Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(Some Guy)   New York Times, 2005: "The filibuster is a grand Senate tradition that must be protected from Republicans." NYT, yesterday: "Republicans are dusting off arcane old rules to frustrate Democrats" (third item)   (opinionjournal.com) divider line
459
    More: Stupid  
•       •       •

8215 clicks; posted to Main » and Politics » on 12 Jan 2007 at 4:14 PM (16 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



459 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all

 
SSP
2007-01-12 3:26:14 PM  
Suck it neocon'tards. What comes around, goes around.
 
oldebayer
2007-01-12 3:26:43 PM  
Republicans in 2005: the filibuster is an arcane and obsolete tool used by pesky minorities to subvert the noble will of the majority.

Republicans in 2007: filibuster -- teh new hotness.

/Pot, meet kettle.
 
tin_man
2007-01-12 3:26:45 PM  
And the hits just keep on comin'!
 
Action Replay Nick
2007-01-12 3:27:25 PM  
What Rommel of iSketch said.
 
Persepolis
2007-01-12 3:30:03 PM  
oldebayer: Pot, meet kettle.

same as the old kettle.
 
MichaelMoron
2007-01-12 3:30:50 PM  
dude, its the NEW YORK TIMES, the mouthpiece of the radical left where every liberal lunatic gets their talking points from.
 
RobertBruce
2007-01-12 3:31:06 PM  
One party rule lives on!
 
crunch-o-matic
2007-01-12 3:31:13 PM  
so?
 
nickyhopkins
2007-01-12 3:32:14 PM  
A lot of Republican hate is being greenlit the past couple days...
 
Pelagius
2007-01-12 3:34:07 PM  
[image from img170.imageshack.us too old to be available]
 
KazamaSmokers
2007-01-12 3:34:09 PM  
2007-01-12 03:30:50 PM MichaelMoron
dude, its the NEW YORK TIMES, the mouthpiece of the radical left where every liberal lunatic gets their talking points from.


Being a neo-Bircher is just so radically kitschy these days.
 
HansensDisease
2007-01-12 3:34:46 PM  
"What we are finding here is that our responsibility, as laid out by the Constitution, is being hijacked by the minority."

Senator George Allen (R-VA)

"This diminishes the role of the Senate as envisioned by the Framers. It silences the American people and the voices of their elected representatives.

And that is wrong.

This filibuster is nothing less than a formula for tyranny by the minority."

Senator Bill Frist (R-TN)
 
GooberMcFly [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2007-01-12 3:36:26 PM  
Action Replay Nick: What Rommel of iSketch said.

*snert*
 
Cake Hunter [TotalFark]
2007-01-12 3:40:30 PM  
dude, its the NEW YORK TIMES, the mouthpiece of the radical left where every liberal lunatic gets their talking points from.

Oh!
 
Dancin_In_Anson
2007-01-12 3:41:03 PM  
Ain't that a kick in the head?
 
heap
2007-01-12 3:44:55 PM  
Dancin_In_Anson: Ain't that a kick in the head?

if the new majority starts talking about a nuclear option, i'll smile and nod.

this is just silly.
 
Dirtball
2007-01-12 3:45:14 PM  
[image from blairerickson.com too old to be available]

"Two parties enter. One party leaves!"

This is what I wish the Senate floor was like.
 
Pxtl
2007-01-12 3:46:04 PM  
I'm sure we can all put aside our differences and agree on at least one thing: the New York Times sucks.
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-01-12 3:46:50 PM  
Is anyone here actually surprised that:

1. The GOP and DNC have swapped position/rhetoric on the filibuster issue, and

2. The NYT reported the DNC talking points as news back then and it's still doing it now?
 
HumbleGod
2007-01-12 3:47:26 PM  
The NYT said nothing about it being some sort of "grand tradition." The positive things said about the filibuster come from a Democrat the Times quoted.
 
heap
2007-01-12 3:48:31 PM  
HumbleGod: Times quoted.

i think that's something that counts as nuance.

BURN THE WITCH!!!
 
skinny-lil-b
2007-01-12 3:50:42 PM  
Does Republican or Democrat really matter anymore? They're all pansy-assed scum-sucking blowtards.

/can we just cockpunch them all & bury the bodies?
 
Stereolab
2007-01-12 3:54:46 PM  
Heil!
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-01-12 3:56:14 PM  
HumbleGod: The positive things said about the filibuster come from a Democrat the Times quoted.

If only the poor Times reporter who wrote that article had been able to balance the quotes with an opposing statement. But you know those Senators--can't drag a word out of 'em with a winch and a crowbar. Tragic--I'm sure the writer cried himself to sleep that night over the overemphasis on the Democrats' viewpoint.
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-01-12 3:57:00 PM  
skinny-lil-b: /can we just cockpunch them all & bury the bodies?

As long as you can assure me that none of the cockpunches will be fatal. If so, I will eagerly help you bury them all.
 
skinny-lil-b
2007-01-12 3:57:54 PM  
that's what I was thinking, Merv
 
HansensDisease
2007-01-12 3:58:07 PM  
MyNameIsNotMervGriffin

FoxNews reported the RNC talking points as news back then and it's still doing it now

Meet the new talking points. Same as the old talking points.

Oh sorry. That's the new Republican talking point isn't it? Didn't mean to step on your cliche.
 
japhy
2007-01-12 3:59:26 PM  
FTA: ... a filibuster, the stalling move that requires 60 votes to overcome, well short of Democratic strength. The author has that backwards. 60 votes is not short of Democratic strength, Democratic strength is short of 60 votes.
 
mediaho
2007-01-12 4:00:44 PM  
Unlike Opinion Journal, the NYT is not a single person with a single philosophy.
 
wanago bob
2007-01-12 4:01:11 PM  
I really don't find this statements to be in direct contradiction.
One says Filibuster good.
The other that republicans are getting trick while using the filibuster

neither negates the other
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-01-12 4:05:12 PM  
HansensDisease: Oh sorry. That's the new Republican talking point isn't it? Didn't mean to step on your cliche.

How should I know? I never watch Fox.
 
heap
2007-01-12 4:12:09 PM  
MyNameIsNotMervGriffin: If only the poor Times reporter who wrote that article had been able to balance the quotes with an opposing statement.

erm...you do realize that this isn't the entirety of the article, no? click the link - quotes a plenty from both sides of the aisle.

hell, the quote in the headline isn't even in the offending article...or the WSJ opinion peace, fer chrissakes.
 
HansensDisease
2007-01-12 4:14:57 PM  
MyNameIsNotMervGriffin: How should I know? I never watch Fox.

Good. I don't read the NY Times.

I might watch Fox if only those talking heads who interview Republicans 71 percent of the time had been able to balance the spin with an opposing viewpoint.

In the meantime David Brooks and William Safire are more than happy to write for the Times.
 
heap
2007-01-12 4:16:48 PM  
heap: opinion peace,

all we are saying...is give Chance a piece.
 
Skleenar
2007-01-12 4:17:24 PM  
Is is too late to note that the NYT didn't call the fillibuster "arcane". They called the Senate rules "arcane". Reid was a master of the arcane Senate rules, forcing closed door sessions at least twice to discuss issues the GOP didn't want to discuss.

Sure, the fillibuster is a Senate rule, but it is far from arcane. It's probably the best known congressional rule their is.

/return to [pointless GOP talking point] flamewar
 
Skleenar
2007-01-12 4:19:02 PM  
Oh, and "arcane" is not a synonym for "bad"
 
BrotherAlpha
2007-01-12 4:21:08 PM  
MichaelMoron:
dude, its the NEW YORK TIMES, the mouthpiece of the radical left where every liberal lunatic gets their talking points from.

That radical left, as you call us, has been right about nearly everything over the past six years.

Maybe your side should shut the fark up and let the smart people work.
 
man hands
2007-01-12 4:21:23 PM  
suck it libs
 
SkepticalBeliever
2007-01-12 4:21:53 PM  
Is the NYT the opposite version of Fox News?

/seriously
 
Chris Barr
2007-01-12 4:22:02 PM  
You libtards had your chance to get rid of it. But no, "we have to keep it so our rights as a minority don't get trampled." And now that we are using it against you, you get all pissy.

Sit on it, Libs
 
Craptastic
2007-01-12 4:22:49 PM  
MichaelMoron: dude, its the NEW YORK TIMES, the mouthpiece of the radical left where every liberal lunatic gets their talking points from.

I suppose you automatically discount the information provided in NewsMax links too?

No?

Didn't think so, Sour Grapes Man.
 
judasdiomedes
2007-01-12 4:23:02 PM  
nice try smitty
 
nopokerface
2007-01-12 4:23:08 PM  
Pxtl-

I don't know about everybody, but I sure as hell agree.
 
BrotherAlpha
2007-01-12 4:23:09 PM  
MyNameIsNotMervGriffin:
Is anyone here actually surprised that:
1. The GOP and DNC have swapped position/rhetoric on the filibuster issue, and

Really? This has happened? I don't recall anyone from the Democratic Party badmouthing the filibuster.
 
Manfred J. Hattan
2007-01-12 4:23:49 PM  
You know, I'm a big fan of James Taranto. He's funny and oftentimes he brings up excellent points in ways most people aren't thinking about (this is not one of those times). But he publishes this column every day, and about one day in three some farker gets a greenlight by just linking to it or, worse, by swiping his joke headline and linking to the story at another source. How about instead the FARK PTB stick a permalink to OpinionJournal somewhere on the left and be done with it?
 
HumbleGod
2007-01-12 4:24:08 PM  
MyNameIsNotMervGriffin: If only the poor Times reporter who wrote that article had been able to balance the quotes with an opposing statement.

Did you read the Times article in question? No, you didn't. The reporter also quotes Arlen Spector and Lindsay Graham, both of whom were Republicans critical of the Democrats' stance.

So two Democrats' views are principally aired, and two Republicans' views are principally aired. What was that you were saying about a lack of balance?
 
greenbeans_and_physics
2007-01-12 4:24:35 PM  
HansensDisease

If you use FAIR as a source, don't expect to sway people with it.

They also have articles that are pro-Hamas, pro-Chavez, pro-Democracy NOW!, and I have no reason to believe this group is anything anywhere near trying to take bias out of the media.

They are a propoganda tool.

This isn't an attack on you. The Republicans are doing as the Democrats did as the Republicans did before them, it's all BS and we know it. I just would like more balanced sources referenced than FAIR.
 
HotWingConspiracy
2007-01-12 4:24:39 PM  
Gawd dammit. This is why I hoped the democrats would have goaded the republicans into using the NOO-Q-LER option.
 
felixstrange
2007-01-12 4:24:41 PM  
MichaelMoron: dude, its the NEW YORK TIMES, the mouthpiece of the radical left where every liberal lunatic gets their talking points from.

Wrong. The NYT is a shiatty newspaper that pimped the Iraq war worse than the rest of the media (Judith Miller, Aluminum Tubes, Yellowcake, etc.).

I doubt you'll find any "libs" defending it.

/You learn something new everyday
 
Skleenar
2007-01-12 4:24:51 PM  
Chris Barr: And now that we are using it against you, you get all pissy.

Actually, just to be accurate, it appears you are the one getting pissy.

Just an observation.
 
Displayed 50 of 459 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all



Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

Come for the Total, stay for the Farking.

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.