Skip to comments.
How the Filibuster Became the Rule
NY Times ^
| December 2, 2007
| DAVID HERSZENHORN
Posted on 12/02/2007 2:51:53 PM PST by neverdem
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21 next last
I always thought that the American Enterprise Institute was a conservative think tank, much like the Heritage Foudation. If the NY Times thinks AEI is nonpartisan, then so much the better with moonbats in control. God help us if we have less than 40 conservatives in the Senate.
Stephen Crowley/The New York Times
DAWN PATROL On occasion, cots have been set up in the Senate when a long debate is expected.
1
posted on
12/02/2007 2:51:55 PM PST
by
neverdem
To: neverdem
So according to the NY Slimes, the Dems have never used fillibusters, eh?
Traitorous POS scumrag....
2
posted on
12/02/2007 2:53:50 PM PST
by
KenHorse
(I have the heart of a Liberal. I keep it in a jar on my desk.)
To: neverdem
All we need is 34. As a practical matter what's stopped the Democrats is less the filibuster threat than their own incompetent leadership.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
3
posted on
12/02/2007 2:54:34 PM PST
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
To: neverdem
["..Senate Republicans have turned filibustering into a primary strategy."]
I can't recall any such articles when the DEMOCRATS turned filibustering into their primary strategy. All of the sudden, this is NOW a big problem. I really can't wait until the NY Times goes completely bankrupt.
4
posted on
12/02/2007 3:03:09 PM PST
by
Mad_Tom_Rackham
(Elections have consequences.)
To: neverdem
What’s wrong with a filibuster?
It sucks when we are on the wrong side of it, but it is great on the other end (which we are now).
5
posted on
12/02/2007 3:03:40 PM PST
by
tj21807
To: neverdem
The last time either party held at least 60 seats was in 1977-78, when the Democrats had 61. IIRC This is coincidentally when the Democrats used the "nuclear" option and changed the votes needed for a super majority from 66 votes to 60.
No doubt the MSM were as outraged about the Dems actually using the nuclear option as they were when the Republicans thought about changing the rules for judicial confirmations.
/S
6
posted on
12/02/2007 3:04:24 PM PST
by
RJL
To: tj21807
Another reason why there have been more filibusters is that the senate has created “filibuster light”. Now, all a senator has to do is to SAY that he’s going to filibuster, and the senate caves. That way, no senator misses a single night between his/her silk bed sheets.
7
posted on
12/02/2007 3:07:08 PM PST
by
Mad_Tom_Rackham
(Elections have consequences.)
To: Mad_Tom_Rackham
Agreed “filibuster light” is lame. If they are going to filibuster make them pull a Jimmy Stewart, up all night!
8
posted on
12/02/2007 3:09:27 PM PST
by
tj21807
To: neverdem
He said he believes the current Senate Republicans have turned filibustering into a primary strategy.If Norman J. Ornstein actually made this assinine remark, then he's got zero credibility. Where was this simple scumbag during the past ten years while the rats were perfecting this "strategy"?
To: neverdem
I always thought that the American Enterprise Institute was a conservative think tankObviously they are anything but conservative.
To: Mad_Tom_Rackham
That way, no senator misses a single night between his/her silk bed sheets.
"Who's got time to sleep?"
11
posted on
12/02/2007 3:24:11 PM PST
by
RoadKingSE
(How do you know that that light at the end of the tunnel isn't a muzzle flash?)
To: tj21807
If they are going to filibuster make them pull a Jimmy Stewart, up all night! Oh, but haven't you heard? That requirement has been outlawed as a form of torture, akin to waterboarding and loud Metallica CD's being played ........
/s
To: neverdem
And to think Bill Frist wanted it banned...
To: Lancey Howard
14
posted on
12/02/2007 4:50:27 PM PST
by
neverdem
(Call talk radio. We need a Constitutional Amendment for Congressional term limits. Let's Roll!)
To: neverdem
Now that the GOP is in the minority WATCH for the cacophonous trumpeting of the MSM disparaging the “CLOTURE RULE” thereby paving the way for the DIMS to DO for ANY VOTE WHAT the GOP didn’t have the “b@lls” to do for judicial appointees ONLY!!
15
posted on
12/02/2007 4:56:08 PM PST
by
PISANO
To: Mad_Tom_Rackham
THere is one problem with the Jimmy Stewart filibusters:
If the Dems as a whole want to filibuster, they only need to have one guy there (or a handful at any rate), but the GOP would have to remain there in force.
If the Dems wanted to defeat a measure but couldn't, they could filibuster. If GOP Senators took a break and left, the Dems could end the filibuster and call the vote anytime there were more of them then there were of the GOP.
All the Dems need is a quorom and they can compel that.
Anyway, it's a risky thing. (Still, I wouldn't mind seeing a couple of them!)
16
posted on
12/02/2007 5:47:59 PM PST
by
Tanniker Smith
("What are we doing tomorrow, Hil?" "Same thing we do every night, Bill, try to take over the world!")
To: RJL
This was not accomplished through the “nuclear option” but through a formal rules change.
17
posted on
12/02/2007 7:32:08 PM PST
by
RWR8189
(Fred Thompson for President)
To: Santa Fe_Conservative
No he didn’t want the filibuster banned.
Only the unconstitutional filibuster of the President’s judicial nominees.
18
posted on
12/02/2007 7:34:03 PM PST
by
RWR8189
(Fred Thompson for President)
To: RWR8189
This was not accomplished through the nuclear option but through a formal rules change. Isn't that want the Republicans wanted to do, a formal rules change that was then tagged with the "nuclear option" title by the MSM?
19
posted on
12/02/2007 7:37:02 PM PST
by
RJL
To: RJL
This is a pretty good summary of the situation.
It was much more complex than a formal rules change, which requires 67 votes.
20
posted on
12/02/2007 7:50:19 PM PST
by
RWR8189
(Fred Thompson for President)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson