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.

(Washington Post)   Now that Obama's destruction of the filibuster has swept away the last vestiges of the Old Republic and brought the Imperial Senate into line, what will this mean for his second-term policies?   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 96
    More: Scary, Imperial Senate, Obama, filibusters, fair hearing  
•       •       •

1008 clicks; posted to Politics » on 22 Nov 2013 at 9:27 AM (20 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-11-22 08:04:45 AM
He may be able to fill some empty positions and have the government at least on the path towards being functional by the time he's out of office?
 
2013-11-22 08:08:30 AM
Nothing because this has no bearing on non-confirmation votes?
 
2013-11-22 08:20:40 AM
Destruction of the filibuster? Subby sounds like he needs a civics class.
 
2013-11-22 08:28:00 AM
Considering that it was Reid not Obama that put this forward, and it has nothing to do with non-confirmation votes, I'm going to assume that it will mean that some positions will get filled with a bit more haste, and the Congress might actually have some time to do the job that they've been dragging their feet about. Judges will be confirmed, jobs left empty will go forward, and the government that so many hate will actually continue?
 
2013-11-22 08:30:44 AM
More donuts for all?
 
2013-11-22 08:44:24 AM
Shut up, GOP. I'm sure you'll find other ways to obstruct the functioning of the government and undermine anything that might be good for the country. Asshats.
 
2013-11-22 08:45:05 AM
thechive.files.wordpress.com

Amateurs...
 
2013-11-22 08:45:58 AM
Dammit. Wrong thread...
 
2013-11-22 08:46:27 AM
We get it subs ..... he's half black
 
2013-11-22 08:51:05 AM

hubiestubert: Dammit. Wrong thread...


Meh...it's loosely turtle-related.
 
2013-11-22 09:29:32 AM
I love the Republican talking point:

"power grab in order to try to advance the Obama administration's regulatory agenda"


Jeez, you'd think he'd won an election or something.
 
2013-11-22 09:29:52 AM
ok, GOP, if removing the filibuster for appointments is so bad, why don't you pledge to reinstate it if you gain the majority?

what's that?

*crickets*

yeah, that's what i thought.
 
2013-11-22 09:29:53 AM
What an arrogant nigBONG, it's like he thinks he won an election by a huge electoral margin or something.
 
2013-11-22 09:30:29 AM

hubiestubert: [thechive.files.wordpress.com image 500x471]

Amateurs...


cdn01.dailycaller.com
 
2013-11-22 09:31:42 AM
I wonder if we'll get an ATF head position filled.
 
2013-11-22 09:32:09 AM
The GOP can get back to their overriding goal of jobs denying Obama's reelection?

/my dad thinks this is a setup for Obama grabbing a third term of office
//I'm skipping Thanksgiving dinner this year
 
2013-11-22 09:33:36 AM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-11-22 09:33:45 AM

JolobinSmokin: I wonder if we'll get an ATF head position filled.


actually that was just filled last week, i think. after seven years. crazy, huh.
 
2013-11-22 09:34:49 AM
More Edward Snowdens and Chelsea Mannings?
 
2013-11-22 09:34:50 AM

hubiestubert: Considering that it was Reid not Obama that put this forward, and it has nothing to do with non-confirmation votes, I'm going to assume that it will mean that some positions will get filled with a bit more haste, and the Congress might actually have some time to do the job that they've been dragging their feet about. Judges will be confirmed, jobs left empty will go forward, and the government that so many hate will actually continue?


Nuh-uh, Obama belongs to the same party and thus has all the same beliefs, and he's the President and therefore the mastermind before this whole thing.
 
2013-11-22 09:35:39 AM

Jackson Herring: [i.imgur.com image 735x493]


GAAHHHHHHH, DUDE, It's too early for that.  I JUST started my first cup of coffee.
 
2013-11-22 09:35:42 AM

Arkanaut: hubiestubert: Considering that it was Reid not Obama that put this forward, and it has nothing to do with non-confirmation votes, I'm going to assume that it will mean that some positions will get filled with a bit more haste, and the Congress might actually have some time to do the job that they've been dragging their feet about. Judges will be confirmed, jobs left empty will go forward, and the government that so many hate will actually continue?

Nuh-uh, Obama belongs to the same party and thus has all the same beliefs, and he's the President and therefore the mastermind before this whole thing.



Er, that should be "behind".  I have outderped myself.
 
2013-11-22 09:35:58 AM

FlashHarry: JolobinSmokin: I wonder if we'll get an ATF head position filled.

actually that was just filled last week, i think. after seven years. crazy, huh.


The main speaking points about gun regulations by the NRA is that the Government should be enforcing the rules already on the books, while the simultaneously do everything possible to block them from doing that.
 
2013-11-22 09:37:05 AM
a.disquscdn.com
 
2013-11-22 09:38:53 AM
Lighter dockets for some federal court judges?
 
2013-11-22 09:41:18 AM
The filibuster is an anachronism - as witnessed by the fact that they don't take the trouble to actually do it anymore.
They should ban it altogether, unless the parties are willing to actually take and hold the floor, and keep talking. It should be hard and unpleasant to do, so that people will only do it when it's worth doing, and not just out of pettiness.
 
2013-11-22 09:44:52 AM
He can finally fill some of the vacancies of the regional governors? Once those are filled then he can disband the senate!
 
2013-11-22 09:45:20 AM
Obama's legions have certainly crossed the Rubicon.

imageshack.us

RIP RUBICON

 
2013-11-22 09:48:09 AM

Aar1012: He can finally fill some of the vacancies of the regional governors? Once those are filled then he can disband the senate!


It's dissolve the Senate. I know that word now, because for years as a kid I took the line literally and thought the Emperor had disintegrated the senators.
 
2013-11-22 09:48:17 AM
OH NOS! A majority in the Senate can pass things now, NOOOOOOOOOO!

Wow, the right wing whining is hilarious. What's the debate? Majority rule? The fact that there's a black president? The fact that Republicans are the minority party and are losing power?

Republicans: Get some winning ideas, and maybe (just maybe) people will vote for you.
 
2013-11-22 09:48:18 AM
When does the zombie apocalypse occur?
 
MFK
2013-11-22 09:49:31 AM

jso2897: The filibuster is an anachronism - as witnessed by the fact that they don't take the trouble to actually do it anymore.
They should ban it altogether, unless the parties are willing to actually take and hold the floor, and keep talking. It should be hard and unpleasant to do, so that people will only do it when it's worth doing, and not just out of pettiness.


THIS.^^^^

for the love of all that is holy, THIS.

How did we get to a point where these guys do all this work to put together legislation only to have one douchebag raise his hand and say "filibuster!" and everyone just shrugs their shoulders and says "oh well."?
 
2013-11-22 09:49:59 AM

Red_October: [a.disquscdn.com image 640x452]


0/10 no credit for effort, Rand Paul.
 
2013-11-22 09:50:31 AM
wickedstageact2.typepad.com
Thanks, Obama.
 
2013-11-22 09:50:36 AM
www.yourprops.com
 
2013-11-22 09:51:33 AM

jso2897: The filibuster is an anachronism - as witnessed by the fact that they don't take the trouble to actually do it anymore.
They should ban it altogether, unless the parties are willing to actually take and hold the floor, and keep talking. It should be hard and unpleasant to do, so that people will only do it when it's worth doing, and not just out of pettiness.


I can see the requirement for the minority to be able to stall the passage of certain types of legislation.  For instance legislation that was not campaigned on which sorta bypassed the democratic process (no mandate) or legislation that has some type of irreversible effect.

Extending debate and raising public attention to a matter before a Senate vote, makes sense.  Just blocking everything for shtis and giggles makes no sense.

Reid exercised just enough discretion to stop the complete GOP insanity right now.
 
2013-11-22 09:52:48 AM

PC LOAD LETTER: Nothing because this has no bearing on non-confirmation votes?


Didn't you hear? Republicans say this mean they may not cooperate with Obama's legislative agenda. Crazy, I know.
 
2013-11-22 09:54:13 AM
It means the Tea Partiers can turn the derp down to 10.5?


financialcryptography.com
 
2013-11-22 09:54:25 AM

hubiestubert: Amateurs...


You like turtles?
 
2013-11-22 10:01:40 AM

Red_October: [a.disquscdn.com image 640x452]


it figures that you nuts would equate restoring the constitutionally mandated majority rule of the senate to the apocalypse.
 
2013-11-22 10:03:49 AM
I love how conservatives don't realize that equating everything Obama does with a complete collapse of society makes them appear completely insane.

Please proceed.
 
2013-11-22 10:04:43 AM

Zeb Hesselgresser: [www.yourprops.com image 850x554]


I don't get it :(
 
2013-11-22 10:08:54 AM
 I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further.

-- Rand Paul
 
2013-11-22 10:09:54 AM

jso2897: The filibuster is an anachronism - as witnessed by the fact that they don't take the trouble to actually do it anymore.
They should ban it altogether, unless the parties are willing to actually take and hold the floor, and keep talking. It should be hard and unpleasant to do, so that people will only do it when it's worth doing, and not just out of pettiness.


They should also require that the filibusters talk only regarding the nominee/bill they are speaking about.  The idea is that we want the minority party to explain with as much time as they feel they need why they are opposing the bill/nominee in order to convince others to vote against the bill based on the arguments they hear.  It's not about reading Green Eggs and Ham, knowing that it has zip all to do with the bill being filibustered.
 
2013-11-22 10:10:08 AM

jso2897: The filibuster is an anachronism - as witnessed by the fact that they don't take the trouble to actually do it anymore.They should ban it altogether, unless the parties are willing to actually take and hold the floor, and keep talking. It should be hard and unpleasant to do, so that people will only do it when it's worth doing, and not just out of pettiness.



As Tom Harkin pointed out yesterday, such plans are and have been in the works for a long time. And it made a Fark thread alongside this one:

TPM: Merkley told TPM he "absolutely" wants to go further and enact his proposal to change the rules of the Senate for passing legislation. It would end the first of two opportunities for a minority to block bills, by scrapping the 60-vote threshold for the "motion to proceed" and, on final passage, require 41 senators to hold the floor and take turns speaking ceaselessly until one side gives in.

This  would make it equally painful for all sides, and should be a litmus test for anyone seeking genuine reform. I have no problems with Republican filibusters or Democratic ones, so long as they are composed of genuine effort and conviction. This makes that happen. Or a comparable effort like Harkin talked about yesterday requiring fewer and fewer votes each day to overcome.
 
2013-11-22 10:10:53 AM

raerae1980: Zeb Hesselgresser: [www.yourprops.com image 850x554]

I don't get it :(


The 3 seashells from demolition man. Not sure how they apply... maybe Zeb thinks Obama is wiping his ass with the constitution, instead of the traditional seashells?
 
2013-11-22 10:11:24 AM

FlashHarry: Red_October: [a.disquscdn.com image 640x452]

it figures that you nuts would equate restoring the constitutionally mandated majority rule of the senate to the apocalypse.


i.imgur.com
 
2013-11-22 10:13:29 AM

FlashHarry: Red_October: [a.disquscdn.com image 640x452]

it figures that you nuts would equate restoring the constitutionally mandated majority rule of the senate to the apocalypse.


img.fark.net
 
2013-11-22 10:14:19 AM

RyogaM: jso2897: The filibuster is an anachronism - as witnessed by the fact that they don't take the trouble to actually do it anymore.
They should ban it altogether, unless the parties are willing to actually take and hold the floor, and keep talking. It should be hard and unpleasant to do, so that people will only do it when it's worth doing, and not just out of pettiness.

They should also require that the filibusters talk only regarding the nominee/bill they are speaking about.  The idea is that we want the minority party to explain with as much time as they feel they need why they are opposing the bill/nominee in order to convince others to vote against the bill based on the arguments they hear.  It's not about reading Green Eggs and Ham, knowing that it has zip all to do with the bill being filibustered.


Isn't that the rule in that haven of ultra-liberal commies, Texas?
 
2013-11-22 10:14:39 AM

raerae1980: Zeb Hesselgresser: [www.yourprops.com image 850x554]

I don't get it :(


i.imgur.com
 
Displayed 50 of 96 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report