If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   Reid mulls "nuclear-style" filibuster reform for nominations. And much like the Cold War, there will be a lot of talk and fear that both sides will do something terrible, but ultimately nothing will ever come of this   (tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 34
    More: Interesting, Richard Cordray, filibusters, reforms, cloture vote, Party leaders of the United States Senate  
•       •       •

472 clicks; posted to Politics » on 22 May 2013 at 9:53 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



34 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-05-22 09:37:45 AM
We have heard this song before.
I don't expect this time to be any different than last.
 
2013-05-22 09:58:43 AM
Tonight on Fox News:

The White House is bracing for yet another scandal as some are beginning to question its role in the Senate's attempt subvert the Constitution and ram through tyrannical legislation that will destroy freedom and hand the keys to America to her enemies.
 
2013-05-22 10:02:53 AM
When Reid mulls, puppies and kittens die.

What nonsense. What kabuki.
 
2013-05-22 10:11:08 AM
So, bets on the outcome? I've got my money on "Republicans will promise to play nice, Reid will inexplicably believe them, then they'll turn around the next day and continue to block everything."
 
2013-05-22 10:12:18 AM
Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
 
2013-05-22 10:15:20 AM
Obvious Tag
Where subby
whe
 
2013-05-22 10:19:20 AM
Reid, get over it. When your party loses power, ideas like this bite you in the ass. Go back to worrying about the condition of your district instead of pandering to the rest of the country.
 
2013-05-22 10:19:26 AM
The filibuster is crap all around. Axe it completely.

Also, tell Megan fox to be at my room by 8.
 
2013-05-22 10:19:55 AM
If the DNC is confident that they can keep control of the Senate for many years to come, they will most certainly kill the filibuster
 
2013-05-22 10:20:51 AM
I'd like to see Reid dismiss the filibuster for all Cabinet and judicial appointees. If you want to keep standing in front of every piece of legislation, Republicans, that's your business, but paralyzing government with vacancies just because you lost or don't like the law is total crap.

Every nomination for a judicial vacancy and Cabinet position should be heard and voted on within a week of the nomination being made, maybe two. Since the Republicans aren't actually doing anything else except press conferences and fiction writing, that should be an easy goal to meet.
 
Bf+
2013-05-22 10:21:35 AM
i1.ytimg.com
 
2013-05-22 10:22:18 AM
I'll believe it when I see it.

I fully appreciate that there's the whole "what happens when we're in the minority again" aspect of setting / changing precedent, but shiat or get off the pot.
 
2013-05-22 10:23:37 AM

rjakobi: Reid, get over it. When your party loses power, ideas like this bite you in the ass. Go back to worrying about the condition of your district instead of pandering to the rest of the country.


Senators don't have districts.
 
2013-05-22 10:26:59 AM
What about changing it from "60 votes needed to end debate" to "40 votes to continue debate"?  That puts the burden on the minority party, but doesn't strip them of their power to hold up legislation (which I think is a pretty important, if currently abused, power).
 
2013-05-22 10:32:24 AM

mrshowrules: If the DNC is confident that they can keep control of the Senate for many years to come, they will most certainly kill the filibuster


I seriously doubt it. It may help the Democrats as a group, but the filibuster magnifies the value of every individual's vote. Increasing their ability to shape legislation, bring home pork, showboat, etc. It comes down to asking members of Congress to vote for their party (and incidentally the country) at the expense of themselves.

They can't make it happen.
 
2013-05-22 10:37:53 AM

Ned Stark: mrshowrules: If the DNC is confident that they can keep control of the Senate for many years to come, they will most certainly kill the filibuster

I seriously doubt it. It may help the Democrats as a group, but the filibuster magnifies the value of every individual's vote. Increasing their ability to shape legislation, bring home pork, showboat, etc. It comes down to asking members of Congress to vote for their party (and incidentally the country) at the expense of themselves.

They can't make it happen.


He will probably do it for stuff like appointments.
 
2013-05-22 10:42:36 AM
Do it or stop talking about it.  There is no sensible third option.
 
2013-05-22 10:49:24 AM

Lionel Mandrake: Do it or stop talking about it.  There is no sensible third option.


Read that first sentence in Yoda's voice.
 
2013-05-22 11:01:22 AM
the annoying part about Reid pussying out over and over again is you know in his cowardly little brain he is thinking he wants the filibuster to be in when and if the republicans gain the senate in 2014 (or whatever) when you know the absolute second they have the senate and the house (and god forbid, the presidency) they will just nuclear the filibuster first day anyway.

It will ALMOST be worth seeing Obamacare repealed, tax rates on corporations dropped to zero and all social safety net programs repealed just to see the look on that detestable scarecrow's face.
 
2013-05-22 11:19:01 AM
Yawnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
 
2013-05-22 11:21:47 AM

theinsultabot9000: the annoying part about Reid pussying out over and over again is you know in his cowardly little brain he is thinking he wants the filibuster to be in when and if the republicans gain the senate in 2014 (or whatever) when you know the absolute second they have the senate and the house (and god forbid, the presidency) they will just nuclear the filibuster first day anyway.

It will ALMOST be worth seeing Obamacare repealed, tax rates on corporations dropped to zero and all social safety net programs repealed just to see the look on that detestable scarecrow's face.


In this instance, the veto will be used far more often I am certain.
 
2013-05-22 11:23:25 AM
Reid mulls so often that, at the very least, the Senate ought to produce a semi-decent cider. Unless the Republicans invoke cloture.
 
2013-05-22 11:43:55 AM
Good thing Reid didn't cry in 2005 when the GOP considered this option or else he'd look like a hypocrite. .. oh, Reid was one of the most vocal? Hmm...
 
2013-05-22 11:44:09 AM
Casualties and losses
South Vietnam
195,000-430,000 civilian dead[11][12]
171,331[13]-220,357 military dead[11]
1,170,000 wounded[citation needed]

United States
58,220 dead;[A 2]
303,644 wounded[A 2]

South Korea
5,099 dead;
10,962 wounded;
4 missing

Australia
500 dead;
3,129 wounded[14]

New Zealand
37 dead;
187 wounded[15]

Thailand
351 dead;1,
358 wounded[16]

Total dead: 430,538-714,564
Total wounded: ~1,490,000+[citation needed]

North Vietnam - Provisional Revolutionary Government of the Republic of South Vietnam North Vietnam & Viet Cong
50,000[17]-65,000[11] civilian dead
400,000[11]-1,100,000 military dead or missing[18]
600,000+ wounded[19]

China
1,446 dead;
4,200 wounded

Soviet Union
16 dead[20]


Total dead: 451,462-1,166,462
Total wounded: ~604,200
Vietnamese civilian dead: 245,000-2,000,000[21]
Cambodian Civil War dead: 200,000-300,000*[22][23][24]
Laotian Civil War dead: 20,000-200,000*
Total civilian dead: 465,000-2,500,000**
Total dead: 1,102,000-3,886,026


= ultimately nothing. Apparently.
 
2013-05-22 11:44:15 AM

mrshowrules: If the DNC is confident that they can keep control of the Senate for many years to come, they will most certainly kill the filibuster


That's a bit ironic. If they had killed the filibuster first thing in 2009 and passed all of their agenda they would have done much better in 2010 and 2012. But instead they acted like scared little girls and allowed the minority party to dictate all action. Well, inaction in this case.
 
2013-05-22 11:48:00 AM

EighthDay: I'll believe it when I see it.

I fully appreciate that there's the whole "what happens when we're in the minority again" aspect of setting / changing precedent, but shiat or get off the pot.


Do you think this current crop of r(ape) partiers will leave the filibuster intact for the dems if they take back control?
 
2013-05-22 11:50:13 AM

MithrandirBooga: Casualties and losses
South Vietnam
195,000-430,000 civilian dead[11][12]
171,331[13]-220,357 military dead[11]
1,170,000 wounded[citation needed]

United States
58,220 dead;[A 2]
303,644 wounded[A 2]

South Korea
5,099 dead;
10,962 wounded;
4 missing

Australia
500 dead;
3,129 wounded[14]

New Zealand
37 dead;
187 wounded[15]

Thailand
351 dead;1,
358 wounded[16]

Total dead: 430,538-714,564
Total wounded: ~1,490,000+[citation needed]

North Vietnam - Provisional Revolutionary Government of the Republic of South Vietnam North Vietnam & Viet Cong
50,000[17]-65,000[11] civilian dead
400,000[11]-1,100,000 military dead or missing[18]
600,000+ wounded[19]

China
1,446 dead;
4,200 wounded

Soviet Union
16 dead[20]


Total dead: 451,462-1,166,462
Total wounded: ~604,200
Vietnamese civilian dead: 245,000-2,000,000[21]
Cambodian Civil War dead: 200,000-300,000*[22][23][24]
Laotian Civil War dead: 20,000-200,000*
Total civilian dead: 465,000-2,500,000**
Total dead: 1,102,000-3,886,026


= ultimately nothing. Apparently.


Say what
 
2013-05-22 11:55:46 AM

theinsultabot9000: the annoying part about Reid pussying out over and over again is you know in his cowardly little brain he is thinking he wants the filibuster to be in when and if the republicans gain the senate in 2014 (or whatever) when you know the absolute second they have the senate and the house (and god forbid, the presidency) they will just nuclear the filibuster first day anyway.

It will ALMOST be worth seeing Obamacare repealed, tax rates on corporations dropped to zero and all social safety net programs repealed just to see the look on that detestable scarecrow's face.


In my opinion, if the GOP is going to nuke the filibuster, they'll wait until they have both the Senate and the White House. There's no benefit to doing it prior to that.
 
2013-05-22 12:03:02 PM
Just friggin' do it.
 
2013-05-22 12:43:20 PM
I do believe I noted the possibility they would have the presidency for that reason, though I could actually see them going nuclear before then so they could pass a bunch of laws worded in a way tat they would have talking points against dems going into 2016
 
2013-05-22 12:53:18 PM

Evil High Priest: EighthDay: I'll believe it when I see it.

I fully appreciate that there's the whole "what happens when we're in the minority again" aspect of setting / changing precedent, but shiat or get off the pot.

Do you think this current crop of r(ape) partiers will leave the filibuster intact for the dems if they take back control?


I doubt Mitch McConnell (or whoever became Senate Majority Leader) would do it without having a majority in the House AND the Presidency.  Given the nature of the Republican party, I doubt the Republicans will get the Presidency in 2016, even if they take the Senate and keep the House... and even then, 2016 is going to be a rough year for the Republicans in the Senate.  Sure, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, and other Republican senators might push for getting rid of the filibuster, but the Democrats would likely cave anyway, and it would secure their ability to obstruct when they lost the Senate again in 2016.

So, no, I don't think they'd do it in 2014 if they took the Senate, only to have everything vetoed by Obama and then likely lose the Senate in 2016.
 
2013-05-22 02:19:14 PM
I keep hearing the argument "well if they change it now, Republicans can abuse it when they regain power!"

Honestly, do you think it matters? After the past 4 years of historic obstructionism, why on earth do you think the R's will need an excuse? The moment they take back the majority, filibuster is dead. Dems may as well do something while they can
 
2013-05-22 03:20:58 PM
I honestly believe that no matter which party holds the majority, there is enough empirical evidence that it's far too easily abused, and is doing more damage than good right now.  What worries me more is that the GOP must know (Reid's been threatening this for long enough) that this is a possibility and have some other more damaging fallback ready to put in play.  I don't for a moment believe that they'll stop being compulsively obstructionist just because one channel has been closed off.
 
2013-05-23 07:12:12 AM

rjakobi: Reid, get over it. When your party loses power, ideas like this bite you in the ass. Go back to worrying about the condition of your district instead of pandering to the rest of the country.


What they call a filibuster now shouldn't exist, no matter what party is in power.  There shouldn't be the ability of 40 people to prevent discussing a bill.. that's what I call a Denial of Service Attack on the nation.
 
Displayed 34 of 34 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report