Page 62 of 86 FirstFirst ... 1252606162636472 ... LastLast
Results 611 to 620 of 860

Thread: Senate approves nuclear option

  1. #611
    Sage
    Visbek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:35 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    9,973

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    Pretty much says it all[/COLOR].....and Reid's thinking. No mistaking where he stands now.
    Actually, I think Rush Limbaugh said it better:

    "The Constitution says nothing about this. The Constitution says simple majority, 51 votes. But because they're invoking the filibuster, which, you know, the Senate can make up its own rules but not when they impose on the Constitution and not when they impose on the legislative branch. Separation of powers here. But if nobody stops them, they're going to keep getting away with it. It's up to the Senate Republicans to stop them."


    Hannity also had a good point:

    "There are seven specific instances in the Constitution where they call for a supermajority. I believe it's unconstitutional to filibuster. It is not about advice and consent now to ask for a supermajority on judicial nominations. I believe that is not constitutional."


    Rich Lowry, in the NRO, didn't mind it either:

    "Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist should take away their ability to mount unprecedented judicial filibusters through the so-called nuclear option, then sleep the sleep of an utterly justified defender of Senate tradition."


    And Karl Rove demanded an up-or-down vote for nominees:

    "We believe that fairness means these people deserve an up-or-down vote. The Senate can debate, the Senate has a right to oppose, it has a right to support, but it has an obligation under the Constitution to offer its advice and consent by a vote. And it's only fair."


    Aaaaand for good measure, Bill Kristol:

    "That's the constitutional underpinning of our history, which is not to filibuster presidential nominees. The president has the duty to fill those jobs. Congress should advise and consent, or not advise -- not consent. "


    And of course, I don't hear anyone saying the House should institute new rules introducing filibusters, or requiring supermajorities.

    The bottom line is that FILIBUSTERS HAVE NO CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY; and both Democrats and Republicans have flipped their positions since 2005. If the Democrats are doing this "purely" for advantage, then the Republicans -- who wanted to nuke the filibuster in 2005 -- are also opposing it as a knee-jerk partisan reaction.

  2. #612
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,125

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by Buck Ewer View Post
    Democrats don't filibuster presidential appointments.
    .
    They most certainly have in the past. They don't do it now because it's their guys.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    This issue has been plowed more times than Paris Hilton.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oborosen View Post
    Too bad we have to observe human rights.

  3. #613
    Traveler

    Jack Hays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,725
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    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
    Hypocrisy is waist deep on both sides in this matter. Dems will reap immediate gains and Repubs will complain. At some future date Repubs will reap gains and Dems will complain. That just makes our politics cruder but it can be borne. The real problem is that we will get a more overtly political judiciary, and that will lead, over time, to less respect for the laws of our great Republic.
    "It's always reassuring to find you've made the right enemies." -- William J. Donovan

  4. #614
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    I always hate these stupid games. Republicans are going to act all outraged when we all know they'd pack the court if they had the chance. Just like Democrats a few years ago were outraged at the thought of a rules change, and now they're doing it.
    I tend to agree with you (especially about the court packing) except for the fact that the republicans could have done this when they had the close majority, knew about the option and did not take it.

  5. #615
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Southwest AZ
    Last Seen
    08-12-17 @ 02:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,285

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    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
    Here it comes...... Harkin calls for more rule changes | TheHill

  6. #616
    Discount Philosopher
    specklebang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Last Seen
    06-05-14 @ 08:26 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,524

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    And you're here to proclaim your ignorance on the issue. No need. Simply put the filibuster as it has become requires the majority party to at least convince some of the minority party to vote their way. This usually means compromise. This is a good thing in our current highly stratified government. That's gone now that Harry went nuclear and where it may benefit his short term goals, it destroys any hope of compromise between the parties in the future. If you have the majority it's now my way or the highway.
    Sad to say, the concept of compromise is a thing of the past. Neither party has any interest in meeting in the middle unless they've gotten paid off directly or indirectly. So, the things they "compromise" on are generally authorizing the purchase of $8000 toilet seats and nothing much else.

    Not only that, but the blame game is too easy to play now. For example, when a Democrat weeps about the Iraq war or the Patriot Act, fingers point in every direction.

    I think I like this new approach. Right now, it's the Democrats in charge. Let them have their way. Lets see how smart (or dumb) they are. Then, when the time comes to vote, the "American People" (don't you hate that phrase?) will have a much more clear cut way of deciding what they want.

    Obamacare. Bring it on! By the next election this plan will be an Eagle or an Albatross. Lets just find out. What's the worst that can happen? Some people won't have insurance they like, some will be singing hallelujah. It's just for a year - then we will know what we are voting for.

    Maybe we'll see some incentive to make these grandiose plans actually work (or fail). Maybe the rulers can put more effort into their responsibilities between their cocaine purchases. Within 3 years, we'll all be on one side or the other instead of the continuing incompetence we've suffered for 13 years.

    Now, I'm (told) the design of the framers was to make change difficult. In principle, that sounds rational. But in the modern world, this doesn't work well at all.

    This is my opinion. It's MY way or the HIGHWAY.

  7. #617
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by specklebang View Post
    Sad to say, the concept of compromise is a thing of the past. Neither party has any interest in meeting in the middle unless they've gotten paid off directly or indirectly. So, the things they "compromise" on are generally authorizing the purchase of $8000 toilet seats and nothing much else.

    Not only that, but the blame game is too easy to play now. For example, when a Democrat weeps about the Iraq war or the Patriot Act, fingers point in every direction.

    I think I like this new approach. Right now, it's the Democrats in charge. Let them have their way. Lets see how smart (or dumb) they are. Then, when the time comes to vote, the "American People" (don't you hate that phrase?) will have a much more clear cut way of deciding what they want.

    Obamacare. Bring it on! By the next election this plan will be an Eagle or an Albatross. Lets just find out. What's the worst that can happen? Some people won't have insurance they like, some will be singing hallelujah. It's just for a year - then we will know what we are voting for.

    Maybe we'll see some incentive to make these grandiose plans actually work (or fail). Maybe the rulers can put more effort into their responsibilities between their cocaine purchases. Within 3 years, we'll all be on one side or the other instead of the continuing incompetence we've suffered for 13 years.

    Now, I'm (told) the design of the framers was to make change difficult. In principle, that sounds rational. But in the modern world, this doesn't work well at all.

    This is my opinion. It's MY way or the HIGHWAY.
    There's quite a lot I agree with there. However, some changes can't just be rolled back but rather entrench power. In particular judicial appointments. We're stuck with those yahoos until they die or get caught with a live boy or dead girl.

  8. #618
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,914
    Blog Entries
    24

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by specklebang View Post
    Sad to say, the concept of compromise is a thing of the past. Neither party has any interest in meeting in the middle unless they've gotten paid off directly or indirectly. So, the things they "compromise" on are generally authorizing the purchase of $8000 toilet seats and nothing much else.

    Not only that, but the blame game is too easy to play now. For example, when a Democrat weeps about the Iraq war or the Patriot Act, fingers point in every direction.

    I think I like this new approach. Right now, it's the Democrats in charge. Let them have their way. Lets see how smart (or dumb) they are. Then, when the time comes to vote, the "American People" (don't you hate that phrase?) will have a much more clear cut way of deciding what they want.

    Obamacare. Bring it on! By the next election this plan will be an Eagle or an Albatross. Lets just find out. What's the worst that can happen? Some people won't have insurance they like, some will be singing hallelujah. It's just for a year - then we will know what we are voting for.

    Maybe we'll see some incentive to make these grandiose plans actually work (or fail). Maybe the rulers can put more effort into their responsibilities between their cocaine purchases. Within 3 years, we'll all be on one side or the other instead of the continuing incompetence we've suffered for 13 years.

    Now, I'm (told) the design of the framers was to make change difficult. In principle, that sounds rational. But in the modern world, this doesn't work well at all.

    This is my opinion. It's MY way or the HIGHWAY.
    I'm headed down the highway, how we doing tonight. Quite a lot to think about as to what you said. I think you had some good points, but I am an old foggie who doesn't care for that much change. At least all at once.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  9. #619
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,914
    Blog Entries
    24

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    Hypocrisy is waist deep on both sides in this matter. Dems will reap immediate gains and Repubs will complain. At some future date Repubs will reap gains and Dems will complain. That just makes our politics cruder but it can be borne. The real problem is that we will get a more overtly political judiciary, and that will lead, over time, to less respect for the laws of our great Republic.
    But the laws we now have are rewritten, subverted, portions are chosen to enforce and some portions not to. There isn't that much respect for the law as it is. Everything is political these days, everything is done for the good of the political party, not for the nation or the people as a whole.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  10. #620
    Sage
    Unitedwestand13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Sunnyvale California
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    14,909

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    I'm headed down the highway, how we doing tonight. Quite a lot to think about as to what you said. I think you had some good points, but I am an old foggie who doesn't care for that much change. At least all at once.
    for what it is worth, here is cnn giving credit where credit is due.

    What was known as the nuclear option yesterday is known as the Reid Rule today. Time will only tell if the Reid Rule is productive or destructive. But we'll leave that to the historians.

    As for how it became the Reid rule, it took a coordinated and sustained effort from an unlikely place -- progressive activists on the blogosphere.
    And credit for the nuclear option goes to... - CNN.com

    i will let that set in for you.

    i guess the democrats were just listening to their constituents.
    "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

Page 62 of 86 FirstFirst ... 1252606162636472 ... 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
  •