QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 7, 2011 -> 07:59 PM)
Which is why I am still waiting for someone to justify how these two were going to save the world somehow. Trust me, I am not holding my breath.
But your point is irrelevant. Even if I grant you that their appointment is ultimately inconsequential, it doesn't legitimize refusing to allow a vote on their appointment. It's a red herring. It's an attempt to deflect away from a discussion of the larger Republican tactic of refusing to allow confirmation votes on dozens or hundreds of appointments.
bmags already addressed your point, by the way, by accurately pointing out the hyperbole. No one claimed they would "save the world," but said that "hey, maybe its a bad idea to hold up fed board nominations for no reason, not good, not bad, but literally no reason during an economic crisis." You responded with a pretty lame and pretty unreasonable standard of "well show me a specific vote they would have changed!!!"
Which, again, is irrelevant to the actual issue: preventing Executive branch appointments from even being discussed or voted on as a matter of policy and nothing more.