Page 4 of 86 FirstFirst ... 234561454 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 860

Thread: Senate approves nuclear option

  1. #31
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Denio Junction
    Last Seen
    11-13-14 @ 12:09 AM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,039
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    I can't wait to hear the pigs scream when the Republicans take back the senate next year and the lems get the nuclear fall out.


    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    Harry Reid finally comes through

    The Senate has voted to change its rules so that a simple majority is required to confirm judicial nominations and executive branch picks — the so-called “nuclear option.”
    The final vote was 52-48. The previous threshold was 60 votes to bring such nominations to a final up-or-down vote.
    “The threshold for cloture on nominations not including the Supreme Court, is now a majority,” Sen Pat Leahy (D-Vt.), the Senate president pro temp, declared after the vote.
    Three Democrats voted with Republicans against the change: Carl Levin (D-Mich.), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Mark Pryor (D-Ark.). Levin is a longtime senator; Manchin and Pryor come from red states.
    Shortly after the vote, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) office sent around a memo noting that the Senate has changed its procedures using a majority vote 18 times since 1977. Republicans, though, note that none of the changes rise to the level of today’s change.

    Senate approves nuclear option

  2. #32
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    07-25-17 @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,878

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Too late to call hypocrisy. Your guys were bitching about fillibusters non-stop when Democrats were blocking Bush appointments.
    Why too late? When the GOP was bitching that's all they did. The Democrats took the 'bitching' one step further which truly seems hypocritical considering their angst directed at Frist when he suggested the same action...
    "The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure" - 2006 Senator Obama...leadership failure indeed!

  3. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Depends sorta. If they are qualified and liberal, or under another president conservative and qualified, then the appointment should not be blocked.
    I don't think anyone can really answer the question of what is a qualified judicial nominee. This seems to be answered only in how someone sees the constitution in which in many ways is a fraudulent argument.

  4. #34
    Guru
    Hamster Buddha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 06:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,675

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Originally, the Senate was suppose to be made up of individuals selected by the states. An amendment took care of that "problem" and thus all we had left is that it was the only place that both slowed the pace of government and also was the only place where compromise had to happened. So tell me, what's the difference now between the senate and house of representatives? Why not just get rid of the distinction altogether?

  5. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Colorado mountains
    Last Seen
    01-03-15 @ 08:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,729

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickieboy View Post
    They don't? Really? Is this just another example of revisionist history, typical liberal/progressive meme. Nevertheless, exactly why did the nuclear option get so much attention when Frist was the Senate majority leader?...here let me help you out:

    http://www.abanet.org/poladv/priorit...08th-72604.pdf

    But in the end Frist didn't invoke this option. Reid's actions are truly a game changer...
    Weigh the appointment filibusters by Democratic senators against the number of republicon filibusters ...
    Then come back here and tell me which party abuses the filibuster rule.
    McConnell's senate minority has filibustered ALL of President Obama's appointments ...
    ALL OF THEM.

  6. #36
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by Buck Ewer View Post
    Weigh the appointment filibusters by Democratic senators against the number of republicon filibusters ...
    Then come back here and tell me which party abuses the filibuster rule.
    It is entirely immaterial who uses it more.

  7. #37
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    My thoughts on this outcome:

    1. As in the past, I have reservations about it, particularly as it relates to further erosions of minority influence in the Senate.

    2. Things had evolved to the put where the minority didn't just have authority under the rules of the Senate to block unqualified appointees, but had reinterpreted the rules to block appointees for reasons far beyond the narrow issue of qualifications. As a result, a de facto practice had taken hold where the minority could deny the President the ability to appoint positions. IMO, that was an application far beyond what those who developed the Senate's rules envisioned when drafting those rules. It's difficult to imagine a scenario under which every nominee for the Court of Appeals was unqualified or so objectionable that he/she had to be blocked.

    At the Court of Appeals, three seats were vacant. These were existing seats, not newly proposed ones. What would happen if every Senate minority adopted the practice of using the 60-vote threshold to prevent a President's making any appointments? That would be an unsustainable outcome and highly damaging to governance.

  8. #38
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,176

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Levin realizes this move may very well come back to bite them in the butt in the near future.
    and levin would be VERY correct
    the republicans might decide to make this move even more broad and extend it to supreme court nominations
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    once you're over the hill you begin to pick up speed

  9. #39
    Sage
    Unitedwestand13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Sunnyvale California
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    14,992

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    I guess balance in power isn't important. Why not just let one party rule? I see nothing wrong with it at all.

    I wonder what they plan to do if they ever lose the Senate? Cry?
    i think the fact we can now fill 93 judicial vacancies is a trade.
    "If you can't stand the way this place is, Take yourself to higher places!"
    Break, By Three days grace

    Hilliary Clinton/Tim Kaine 2016

  10. #40
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:26 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,363
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    I don't think anyone can really answer the question of what is a qualified judicial nominee. This seems to be answered only in how someone sees the constitution in which in many ways is a fraudulent argument.
    Which is why unless there is a clear cut issue with qualifications, they should be approved. If the person has ethics issues, damn right reject them. If a person is clearly unqualified, reject them. If a person has a different ideology, that is not a reason to reject them.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

Page 4 of 86 FirstFirst ... 234561454 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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