Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 54

Thread: KABOOM

  1. #1

    KABOOM

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...67c_story.html

    "The partisan battles that have paralyzed Washington in recent years took a historic turn on Thursday, when Senate Democrats eliminated filibusters for most presidential nominations, severely curtailing the political leverage of the Republican minority in the Senate and assuring an escalation of partisan warfare.
    The rule change means federal judge nominees and executive-office appointments can be confirmed by a simple majority of senators, rather than the 60-vote super majority that has been required for more than two centuries. "


    Thoughts?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ovinomancer View Post
    Fine, I'll say it because it's obvious -- VK is 100% right

 

  • #2
    Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Province
    Crystal Lake, IL
    Oratio
    8,373

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Vermicious Knid View Post
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...67c_story.html

    "The partisan battles that have paralyzed Washington in recent years took a historic turn on Thursday, when Senate Democrats eliminated filibusters for most presidential nominations, severely curtailing the political leverage of the Republican minority in the Senate and assuring an escalation of partisan warfare.
    The rule change means federal judge nominees and executive-office appointments can be confirmed by a simple majority of senators, rather than the 60-vote super majority that has been required for more than two centuries. "


    Thoughts?
    Honestly...

    Wow.

    That was, at one time, called the Nuclear Option.

    I'm surprised more than anything else.
    My Other Sword Is Vorpal

  • #3
    Yeah, I've seen it threatened so many times and come to nothing. Sorta stunned.

    I'm pretty happy to see obstructionism take a shot to the nuts.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ovinomancer View Post
    Fine, I'll say it because it's obvious -- VK is 100% right

  • #4
    Religipster Enkhidu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Dayton
    Oratio
    7,101

    Ignore User
    This bodes ill for common sense.

    Also for the Democrats the moment the the worm turns.

  • #5
    It was the way things were done for 200 years so I'd be surprised if the sky fell.

    All the republicans need to block a nomination is a few democrats to agree...if the the nomination is that problematic why should that be an issue?








    Quote Originally Posted by Ovinomancer View Post
    Fine, I'll say it because it's obvious -- VK is 100% right

  • #6
    Pony Up! Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Province
    The Paddock
    Oratio
    28,180

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Vermicious Knid View Post
    It was the way things were done for 200 years so I'd be surprised if the sky fell.

    All the republicans need to block a nomination is a few democrats to agree...if the the nomination is that problematic why should that be an issue?
    I'm confused about your 'the way things were done for 200 years....' You are aware that even the idea of a cloture to end a filibuster is less than 100 years old, and until the '70s it took 2/3rds, not just 3/5ths. This is a tectonic change in how the Senate does business.

  • #7
    First Day On The Internet Calamari Face's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Province
    Band of Workermootly Kithish Commonwealths
    Oratio
    13,755

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Ovinomancer View Post
    I'm confused about your 'the way things were done for 200 years....' You are aware that even the idea of a cloture to end a filibuster is less than 100 years old, and until the '70s it took 2/3rds, not just 3/5ths. This is a tectonic change in how the Senate does business.
    Oh, come on. You know the jury's still out on plate tectonics.



    I don't think CF and I agree on much at all, and probably not this. -- Ovinomancer, The Senate, 28 June 2011

    I find myself in full agreement with CF. -- Ovinomancer, The Senate, 1 July 2011


    Larry Sanders 2016!

  • #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Ovinomancer View Post
    I'm confused about your 'the way things were done for 200 years....' You are aware that even the idea of a cloture to end a filibuster is less than 100 years old, and until the '70s it took 2/3rds, not just 3/5ths. This is a tectonic change in how the Senate does business.
    The strategy of filibustering any and all appointments by the current administration is much more recent. Traditionally routine appointments were treated as...routine.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ovinomancer View Post
    Fine, I'll say it because it's obvious -- VK is 100% right

  • #9
    That's Wacist! Mistwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Los Angeles, CA
    Oratio
    26,409

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Vermicious Knid View Post
    It was the way things were done for 200 years so I'd be surprised if the sky fell.
    It really wasn't. In fact, the rule they changed today is itself 225 years old. You're confusing the different types of fillibusters. Shutting down debate wasn't even introduced until 1917, and then it changed again in 1975.

    Also, people are constantly confusing "number of things filibustered" with "number of things successfully prevented by means of a filibuster". Many filibusters are done to slow things down and genuinely debate the law more to try and get a real amendment in there. If you look at the number of things which were actually prevented as a result of a filibuster under this Republican minority - it's virtually identical to the number prevented by the prior Democratic minority.

    And I predict this will bite the Democrats in the ass sooner than they hope it will. It was a bad idea to try and change this, and at least one left-leaning Democrat understood that fact today.
    Last edited by Mistwell; November 21st, 2013 at 10:04 PM.
    I like hats.

  • #10
    Pony Up! Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Province
    The Paddock
    Oratio
    28,180

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Vermicious Knid View Post
    The strategy of filibustering any and all appointments by the current administration is much more recent. Traditionally routine appointments were treated as...routine.
    And that's a good reason to change? Because the majority is being stymied? That's the point. Let's not forget that the Republicans threatened to do this 8 years ago, and the same Dems lauding the move today screamed the same things the 'Pubs screamed then. More proof that the only real difference between the two parties are the cronies that benefit from them.

    This is a reduction in the power of the minority to resist the majority. We're moving more towards the tyrrany of the majority. This is a great thing if you're in the majority, but, given recent events, it's hella optimistic of the Dems to think that they'll handily maintain that majority (they may, they may not, I'm just pointing out that it's far more in question now than three months ago).

  • #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Ovinomancer View Post
    And that's a good reason to change? Because the majority is being stymied? That's the point. Let's not forget that the Republicans threatened to do this 8 years ago, and the same Dems lauding the move today screamed the same things the 'Pubs screamed then. More proof that the only real difference between the two parties are the cronies that benefit from them.

    This is a reduction in the power of the minority to resist the majority. We're moving more towards the tyrrany of the majority. This is a great thing if you're in the majority, but, given recent events, it's hella optimistic of the Dems to think that they'll handily maintain that majority (they may, they may not, I'm just pointing out that it's far more in question now than three months ago).
    I think we differ on the desirability of blind obstructionism by the minority. Do you really believe that the recent use of the filibuster was justifiable?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ovinomancer View Post
    Fine, I'll say it because it's obvious -- VK is 100% right

  • #12
    That's Wacist! Mistwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Los Angeles, CA
    Oratio
    26,409

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Vermicious Knid View Post
    I think we differ on the desirability of blind obstructionism by the minority. Do you really believe that the recent use of the filibuster was justifiable?
    I really believe this cure does more long term damage than the disease.

    But this guy makes the case much better than I do:

    This guy

    Or maybe these guys:

    Last edited by Mistwell; November 21st, 2013 at 10:20 PM.
    I like hats.

  • #13
    Pony Up! Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Province
    The Paddock
    Oratio
    28,180

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Vermicious Knid View Post
    I think we differ on the desirability of blind obstructionism by the minority. Do you really believe that the recent use of the filibuster was justifiable?
    Yes. I disagree with it, as I think that Presidential nominees should be granted the presumption, and only exceptional reasons should force a filibuster, but I find them entirely justifiable. Reid is doing everything in his power to prevent any minority bills or amendments from being heard, so I do not think it unreasonable or unjustifiable for the minority to exercise it's considerably weaker powers to block majority efforts, even in a retalitory way (which the nominee blocking recently are). Bipartisan consideration needs to flow both from the minority to the majority and from the majority to the minority. The Dems similarly blocked a number of Bush nominees for also unrelated reasons back in '08 which precipitated the last round of the 'nuclear option' discussion. As I recall, that roadblock was cleared by a group of Senators in the middle reaching mutally acceptable accomodations -- something the current majority is very unwilling to do (probably because of their by-the-fingernails control).

    So, yes, I find it justifiable, even if I generally disagree with the practice.

  • #14
    That's Wacist! Mistwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Los Angeles, CA
    Oratio
    26,409

    Ignore User
    I like hats.

  • #15
    guyjin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Province
    The land between two rivers
    Oratio
    7,562

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Calamari Face View Post
    Oh, come on. You know the jury's still out on plate tectonics.

  • Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

    Tags for this Thread

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •