[JSDude1]

What’s he gonna do (force) Senators to be there: I’d say screw you Harry Reid and go home anyway!!

[Bernard Marx]

What’s he gonna do (force) Senators to be there: I’d say screw you Harry Reid and go home anyway!!

They will, of course. And Harry's only Nancy's sock-puppet; she calls all the shots.

[janereinheimer]

Wouldn’t he need a quorum? I mean, can he say that the Senate is in session if a quorum isn’t present? If that’s the case, I think the Senators ought to go on home and be with their families on Thanksgiving Day.

Bush’s possible — or not— appointments are going to be all that earth shattering. It’s only a year until election day anyway. Then we’re going to see big turnovers, I think. Or I hope. Is Harry Reid up for re-election in 2008?

[xzins]

I think you have to be present to vote.

But, he’ll not do it over Christmas. It’s only another month.

[bill1952]

No dem will go against he who controls appointments, and few pubs will then leave the dems in complete control of the Senate voting.

[mvpel]

Then whoever’s left there gets to make all the votes based on “members present” and ram through their agenda on 26 votes, or fewer if there’s nobody there to demand a roll call vote or a quorum call.

[longtermmemmory]

he does not need you.

The rules should allow a rule to have members make and pass a motion to adjourn.

The Congressional rules should be no different than roberts or demeters in this regard.