The way I seen it the game between the house and senate, tabling the bills and the filibusters were in a way tit for tat. Blame only one party if you must, but I will not do that. Ah, you are correct, by dropping the Nuke on the 21st, Reid didn’t stop the Republicans from voting, that is for sure. But with a 55-45 majority any nomination is guaranteed now. Voting means nothing, the president can nominate a Hitler or Stalin, a Marx or even a Pol Pot, there is no way to stop him. No way to say, hey, these guys are a little too much, how about reconsidering and send us someone less gruesome. I am not saying the president will, but in today’s lock step world, they would as sure as day is day and night is night be confirmed.
Sure, a traditionalist from IKE on. Play that as you may. Obstruction is over. There is an old saying, one nation’s terrorist is another nation’s freedom fighters. Tabling 50-100 bills from the house without so much as a debate or vote, most without even being assigned to a committee, that is not obstructionalism? Especially when the senate could have amended, changed, added anything Senator Reid wanted and deleted anything Senator Reid didn’t want. But he tabled them. Sounds like your obstruction only works one way.
Early voting in Georgia. On the 20th of October this old Goldwater conservative voted against both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton by casting my vote for Gary Johnson. Neither Trump or Clinton belong within a million miles of the Oval Office.
So to answer your question NO...
I have not considered that, because by their own actions the republicons in the senate have shown that they are determined to stop any legislation that the president favors. EVEN THEIR OWN! That goes beyond partisan politics and demonstrates a childish PERSONAL vendetta against the President.
They are stupid and stubborn to a fault.
You apologise for their stupidity and partisan idiocy...
Tell me why the republicons in the senate would filibuster their own bills just because the president supports those bills.
Give me a reasonable and logical reason why they would do that.
We have seen McConnell filibuster a bill that he himself had introduced that same day when the president made a favorable comment towards it... Tell me ... WTF is that?
Last edited by Buck Ewer; 11-23-13 at 07:25 PM.
This present administration and Senate is the most disgusting, vile and fascist group of idiot tyrants I have ever seen in my day or even read about in United States history books...... These progressives are disgusting with their attempted recalls, quorums and lawsuits....
All these pathetic losers want is the courts to be padded with progressive communist sympathizing judges so they can file a lawsuit every time a law is passed that goes against their agenda - prop 8 is a perfect example - which ultimately allows them to circumvent democracy via ONE JUDGES RULING...
This is called authoritarianism..... If you don't like a law that has been passed run to a judge that will deem in "unconstitutional" on nothing more than political ideology/affiliation.
When the country was first founded, both the House and the Senate had unlimited debate. When the country grew in size the House made rules to limit the time because of the size.
In 1841, when the Democratic minority hoped to block a bank bill promoted by Kentucky Senator Henry Clay, he threatened to change Senate rules to allow the majority to close debate. Missouri Senator Thomas Hart Benton rebuked Clay for trying to stifle the Senate's right to unlimited debate.
Three quarters of a century later, in 1917, senators adopted a rule (Rule 22), at the urging of President Woodrow Wilson, that allowed the Senate to end a debate with a two-thirds majority vote (67), a device known as "cloture."
By 1975 Democrats in the majority in the Senate decided to change the rules again. They had the majority of 61 but couldn't reach the needed 67 so they changed the rules making the vote 60 to reach cloture.
When Republicans came up with an up or down vote in 2005 to override the filibusters from the Democrats of all of Bush's nominees, the Democrats named it the Nuclear Option. Harry Reid was livid. But now he seems to like the idea.
So I hope the Republicans if they get in power, just do away with the filibuster all together and show the Democrats what a real Nuclear Option looks like. And when they get done cleaning up all the messes of the Democrats from the feckless spending, to the sh*tload of new regulations and most of all overturning Obamacare, and downscaling the size of the federal government in general... then I would like to see them restore the pre-1975 rules where it would take 2/3 of the Senate to pass another dang bill.
The Democrats used the filibuster when appointments were unreasonable... republicons under McConnell have abused the filibuster using it for EVERY appointment and in doing so, they have themselves become unreasonable.