Is that really a bad idea? LOL!
Yippee!!!!!!! *\;-)
what source are you quoting ?
This infatuation with bipartisanship just doesn’t hold the same enchantment for us working stiffs.
I think it’s a great checks and balances system to ensure we don’t have a tyranny of any particular one party. Since the majority of the agenda being foisted on the American people since Obama’s inauguration is against their will, I’d say the system which guards against a majority party running roughshod over everyone else is working as it’s supposed to!
Anyone who thinks setting the Senate loose will do anything other than damage the country at an accelerated pace, is a complete and total, clueless chump.
I see another DNC operative is masquerading as an “Editorial Writer”.
These rat b@st@rds BETTER realize that if they “reform” senate rules to cram their “change” thru,we can use them to abolish them and then some!Like the entire leftist welfare system as well as the current “progressive” tax system, the rulings on CO2 as a man made toxin- theres no limit to what WE can do with that!
Right. Because nobody has the integrity and the discipline to stop the madness and do the right thing. Of course it depends on what the definition of "hard stuff" is. I bet there aren't more than a handful in either house who have the integrity or the discipline.
Congress trying to do a zillion things guarantees that it does nothing well, and certainly cannot do well the few things that it is supposed to be doing.
LOL, I guarantee these sick scumbags at the Journal-Sentinel never cared about the “tyranny of the minority” when the Republicans controlled both chambers, and when the rat senate minority was holding up most of Bush’s judge appointments.
Some of the “hard stuff”, as mentioned by the writer of this screed, probably should NOT be done.
And I am altogether in favor of reverting to a 67-vote minimum for the cloture votes on any items up for debate in the Senate. The purpose of the Senate IS to serve as a moderating voice on the more, um, unusual, demands on the public’s attention.
If I had to take a guess, this editorial could probably be ascribed to the Madison, Wisconsin, Capital Times. Or maybe the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinal.
When Pelosi and Reed got their super majorities they figured that they could force anything they wanted down the public’s throat. Happily they were wrong. Having to call a meaningless conference then game the system to get the legislation passed spotlights the ineptitude of the Congressional Democrats.
Where were all the complaints when Democrat controlled Congress was purposefully not passing legislation until GWB would be out of office? I guess it was OK then.
But these people are so predictable. A couple years from now when the Democrats are in the minority, they will do a 180 and start talking about how the filibuster is part of the Constitution and the evil Republicans want to do away with the Constitution etc. No one in the MSM will point out their hypocrisy.
If they could, they would pass a law that officially reinstates the filibuster every time the Democrats lose the Senate, and suspends it every time the Democrats are in the majority. MSM editorialists would praise the measure as "a prudent example of democracy in action."
“Blame that magic number: 60. “
don’t worry, that will change in November.
.
“Congress is paralyzed.”
Good.
Bills that serve ALL of the people and satisfied BOTH parties would pass without issue. Isn't that what this is all about... protecting the minority so that they are not dictated to by the majority?
I often hear people claim "majority rules". The fact is, our system is designed to protect the suppressed group and ensure their rights are preserved .. the majority would never dissolve their own, it is the minority that needs such leeway and protection.
This madness must stop. I think the vote should be raised back to 67. This will ensure even more that groups are not trampled on. Write responsible legislation and 67 isn't a problem.
There will be no Seante rule change because that takes 67 votes and with only 56 democrats (one who is in the hospital and unable to vote) there is no way it will happen. They can fantasize all they want, it is not going to happen.