Reid Changing Filibuster Rules

[RoadVirus]

So dimocraps can stack Federal Courts with left wing Judges....

Sen. Harry Reid Gets Ready to Go Nuclear - NationalJournal.com

I was going to say unbelievable, but you know who we're talking about here.

Turnabout's fair play, boys

I'm surprised he didn't go all the way and do it for everything, including legislation.

 

[asaratis]

I think they should do away with the filibuster altogether.

if the minority party doesn't like it, they should try to win an election.

I favor majority rules.

Then you favour Mob Rule which is what a true Democracy is.

It's only mob rule, if they held popular votes for every single issue, you idiot.

No. It's mob rule within the Senate if you don't allow filibuster, you idiot!

 

[BDBoop]

Not sure how I feel about this. However, it is obvious the Republicans have been blocking the DC Circuit Court nominations in order to preserve the current imbalance the vacant seats have created to their favor, and it is equally obvious the Democrats are for the nuclear option so they can fill the vacant seats with Obama nominees.

No one's motives are pure, which makes discerning the wisdom of this move difficult.

Supreme Court nominees will still require a 60 vote majority.

Exactly, [MENTION=34052]g5000[/MENTION].

But what the R's have been doing is unprecedented, from everything I've seen. And I see no logical reason to let it continue. Ten months ago, Reid took them at their word and that was a mistake that he is apparently not going to make again.

Does this rule only apply to appointments?

 

[Smilodonfatalis]

Alright, democrats. You asked for this one. Now that you have effectively ended the filibuster in the Senate, you have opened yourselves up to the same abuses of power you are now exercising now. Mark my words. You will regret this day down the road.

I don't believe the filibuster should exist in the first place.

Then you must disagree with our country as a Republic. Something about a pledge, some kind of allegiance.....

The filibuster is not in the constitution.

The Senate can never get anything done because of it.

The U.S. is not a republic because of the filibuster. That's an asinine claim.

The House doesn't have a filibuster.

The filibuster is simply idiotic and archaic.

 

[Mustang]

Alright, democrats. You asked for this one. Now that you have effectively ended the filibuster in the Senate, you have opened yourselves up to the same abuses of power you are now exercising at this very moment. Mark my words. You will regret this day down the road.

The filibuster hasn't been ended. It just can't be invoked for presidential appointments. But Republicans are still free to vote down anyone's nomination.

 

[Smilodonfatalis]

Then you favour Mob Rule which is what a true Democracy is.

It's only mob rule, if they held popular votes for every single issue, you idiot.

No. It's mob rule within the Senate if you don't allow filibuster, you idiot!

So then I guess you agree we have mob rule in the House, right?

 

[Darkwind]

And that would be different - how, Darkwind?

Tell Me again what was the reason the Democrats and liberals fought so hard to keep this from happening when the GOP was in charge of the Senate?

 

[Smilodonfatalis]

Then you favour Mob Rule which is what a true Democracy is.

It's only mob rule, if they held popular votes for every single issue, you idiot.

HA! Listen to you. It was mob rule for the first two years of Obama's term! Or did you somehow conveniently forget that?

Explain.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[peach174]

Yup.

Finally, you got it right.

Both sides, knowing in the future what are the consequences of winning elections, may work a bit more harmoniously together.

Um ok, if by "working together" you mean that we demand the Unconditional Surrender of the Democrat Progressive Socialists, then yeah, we can work together

They are in both parties.
People need to vote the progressives out Repubs and Dems.

 

[The T]

I think they should do away with the filibuster altogether.

if the minority party doesn't like it, they should try to win an election.

I favor majority rules.

Then you favour Mob Rule which is what a true Democracy is.

It's only mob rule, if they held popular votes for every single issue, you idiot.

WTF do you think the filibuster was designed to do? The Democrats just today told the Founders to fuck off, and opened another door to tyranny of the majority and pounded a nail home into the coffin of the Constitution, which they desperately wish to kill as well as this Republic. YOU support it with your rhetoric spewed.

Thank me.

 

[The Rabbi]

https://www.freespeech.org/text/senate-gops-unprecedented-obstruction-five-charts

Republican blanket obstructionism of Obama's appointees is much worse than democratic obstructionism.

At this same point in Bush's presidency, the Senate had approved 91% of his nominees compared with just 76% of Obama's nominees.

Worse yet, republicans have blocked almost as many of Obama's executive appointees as the senate had done in the previous 63 years combined.

"If you need 60 votes to get your nominee through you need a different nominee." -Hillary Clinton

 

[The T]

It's only mob rule, if they held popular votes for every single issue, you idiot.

No. It's mob rule within the Senate if you don't allow filibuster, you idiot!

So then I guess you agree we have mob rule in the House, right?

Different house, different RULES you twerp.

 

[BDBoop]

Republicans used to be useless, that was fine, now they are hopeless. Their history is in my signature and consider how long ago Truman perfectly summed them up? Nothing has changed.

"Well, I have been studying the Republican Party for over 12 years at close hand in the Capital of the United States. And by this time, I have discovered where the Republicans stand on most of the major issues. Truman Library - Public Papers of the Presidents: Harry S. Truman

Since they won't tell you themselves, I am going to tell you.

They approve of the American farmer-but they are willing to help him go broke.

They stand four-square for the American home--but not for housing.

They are strong for labor--but they are stronger for restricting labor's rights.

They favor a minimum wage--the smaller the minimum the better.

They indorse educational opportunity for all--but they won't spend money for teachers or for schools.

They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine--for people who can afford them.

They approve of social security benefits-so much so that they took them away from almost a million people.

They believe in international trade--so much so that they crippled our reciprocal trade program, and killed our International Wheat Agreement.

They favor the admission of displaced persons--but only within shameful racial and religious limitations.

They consider electric power a great blessing-but only when the private power companies get their rake-off.

They say TVA is wonderful--but we ought never to try it again.

They condemn "cruelly high prices"--but fight to the death every effort to bring them down.

They think the American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people.

And they admire the Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it.

Now, my friends, that is the Wall Street Republican way of life. But there is another way--there is another way--the Democratic way, the way of the Democratic Party.

Of course, the Democratic Party is not perfect. Nobody ever said it was. But the Democratic Party believes in the people. It believes in freedom and progress, and it is fighting for its beliefs right now.

In the Democratic Party, you won't find the kind of unity where everybody thinks what the boss tells him to think, and nothing else."

Truman Library - Public Papers of the Presidents: Harry S. Truman

Nothing has changed, in all this time. It's good to know, really.

Thank you.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I don't believe the filibuster should exist in the first place.

Then you must disagree with our country as a Republic. Something about a pledge, some kind of allegiance.....

The filibuster is not in the constitution.

The Senate can never get anything done because of it.

The U.S. is not a republic because of the filibuster. That's an asinine claim.

The House doesn't have a filibuster.

The filibuster is simply idiotic and archaic.

The filibuster is constitutional.

The Rules and Expulsion Clause

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.

(Article 1 Section 5 Clause 2 of the United States Constitution)

Therefore, Smilodon, when the filibuster was enacted in 1837, it was constitutional simply because it did not interfere with the Constitution, but protected rights under the Constitution.

 

[Darkwind]

Not sure how I feel about this. However, it is obvious the Republicans have been blocking the DC Circuit Court nominations in order to preserve the current imbalance the vacant seats have created to their favor, and it is equally obvious the Democrats are for the nuclear option so they can fill the vacant seats with Obama nominees.

No one's motives are pure, which makes discerning the wisdom of this move difficult.

Supreme Court nominees will still require a 60 vote majority.

Exactly, @g5000.

But what the R's have been doing is unprecedented, from everything I've seen. And I see no logical reason to let it continue. Ten months ago, Reid took them at their word and that was a mistake that he is apparently not going to make again.

Does this rule only apply to appointments?

No, its not unprecedented. The DNC/Democrats have been blocking Judicial appointments from the GOP for decades.

There is nothing new under the sun here other than the fact that Obamacare is coming under serious pressure from the people of this country and the Senate wants to be able to ignore the people to preserve it.

 

[Truthseeker420]

Will democrats still like this next year when there is a republican majority?

Will the Republicans who are howling over this move restore the rule if/when they gain the majority?

The answer to both questions is, "No."

When have Democrats blocked everything the majority does...?

 

[TemplarKormac]

It's only mob rule, if they held popular votes for every single issue, you idiot.

HA! Listen to you. It was mob rule for the first two years of Obama's term! Or did you somehow conveniently forget that?

Explain.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

No, of course you don't. Please stop feigning stupidity. If you are indeed truly ignorant on the subject matter of this discussion, please don't ask me to coddle you.

 

[JimH52]

Will democrats still like this next year when there is a republican majority?

And Obama is still President to veto their stupid little deals?

 

[Amelia]

Kudos to Levin, Manchin and Pryor for not joining the hypocritical Democrats in betraying their roles as senators.

 

[g5000]

Will democrats still like this next year when there is a republican majority?

Will the Republicans who are howling over this move restore the rule if/when they gain the majority?

The answer to both questions is, "No."

When have Democrats blocked everything the majority does...?

False premise. The Republicans do not block everything, and this "nuclear option" has only to do with circuit court nominations.