37 replies, 2791 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 37 replies Author Time Post
Reply Tim Scott just stopped Thomas Farr's nomination in it's tracks! (Original post)
EffieBlack Nov 2018 OP
brush Nov 2018 #1
HipChick Nov 2018 #12
kwassa Nov 2018 #14
DFW Nov 2018 #20
Jeffersons Ghost Nov 2018 #24
brush Nov 2018 #27
DFW Nov 2018 #31
brush Nov 2018 #32
DFW Nov 2018 #33
brush Nov 2018 #35
DFW Nov 2018 #36
brush Nov 2018 #37
Jeffersons Ghost Nov 2018 #25
brush Nov 2018 #28
DFW Nov 2018 #34
The_REAL_Ecumenist Nov 2018 #22
cynatnite Nov 2018 #2
Tarheel_Dem Nov 2018 #3
SCantiGOP Nov 2018 #4
Tarheel_Dem Nov 2018 #5
EffieBlack Nov 2018 #6
Tarheel_Dem Nov 2018 #7
Hermit-The-Prog Nov 2018 #8
EffieBlack Nov 2018 #9
Hermit-The-Prog Nov 2018 #15
hatrack Nov 2018 #30
brush Nov 2018 #29
UTUSN Nov 2018 #10
a kennedy Nov 2018 #13
UTUSN Nov 2018 #16
Polybius Nov 2018 #17
a kennedy Nov 2018 #18
UTUSN Nov 2018 #19
a kennedy Nov 2018 #11
JI7 Nov 2018 #21
oberliner Nov 2018 #23
EffieBlack Nov 2018 #26

Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 07:40 PM

1. Finally! A Republican senator showed gumption and principles. It took an AA...

to stop the repugs continued march towards more and more vote suppression.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #1)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 09:33 PM

12. What's an AA?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HipChick (Reply #12)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 09:34 PM

14. African American

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #14)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 10:45 PM

20. If it's a Senator involved, it's a legitimate question to ask, as "AA" has a specific meaning there.

In the Senate, whenever someone mentions an "AA," they think you meant a Seantor's Administrative Assistant, which is pretty much their right hand, sort of like the equivalent of a White House Chief of Staff. If you have an urgent message for a Senator and can't get a hold of him/her, you leave it with their AA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #20)

Fri Nov 30, 2018, 05:43 AM

24. I AM STOPPING FREEPERS IN THIER TRACKS TOO, read IT and weep:

The ultimate weapon of choice is still an FBI FISA Warrant; and everyone who replied or kicked this old OP up gets one: read ALL of this...

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211491422

GOTCHA
The National Security Agency is the only government group that actually listens...
Maybe, FBI online agents are finally "listening" too...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #20)

Fri Nov 30, 2018, 08:00 AM

27. Well, this is DU where you have a limited char. count in your headline, thus AA...

is short for African American, a pretty common usage here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #27)

Fri Nov 30, 2018, 12:54 PM

31. I've spent time around both

And I was using the term AA referring to Senators' Adminsitrative Assistants since the 1960s, back in the days when my two roomies in college just referred to themselves as "black folks," and when my dad used to take me up to the Senate during semester breaks. There was a world before DU. I looked it up to be sure I hadn't just dreamed it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #31)

Fri Nov 30, 2018, 12:59 PM

32. Time to update.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #32)

Fri Nov 30, 2018, 01:07 PM

33. The U.S. Senate doesn't "update" accordng to my schedule

Probably not to the schedule of any demands from DU, either (you can always try, of course).

When Senators I know say "AA," they mean their administrative assistant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #33)

Fri Nov 30, 2018, 01:13 PM

35. Not the Senate, your DU vocabulary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #35)

Fri Nov 30, 2018, 01:18 PM

36. I'll have others dictate my DU vocaulary when I feel a pressing need for it

I promise you'll be among the first to know. I'll even include my socks color and my toothpaste brand for review at the same time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #36)

Fri Nov 30, 2018, 01:47 PM

37. OK. I'll stay off your lawn but will continue to use common abreviations in limited DU char. fields.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HipChick (Reply #12)

Fri Nov 30, 2018, 05:54 AM

25. The actual "AA" stands for "A"ctual "A"uthentication...

It was a Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency DARPA competition, which allowed universities and private corporations to compete to create technology to find and identify jobs and goals of internet users, by ways they searched topics on the World Wide Web. BTW, what does F.I.S.A. mean?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jeffersons Ghost (Reply #25)

Fri Nov 30, 2018, 08:02 AM

28. See post 27

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jeffersons Ghost (Reply #25)

Fri Nov 30, 2018, 01:08 PM

34. I didn't know that one. I'll have to ask my brother

He does projects for DARPA

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #1)

Fri Nov 30, 2018, 05:30 AM

22. AA or not, he's also one of the 5 fuckers who took money to QUASH the HORRIFIC

slaughter of innocent men, women and most importantly BABIES, on the behalf of the UAE & Saudi Arabia because, you see, taking as much money as they can stuff in every pocket they ever thought of having to look the other way while the creeps throwing buckets & shovelling coin of the realm grin, knowing that the "Sunday morning Christians" are only saying the things that the dim witted delusional masses want to hear, in spite of the blatant & obvious hypocrisy they seem to be proud to display....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 07:43 PM

2. I think this is the beginning of repubs starting to break with tRump...

It'll be drip drip drip, but I see this as being the first of many starting to go against tRump and will get more bold about it the more that comes out about tRump and his treason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 08:03 PM

3. I asked this question in another thread, but does anyone know if this nomination can be brought back

when the new Senate is in session?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #3)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 08:07 PM

4. Don't see why not

I know that it has been done before.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCantiGOP (Reply #4)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 08:13 PM

5. That's what I'm thinking as well. If we can keep Scott, and put pressure on Collins, Murkowski, and

some other unnamed Republican, we might prevent this one. Otherwise, I don't see how we prevent it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #3)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 08:23 PM

6. He can be renominated.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #6)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 08:39 PM

7. See this is what pisses me off everytime I think about those who were running around this board...

telling everyone they wouldn't be "blackmailed" into voting for the person who could've prevented the takeover of our courts. I fear we've lost the judiciary, to include the USSC, and the feeder courts for a generation. The Republicans have been very deliberate in their judicial appointments.

I heard on NPR (or somewhere) that Trump has made court packing a top priority since his election, and most (if not all) are coming directly from the Federalist Society.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 08:45 PM

8. didn't Flake go back to being a jellyfish?

IIRC, there was one GOPer called away (maybe just too chicken to vote no) and Flake's stand stopped the vote, then Flake flaked. Is Scott's vote enough to stop it still?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hermit-The-Prog (Reply #8)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 09:03 PM

9. That was on the cloture vote - Scott voted yes on that, to.

 

Flake has stated he would vote no on Farr's confirmation and has not announced any change of position

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #9)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 09:35 PM

15. thank you

Thanks also for posting that contact information in the other OP!

Too much going on for me to keep track.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #9)

Fri Nov 30, 2018, 08:08 AM

30. But of course, now he doesn't actually have to DO anything . . .

So this worked out quite nicely for Senator Concerned Q. Jellyfish (R-AZ).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hermit-The-Prog (Reply #8)

Fri Nov 30, 2018, 08:06 AM

29. From what I understand Scott's no vote on confirmation killed it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 09:24 PM

10. Thanks to Senator SCOTT, but question to him: Why are you a (Repuke)?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Reply #10)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 09:33 PM

13. It's one issue....that's a good thing he denied this judge, but it's only one issue.

Heís a repub!!!!!! Donít forget that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a kennedy (Reply #13)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 09:56 PM

16. Yip, that's my point, that racism is a distinguishing characteristic of core Repuke-ism, so why

is he a Repuke? He has to take a stand when the racism is the issue of the day, him alone (except for the occasional flake joining him) with the 50+ of his party standing against him. It's one of the Eternal questions, why is *any* member of an oppressed group a wingnut - ever?







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Reply #16)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 10:05 PM

17. Because where else would he go?

He's anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, very pro-gun, for huge corporate tax cuts, etc. We certainly don't want him with those views.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #17)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 10:16 PM

18. That's kinda what I was saying.......

thank you for stating it better then I can.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #17)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 10:38 PM

19. Thanks because I didn't know any of all of those things about him!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 09:30 PM

11. I wrote to his Senate office........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Nov 29, 2018, 11:49 PM

21. we should expect white people to reject bigots also

so the media accepts this is a case of racism so what will the black guy do ?

at the same time they can also demand white people reject them also.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2018, 05:33 AM

23. Would not have been possible without Jeff Flake

 

And his initial opposition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #23)

Fri Nov 30, 2018, 08:00 AM

26. It wouldn't have been possible without ANY of the other 50 senators who opposed the nominee

 

My point stands.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread