Harry Reid moves to limit GOP filibusters

Discussion in 'Politics and News' started by Socio, Nov 8, 2012.

  1. monovillage

    monovillage Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2008
    Messages:
    8,445
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nah, you're using inflammatory language because the Republicans follow the rules. The Republicans are under no obligation to allow Obama/Reid/Pelosi to pass damaging, if not destructive laws and regulations in this country. It's called politics and the fact that the Peoples House is majority Republican shows that it's the way the citizens want it.
     
  2. Charles Kozierok

    Charles Kozierok Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2012
    Messages:
    6,762
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, I'm using inflammatory language because Mitch McConnell used inflammatory language. For which he has never apologized.
     
  3. CrackRabbit

    CrackRabbit Lifer

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2001
    Messages:
    16,540
    Likes Received:
    1
    I say we start filibustering all of your posts for the next two years and see if you don't start clamoring for some type of reform.
     
  4. EagleKeeper

    EagleKeeper Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    42,600
    Likes Received:
    0
    That may be true.

    Justified is a matter of interpretation and intent.

    A Senator's job is to represent their constituents the best way he feels possible.

    If the senator does not do it; constituents have the ability to revoke the representation at the next election. Given that there was a shift of only two Senate seats; apparently enough people were satisfied with what their Republican Senator was doing.

    So while from the Democratic supporters viewpoint, the filibuster was abused; from the american people, it was not.
     
  5. thujone

    thujone Golden Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2003
    Messages:
    1,158
    Likes Received:
    0
    ok see... using words like traitor in a discussion like this is just pointless because now look how far off topic we are. it's not going to get us anywhere in discussing filibusters.


    but like i said before... i'm interested to know for all the republican supporters. if the pendulum swings back the other way and republicans gain control of the senate, would you be ok with the democrats using the filibuster with the same frequency as current republicans in the senate?
     
  6. etrigan420

    etrigan420 Golden Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    1,723
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh PUhLeeze.

    Jumped. The. Fucking. Shark.

    Answer the question about whether you'd support Demo's making the same move if the roles were reversed.

    Paint yourself into that nice tight corner.
     
  7. zinfamous

    zinfamous No Lifer

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2006
    Messages:
    74,439
    Likes Received:
    178
    and abort all our babies...on the taxpayer's dime.
     
  8. DucatiMonster696

    DucatiMonster696 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,267
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, it is in line with the system of government we have in order to prevent the majority from steamrolling the minority via a wave of populist bullshit agendas used as billy clubs against the minority. Or do you not understand that the founding fathers of this country enacted a system of checks and balances so as to prevent the balance of power from ever tilting to wildly to one side so that it only favors the majority?
     
    #33 DucatiMonster696, Nov 8, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2012
  9. Charles Kozierok

    Charles Kozierok Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2012
    Messages:
    6,762
    Likes Received:
    0
    Drop the bullshit about "the American people". You know damned well that the GOP represents less than half "the American people". And Congressional GOP approval ratings are very low.

    Something is abused when it is used to excess or in a way not consistent with its intended purpose. And that applies here. The filibuster was not introduced in order to enable the minority party to force every vote to require 60 yeas to pass. And you know that, because if the shoe was on the other foot, YOU would be the one screaming for filibuster reform.
     
  10. Fern

    Fern Elite Member <br> Super Moderator
    Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Messages:
    26,080
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't think so.

    The high use of the filibuster is a symptom of several other problems.

    I remember a time when we actually had compromise. The different party leaders met and hammered out an agreement. They would 'lobby' each other face-to-face in private. They don't do that any more. They don't even meet, and if you don't meet you have zero chance of getting anywhere unless you're depending upon 'force'. Our leaders in DC just don't meet. We have the fiscal cliff looming and Obama hasn't met with anybody on the Repub side in many months.

    Some thing just don't readily lend themselves to compromise. E.g., if my wife wants to have another baby and I don't, how do we compromise on that? You either get pregnant or you don't, there's no halfway there. We have many issues which by their very nature are of a type difficult to compromise on. One side wants another porkulous, one side wants to cut the deficit. Well which one is it going to be, you can't do both.

    Harry Reid's hands are not clean here either. The House Repubs have passed a budget every year. Reid (abusing the rules?) has never let one to the floor for a vote. Also, he won't let Repubs submit amendments for a vote either on most bills. Reid ain't playing fair, so I'm not having much sympathy for his complaints.

    Neither side has done a decent job regrading compromise. I still remember Obama in the televised hearing telling the Repubs "We won. So you can ride on the bus if you want, but you'll have sit in the back." WTH kind of shizz is that?

    BTW: According to Bob Woodward, hardly a righty, the one time Reid and Boehner actually did reach a compromise it was on the budget and Obama nixed it leaving us with sequestration and the fiscal cliff. Then Obama claimed in the debate that sequestration was Congress's idea and he had nothing to with it. Well, that's completely false:

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82772.html

    It takes two to fight, and it takes two to compromise. The way I see it, we don't even have one yet willing to compromise.

    Fern
     
  11. thujone

    thujone Golden Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2003
    Messages:
    1,158
    Likes Received:
    0
    i'm fine with the filibuster as a tool in the way that you're painting it there. but the way it's being used currently is that the minority party is using it to steamroll the majority.

    i DEFINITELY think there needs to be tools for the minority to still have a voice over the majority, but if things remain how they are now... the entire political system is going to be a constant back and forth rotation where 1 party just prevents the other party from doing anything.
     
  12. Charles Kozierok

    Charles Kozierok Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2012
    Messages:
    6,762
    Likes Received:
    0
    Because you don't WANT to think so.

    The GOP declared war on Obama literally the night he was inaugurated. They held a meeting to discuss how to defeat him.

    All of their leaders, elected and otherwise, said flatly they wouldn't work with him on anything, that all they wanted to do was hold him up, make him fail, make him lose re-election.

    So spare me the false equivalencies about it taking "two to compromise". It's impossible for two people to work together when one of them decides in advance that it is not interested.
     
  13. ivwshane

    ivwshane Lifer

    Joined:
    May 15, 2000
    Messages:
    14,957
    Likes Received:
    16
    Once again those damn pesky facts get in the way!

    http://www.brookings.edu/research/testimony/2010/04/22-filibuster-binder
     
  14. Fern

    Fern Elite Member <br> Super Moderator
    Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Messages:
    26,080
    Likes Received:
    0
    That gets to another big problem in all this: If there isn't adequate compromise on a bill, and I'm speaking to the bigger picture here, you simply will not get cooperation in voting. A senator, and I don't care from which side, is simply not going to vote for a bill if it amounts to political suicide. You're going to get more of we've been seeing the last several years. You're just tying their hands.

    Some part of this may be inadequate compromise in drafting bills. Some part may be constituents themselves being unable to accept a reasonable compromise. The former is under Congress's control, the latter is not.

    BTW: When's the last time we saw Obama or Reid 'triangulate' like Bill Clinton?

    Fern
     
  15. Fern

    Fern Elite Member <br> Super Moderator
    Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Messages:
    26,080
    Likes Received:
    0
    Pelosi and Reid did the same damn thing.

    Fern
     
  16. Moonbeam

    Moonbeam Elite Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 1999
    Messages:
    57,804
    Likes Received:
    17
    Why? It was the inevitable direction the conversation was bound to head in.

    When you talk about Reid wanting to make changes to how the filibuster is used we will inevitably get to the reasons. The filibuster is being abused, how, to block legislation purely so that the other party can't claim any progress or credit, to make Obama a one term President, clearly enunciated and stated, by, what can only be a traitor, a person who will work against the nation for the good of something different, in this case a mentally ill and insane party of fanatics who have determined that any means at all justifies their ends. * them and the horse they road in on. * them to Hell. They are getting their wings clipped instead of shot like they should be.
     
  17. openwheel

    openwheel Golden Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,992
    Likes Received:
    1
    The Republicans are abusing the system. There is no other way to put it. It's very childish.

    This needs to stop. The people want things done, and they elected a President, the Senators and the House to do that job. The Congress is broken and all the filibusters need to slow down. They get my tax dollars and they do NOTHING. It's absurd.
     
  18. Charles Kozierok

    Charles Kozierok Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2012
    Messages:
    6,762
    Likes Received:
    0
    Source?
     
  19. First

    First Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    9,732
    Likes Received:
    4
    lulz, your posts really have gone downhill Fern. Pelosi was literally not involved in any of the debt talks last year between Boehner and Obama, and Reid continually accepted whatever moderate bill came out of the executive since 2009. There was no record filibuster in the Senate with Daschle during Bush's administration. There most definitely was record filibusters after the Dems took control of the Senate in 2006.
     
  20. waggy

    waggy No Lifer

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2000
    Messages:
    68,161
    Likes Received:
    4
    good point. they aren't even though they will some day. they don't care that it fucks the party up latter.
     
  21. Pneumothorax

    Pneumothorax Golden Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2002
    Messages:
    1,136
    Likes Received:
    1
    Aw hell why not? Aren't the majority of the babies born today born blue?
     
  22. blankslate

    blankslate Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    Messages:
    7,104
    Likes Received:
    3
    If Senators actually had to stand up and speak in the chamber (about whatever) in order to keep a filibuster going. Instead of threatening a filibuster like they do now....

    It would be much less abused.
     
  23. ElFenix

    ElFenix Elite Member<br> Super Moderator<br>Off Topic
    Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Messages:
    95,885
    Likes Received:
    36
    Yup. Make them stand up and actually do it.
     
  24. RabidMongoose

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2001
    Messages:
    11,061
    Likes Received:
    0
    Making them stand up and actually do a filibuster would be worth it. Most of the GOP is old people who are very frail, so they won't be able to filibuster much at all. Democrats are younger and more energetic, so they can definitely filibuster a lot longer than some Republican on the edge of death.
     
  25. Fanatical Meat

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Messages:
    10,046
    Likes Received:
    57
    **oops didn't see above**

    To me its simple to fix 1st) no more anonymous filibusters 2nd) go back to Mr. Smith days where the Senator(s) need to stand at the podium and speak the entire time to stop a vote. This way we all know who is holding something up.
    I'd like to see them commit to up or down vote within 90 for judges & cabinet positions.
     
    #50 Fanatical Meat, Nov 9, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012