Forum Thread

Senate Democrats Go Nuclear

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 16 - 23 of 23 Prev 1 2
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Thank Goodness for Harry Reid. This topic has been brewing for such a long time, that the Republicans have used that Filibuster technique way more often than reasonable people should allow. We have been TOO PATIENT with the GOP, & they have taken full advantage of us for all this time. NOW maybe we can exert our own influence, to nominate judges & officials that are more "on our side" of important issues. THANKS to Harry Reid for bringing up the "Nuclear Option" -- so we can have back our democracy once again. THANKS, HARRY REID.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    What was done in the Senate recently was unprecedented. It will not only come back to bite the Democratic Party in the butt; the move will continuously come back to bite both parties over the coming decades of this nation. More importantly this move will continuously chisel away at the American way of life from now on until the end of the American way of life is in view – as our two major and competing political parties maneuver and fight over political power. They don’t have the American people at the center of their concerns and haven’t for a long time – well before you and I were born. True enough - What was done was a foul as the Republican Party has pronounced… as the standard way of “politics as usual” would dictate – however what my Republican Party was perpetrating was also in some ways a foul – by blocking virtually every significant Presidential nominee brought before them. There are no easy answers to our nations concerns. For the government to make any kind of comeback – and thus the comeback of “…government of the people, by the people, for the people…” (President Abraham Lincoln, 1863), it is a good thing for the Democrats (in what they did) to do what is in their hearts as right for the people. It is also good for our Republican Party to do what is right in their hearts for what they believe is right for the people. Then let the chips fall where they may - without either side of the isle crying “foul.” The term “foul” discusses me to no end; simply because our political entities handle and treat our social, economic and most importantly our spiritual lives here in the US and abroad like they are different kinds of games. While in our society anything cannot be allowed to go, I fight hard on the side of Conservatism to see what I believe as the way things should be happens. I expect the liberals to do the same on their side of the isle without the two becoming embroiled as mortal enemies in some new version of the Civil War. Believe it or not – symbolically speaking - I love many liberals and hate many conservatives. This is so simply because of the hypocrisy I think I see in the daily routines of individuals acting within their respective parties. There is not a lot I can do about how people carry themselves, save to speak my mind with those of like mind; and hope our efforts can illuminate and convince to the level that change… even if that change is compromising change. I am confident that most Americans agree – no matter which side of the isle they lean toward in political preference - that some change of direction must occur in the current destructive path that our nation is on… as we speak today of one of our national controversies.
    I am sincerely hoping that everyone who reads my words enjoy, respect, and truly understand the spirit behind this conservative post.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    ..
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Clear conservative - What absolute poppycock!

    Obviously you don't understand the origins of the filibuster or how YOUR friends (the Conservative Republicans) have abused it in the past several years,only because they don't like the idea of a smart black guy making them look and feel like the minority they soon shall be.

    Stop watching Fix NotNews and listening to Rushbo and do some real research on the subject before wasting our time with your half-truths and misinformation.

    Just to help you in your quest for the truth - here is an editorial from today's Boston Globe

    GOP provoked filibuster move, but Senate’s woes run deeper
    'The Boston Globe' - 2013-11-23

    Ul­ti­mately, any or­ga­ni­za­tional rule re­lies on the good faith of those in the or­ga­ni­za­tion.
    THE RULES of the US Senate aren’t written in the Constitution. On the contrary, to the extent that they impose barriers to up-or-down votes, the Senate’s arcane rules can arguably be seen as violating the intent of the framers— a point that many Republicans, frustrated over Democratic blockage of some of President GeorgeW. Bush’s judicial nominees, emphasized eight years ago.
    Thus, the move by Senate Democrats this week to eliminate the filibuster— under which 40 of 100 senators can prevent a vote on a bill or nomination— for presidential appointees and lower-court judicial nominees, isn’t an affront to the constitutional framework. Nor is it a violation of Senate tradition. The original filibusters, in which groups of senators tied up debate by talking around the clock, were selflimiting. Like baseball games, those early filibusters were limitless in theory, but they all came to an end.
    Through accident more than design, efforts to provide a voiceless alternative to those talkathons morphed into a de facto requirement of a 60-vote majority on most Senate business. In recent years, it expanded even further: No longer were presidential appointees being blocked out of concern for their fitness for office; they were being blocked solely to force unrelated concessions from the administration. Essentially, the filibuster became a hostage-taking device.
    It’s hard to know whether the Democratic-imposed change in the rules will lead to more or less partisanship over time. It was, of course, a partisan act in itself, a sign of just how bitterly divided the body has become. But at the same time, it removes a prime vehicle for partisanship, on either side of the aisle.
    Republican opponents are right about one thing: Liberals who are cheering the move shouldn’t be happy unless they’re sure they could stomach the situation in reverse. Would they really be comfortable if a Republican president rammed through a slate of pro-life judicial nominees on simple majority votes? Perhaps not.
    But another Republican argument— that the Democrats’ move was unprovoked— is simply wrong. Indeed, unprecedented Republican use of the filibuster to obstruct Senate business precipitated the change. Use of the filibuster skyrocketed during the Obama administration, not to register principled objections but to gain political leverage. The final act of this farce was the GOP’s insistence on blocking any Obama nominee for the influential DC Circuit Court of Appeals. Republican leaders wanted to cut the size of the court rather than let the president make any appointments.
    Ultimately, any organizational rule relies on the good faith of those in the organization. The Senate’s problems go well beyond the precise contours of its filibuster rule, which will remain in place for most legislation and for Supreme Court nominations. Hopefully, this realization will dawn on both the frustrated Democrats who forced the rule change, and on the aggrieved Republicans who are now deprived of their favorite tool of obstruction.

    Boston Globe Media Partners LLC
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Clear Conservative Wrote: What was done in the Senate recently was unprecedented. It will not only come back to bite the Democratic Party in the butt; the move will continuously come back to bite both parties over the coming decades of this nation. More importantly this move will continuously chisel away at the American way of life from now on until the end of the American way of life is in view – as our two major and competing political parties maneuver and fight over political power. They don’t have the American people at the center of their concerns and haven’t for a long time – well before you and I were born. True enough - What was done was a foul as the Republican Party has pronounced… as the standard way of “politics as usual” would dictate – however what my Republican Party was perpetrating was also in some ways a foul – by blocking virtually every significant Presidential nominee brought before them. There are no easy answers to our nations concerns. For the government to make any kind of comeback – and thus the comeback of “…government of the people, by the people, for the people…” (President Abraham Lincoln, 1863), it is a good thing for the Democrats (in what they did) to do what is in their hearts as right for the people. It is also good for our Republican Party to do what is right in their hearts for what they believe is right for the people. Then let the chips fall where they may - without either side of the isle crying “foul.” The term “foul” discusses me to no end; simply because our political entities handle and treat our social, economic and most importantly our spiritual lives here in the US and abroad like they are different kinds of games. While in our society anything cannot be allowed to go, I fight hard on the side of Conservatism to see what I believe as the way things should be happens. I expect the liberals to do the same on their side of the isle without the two becoming embroiled as mortal enemies in some new version of the Civil War. Believe it or not – symbolically speaking - I love many liberals and hate many conservatives. This is so simply because of the hypocrisy I think I see in the daily routines of individuals acting within their respective parties. There is not a lot I can do about how people carry themselves, save to speak my mind with those of like mind; and hope our efforts can illuminate and convince to the level that change… even if that change is compromising change. I am confident that most Americans agree – no matter which side of the isle they lean toward in political preference - that some change of direction must occur in the current destructive path that our nation is on… as we speak today of one of our national controversies.
    I am sincerely hoping that everyone who reads my words enjoy, respect, and truly understand the spirit behind this conservative post.
    god spoke to me last night.......u sir,,,,,,need help....... the rapture is coming,,,,grab ur bible, ur rifle and ur rhetoric....see ya
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    the picture below graphically illustrates what the Republicans have done to Obama:

    http://upworthy-production.s3.amazonaws.com/nugget/529002306c10b28f7000069f/attachments/final_final_obama.jpg
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    pgr --

    The Boston Globe article is excellent. It captures the "why" very well. I for one am glad that the Senate did this so that Obama can get on with the business of governing, and picking good people for the courts is a part of the process. The 60 vote filibuster still exists for the Supreme Court nominees and legislative proposals.

    When the nuclear option was contemplated in 2005 by Republicans to overcome Democratic opposition to some of Bush's appointments...some very extreme, a Gang of 14, (7 Senate Republicans and 7 Democrats) came together to block the nuclear option. Democrats agreed to not filibuster Bush's appointments except in "extraordinary circumstances." The result was that Bush was able to get essentially all of his appointees approved without filibusters for the remaining tenure (2005 thru 2008) of his office, and they included some with really extreme positions like Priscilla Owen.

    Back in 2005 we didn't have a "no compromise" Tea Party, nor groups the like the Heritage Action that threaten to score every Senator's vote, so a "Gang of 14" would not have worked in 2013...they could not get 7 Republican Senators to go along.

    And in any case, many liberals saw the 2005 "Gang of 14" as really just capitulating to Bush's demands, giving him essentially a free hand to push the courts to the right. History has proven them to be right. Republicans would never want to reciprocate on that move...giving Obama's nominees an up or down vote except under "extraordinary circumstances."
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Janice Rogers Brown is another of the Bush appointees opposed by Democrats but escaped being blocked after the Gang of 14 reached their agreement. Here is what Ms Brown has said in some of her speeches from Wikipedia.

    "In a speech to the Federalist Society, Brown called the group a "rare bastion (nay beacon) of conservative and libertarian thought" and that the "latter notion made your invitation well-nigh irresistible."

    "In the same speech, she gave hints of her philosophical foundations. She described private property as "the guardian of every other right". Later in her speech she described collectivism as "slavery to the tribe" and that government was a "leviathan [that] will continue to lumber along, picking up ballast and momentum, crushing everything in its path""


    Bush of course was noted for some of his crazy nominations...remember Harriet Myers to the Supreme Court? Even the Republicans couldn't stomach her and squashed her nomination because of her incompetence in Constitutional Law.

    Ms Brown, with her Federalist Society radical views on government, should hardly have qualified for any judgeship, but she now serves as one of Bush's appointments on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, the very court that President Obama is trying to fill and has been blocked (up to now) by Republican filibustering.