Page 82 of 86 FirstFirst ... 32728081828384 ... LastLast
Results 811 to 820 of 860

Thread: Senate approves nuclear option

  1. #811
    Sage
    Visbek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 05:28 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,020

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Maybe not, but this is going to do them damage....What a loser Harry Reid is....But, hey, you libs are trashing everything else that has to do with the founding, and set up of this country, so why not this 225 year old precedent as well...?
    The filibuster was not intentionally designed by the Senate. It was a result of a small change in Senate rules, to eliminate a procedure that (at the time) was rarely used. In fact, it was never used until the 1830s. Cloture was introduced after World War I. The filibuster rules were significantly strengthened in 1975. Its use during the Obama term, including using threats to filibuster, is unprecedented. It was also used repeatedly during Bush 43's term.

    All that said: When a "tradition" prevents the government from actually doing its job, then it's time to retire that specific tradition.

  2. #812
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 04:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,040

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen View Post
    Republicans control the House. The structure of government and the Supreme Court is how minority rights are protected not some archaic parliamentary procedure created by chance in the 1800's.

    I'm curious...do you think they should reinstate the filibuster into the House?
    No, I think the Republicans should allow the Democrats to put forth bills, amendments, and only pass legislation that has support of both parties. The filibuster is irrelevant.

  3. #813
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,343

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by Visbek View Post
    The filibuster was not intentionally designed by the Senate. It was a result of a small change in Senate rules, to eliminate a procedure that (at the time) was rarely used. In fact, it was never used until the 1830s. Cloture was introduced after World War I. The filibuster rules were significantly strengthened in 1975. Its use during the Obama term, including using threats to filibuster, is unprecedented. It was also used repeatedly during Bush 43's term.

    All that said: When a "tradition" prevents the government from actually doing its job, then it's time to retire that specific tradition.
    Yep, and as I recall when the repubs wanted to use this option, the demo's like Reid were all over them, only to use it themselves now like true hypocrites....What a bunch of liars liberal demo's are.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  4. #814
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 04:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,040

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen View Post
    Every open position. That's kind of how it works. A new President comes in and appoints the heads of agencies in the Executive branch to carry out his agenda.

    When openings pop up in the judicial branch he appoints people to fill the positions.
    You meant the agenda of the country, not the Presidents agenda right? Since theres also something called Congress.

  5. #815
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 05:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,213

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    You simply don't know what you are talking about....

    "The biggest loser, however, will not be Democrats or Republicans, but the American constitutional system. Like several other parts of the Obama administration’s political program, the filibuster’s end sacrifices unique constitutional and political features of the American government for short-term political gain. Worried about minority rights, the Framers designed a Constitution that imposed a difficult, hazardous path before any government action could be taken. Legislation had to be able to run the gauntlet of the popular House, the state-chosen Senate, and the nationally elected president, before braving federalism’s limited enumeration on federal powers. “Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people,” James Madison explained in Federalist 51. “The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself.”

    Under the Framers’ design, domestic action could flow only from high levels of political consensus built upon long and careful deliberation. It forced the political parties to compromise — if President Bush had truly wanted Estrada on the courts, he should have traded political favors with Senate Democrats. Though ever frustrating to those who demand immediate reform or unchecked majority rule, the filibuster rule bolstered these unique features of the American Constitution. They imparted a stability to government and a resistance to sudden impulses that spared the United States the trials and tribulations of Europe, where parliamentary government has often led to wild swings of policy. As political sociologist Louis Hartz observed long ago, there is a reason why the United States never suffered the evils of socialism or Communism.

    Democrats, however, have little difficulty trading constitutional stability for short-term political advantage. The filibuster’s end falls in line with President Obama’s refusal to fulfill his constitutional duty to faithfully execute the laws, merely to avoid the radioactive political fallout from his signature health-care law or dictate his preferred immigration reforms. It fits neatly Obamacare’s erasure of the limits on the powers of the federal government over interstate commerce, spending, and taxation, and with the president’s political browbeating of the Supreme Court for the assist. But these political victories, evanescent as they will be, will do permanent harm to the American political and constitutional system, which may well remain the longest-lasting legacy of Mr. Obama and his Democratic allies in the Senate."

    Reid's Filibuster Power Play Is a Blow to American Constitutional System | National Review Online
    I'm not sure how that proves me wrong....as mentioned in other posts of mine the minority was protected by having 3 branches and a bicameral legislative body. It's an op-ed piece that doesn't discuss the history of the filibuster. Apparently it's sacrosanct...in fact if you feel so strongly about it I'm surprised Conservatives haven't tried to reintroduce it into the House. I know exactly what I'm talking about. I guess you can go ahead and be Outraged! just like Conservatives were Outraged! during 2005 when Bush appointments were getting filibustered and were calling for the use of the nuclear option.

    The rest is just an op-ed piece talking about how glorious the filibuster is. Of course...this is the Rich Lowry from the National Review in 2005

    The judicial filibuster isn't a tradition, but an innovation; not a function of checks and balances, but a perversion of them; not an outgrowth of the Constitution, but at best irrelevant to it.

    [...]

    During the contentious fight over Clarence Thomas's nomination to the Supreme Court in 1991, Democrats who were harshly opposed to him still refused to filibuster his nomination, even though they would have had the votes to do so. Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy called a filibuster against Thomas "nonsense" and a "crazy idea," declaring himself "totally opposed to a filibuster."

    Democrats point to a filibuster of Lyndon Baines Johnson's 1968 attempt to elevate Abe Fortas from an associate justice to chief justice of the Supreme Court as a precedent. But it was different in kind from today's filibusters. It was bipartisan. Twenty-four Republicans and 19 Democrats voted against ending the filibuster. Fortas almost certainly didn't have the support to pass on an up-or-down vote in the Senate. Hurt by ethics charges, he soon withdrew his nomination, and ended up resigning from the court. The case was truly exceptional.

    [...]

    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. [National Review, 5/13/05, via Media Matters]
    And this is about Supreme Court nominees!
    “Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes

  6. #816
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 05:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,213

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by jonny5 View Post
    No, I think the Republicans should allow the Democrats to put forth bills, amendments, and only pass legislation that has support of both parties. The filibuster is irrelevant.
    Well that's not how it operates...but I guess my question is...why? How do you think a Democracy would operate if it required the support of everybody to pass anything. Most of the hard situations that face the country divide the country.
    “Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes

  7. #817
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 05:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,213

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by jonny5 View Post
    You meant the agenda of the country, not the Presidents agenda right? Since theres also something called Congress.
    Nope. Executive branch appointees generally follow the agenda of the President.

    Bush's agenda was business friendly...so he appointed people to regulatory agencies that allowed business to do whatever they wanted. Like oil companies practically fill out their own safety inspection forms.

    He also appointed very lax EPA heads.

    Obama is appointing very tough EPA heads.
    “Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes

  8. #818
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,343

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen View Post
    I'm not sure how that proves me wrong....as mentioned in other posts of mine the minority was protected by having 3 branches and a bicameral legislative body. It's an op-ed piece that doesn't discuss the history of the filibuster. Apparently it's sacrosanct...in fact if you feel so strongly about it I'm surprised Conservatives haven't tried to reintroduce it into the House. I know exactly what I'm talking about. I guess you can go ahead and be Outraged! just like Conservatives were Outraged! during 2005 when Bush appointments were getting filibustered and were calling for the use of the nuclear option.

    The rest is just an op-ed piece talking about how glorious the filibuster is. Of course...this is the Rich Lowry from the National Review in 2005



    And this is about Supreme Court nominees!
    Actually it's John Yoo, but you'd actually have to have read the article before criticizing it to know that....
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  9. #819
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 05:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,213

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Actually it's John Yoo, but you'd actually have to have read the article before criticizing it to know that....
    The one I linked was Rich Lowry.

    I didn't criticize the article...I pointed out that it has nothing to do with the filibuster being some intent of the founders or some super important thing outside of the opinion of the writer.
    “Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes

  10. #820
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,343

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen View Post
    The one I linked was Rich Lowry.

    I didn't criticize the article...I pointed out that it has nothing to do with the filibuster being some intent of the founders or some super important thing outside of the opinion of the writer.
    Whatever, just throw the whole thing in the trash right? Isn't that what revisionist liberals like you think anyway.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

Page 82 of 86 FirstFirst ... 32728081828384 ... 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
  •