Page 65 of 86 FirstFirst ... 1555636465666775 ... LastLast
Results 641 to 650 of 860

Thread: Senate approves nuclear option

  1. #641
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,920

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    I was discussing your posts with a colleague this morning and was directed to Federalist Paper #10. Here's a bit I think you'll appreciate, Perotista:

    There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects.

    There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence; the other, by giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests.

    It could never be more truly said than of the first remedy, that it was worse than the disease. Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires. But it could not be less folly to abolish liberty, which is essential to political life, because it nourishes faction, than it would be to wish the annihilation of air, which is essential to animal life, because it imparts to fire its destructive agency.

    The Federalist #10

  2. #642
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,948
    Blog Entries
    25

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by polgara View Post
    : No wonder people are turning off, and tuning out!
    Me thinks we need a viable third party for the middle. Let the Democrats have the hard left and the Republicans the hard right. We need a party to speak for those who are turning off and turning out and departing the main parties in droves.
    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.

  3. #643
    Sage
    polgara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,356

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    Me thinks we need a viable third party for the middle. Let the Democrats have the hard left and the Republicans the hard right. We need a party to speak for those who are turning off and turning out and departing the main parties in droves.
    d: Who might it be?

  4. #644
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,948
    Blog Entries
    25

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by polgara View Post
    d: Who might it be?
    I haven't the faintest idea. Perot was 20 years too early. Today's atmosphere is much more conductive to a third party having success. Most voters vote for the lesser of two evils and the least disliked party. But the obsticles are tremendous to be overcome. I see no one on the horizon, but who knows, Perot came from nowhere.
    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.

  5. #645
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by NIMBY View Post
    Hello Polgara--to directly answer your question, one of the 3 court of appeals judges filibustered in the last week was passed 55-43 after the nuclear option..The other two will be up shortly..The other 90 federal openings out of a grand total of 873 judges, over 10%, will shortly be approved to catch up with the judicial backlog..I trust a future President Christie against this House, even if McConnell leads the Senate in 2016, unlikely since the GOP has far more seats to protect that cycle..President Christie should not have 82 cabinet/judicial appointees blocked out of an historical total of 168..This fight today has zero to do with next year..IMO, battle lines are already drawn as they have been by Cantor and his coup for 5 years..
    Pulled this post from page 39...don't have time to read the remaining 10+ pages to catch up with the discussion, but this post caught my attention.

    I was listening to Mark Levin's radio show today (during drive time which is about as long as I can stand him ) and he was mentioning how this was all about the Obama Administration packing the lower courts similar to what FDR tried to do only with the Supreme Court. My thoughts immediately turned to the GWBush Administration where instead of trying to fill the lower courts with party favorites, he instead lined the Office of Legal Counsel and the Office of Legal Services with his appointees who wrote the memos on terrorist tribunals that eventually set legal precedent from the Executive Branch. People don't talk about it much because...well, it's prosecuting terrorist! But it doesn't make what he did any more right.

    Until Levin mentioned it, I hadn't really thought Sen. Reid pulling the trigger on the nuclear option would impact any legislative decisions coming out of the Senate other than presidential nominations. But I can certainly see why so many folks on the Right are concerned about this rule change. Thing is as I understand the limits of this ruling, the filibuster can still be used in all other Senate business except for presidential nomination less nominations to the SC. So, in that sense, I don't know why folks are so up in arms over this since it doesn't change normal order (or it's not suppose to anyway). I'll look into it alittle later (Senate.gov, query "rules" for those interested) and see exactly how this impacts ordinary Senate voting procedures, but from what I understand this shouldn't change things in the lower chamber. Yet, Republicans are already looking at ways to punish the other side. The way I see it, if they backed away from not blocking nominations for long vacate positions that the President needs to have filled, then IMHO they left Sen. Reid no choice but to change the rules.
    "A fair exchange ain't no robbery." Tupac Shakur w/Digital Underground

  6. #646
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    IL
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    36,837

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Except if you've been following along you'd know this dem rule change does not apply to SCOTUS nominations or to legislation. It's strictly centered around non-SCOTUS judicial appointments.
    Repubs have already threatened to go all the way on the filibuster to SCOTUS Justices and legislation..Time for ya to catch up with your own team..
    Physics is Phun

  7. #647
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Just found this article from Forbs.com which gives a very good overview of how Republicans reacted by in 2005 when the situation was reversed. Only back then the Dems kept their side of the bargain.

    The 2005 version of the nuclear option never exploded as a group of 14 senators—half Democrats and half Republicans—came up with a deal whereby the Democrats promised not to filibuster presidential nominees except in “exceptional circumstances” and the Republicans promised not to use the nuclear option unless they believed the Democrats were filibustering appointees on grounds that did not qualify as exceptional.
    It's becoming clear to me that Senate Republicans reneged on their part of the deal this time around. This is why I'm not too hell bent on Sen. Reid's decision to pull the trigger. Granted, it might come back and bit him (and the President) in the butt, but the more people learn why this was done and what led up to it, the more I think people will kinda see things alittle more like Perotista (re: "President should get consideration for his nominations in a straight up or down vote with few excepts" (if I've interpreted his commentary correctly)).
    "A fair exchange ain't no robbery." Tupac Shakur w/Digital Underground

  8. #648
    American
    cpgrad08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Lakewood,WA
    Last Seen
    10-18-17 @ 07:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,388
    Blog Entries
    10

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by Visbek View Post
    If this is the case, then why are Republicans protesting?
    Because it can both ways and destroys a long stand rule and tradition of the senate.

  9. #649
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by NIMBY View Post
    Repubs have already threatened to go all the way on the filibuster to SCOTUS Justices and legislation..Time for ya to catch up with your own team..
    Nothing the SC can do about this considering that the opening line to Art. I, Section 5 of the Constitution gives both chambers of Congress the authority to set their own rules:

    Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings...
    All the SC will say is the Senate Majority Leader followed Senate Rules, its members voted and the rules were changed by majority vote.

    Next!
    "A fair exchange ain't no robbery." Tupac Shakur w/Digital Underground

  10. #650
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by cpgrad08 View Post
    Because it can both ways and destroys a long stand rule and tradition of the senate.
    No. What Senate Republicans are really upside with is they see this as a power grab. The fear Senate Dems will run rough-shot over them as long as Republicans remain the minority party in the Senate. Moreover, they fear the lower judicial courts (District and Appeals) will be loaded with Liberal judges. It's got nothing to do with changing tradition because when they were in power not too long ago, they threatened to do the same thing.
    "A fair exchange ain't no robbery." Tupac Shakur w/Digital Underground

Page 65 of 86 FirstFirst ... 1555636465666775 ... 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
  •