• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senate approves nuclear option

Navy Pride said:
Under Obama I am ashamed of my country......He has ruined our reputation foreign and domestic......He might be a nice guy but as president he is totally clueless............More and more Americans are feeling the same way....His personal approval is in the 30 percentile now.
Click to expand...

Oh you can't be serious about this. I won't say Obama has improved it - but I doubt he's made it any wore. If anything he's on the same path as the previous 5-6 presidents. Mediocre - with massive amounts of dislike towards the end of their presidency (with maybe the exception of Clinton & Reagan) and then general apathy from the American people. We've been disliked overseas by everyone from the Brits to the South Americans for over 50 years. I doubt any recent president has changed the memory of the average foreigner who we've helped oppress.
 
Out of 168 nominees filibustered in our history, 82 during Obama..
Sen. Reid actually did the RepubLies a favor by not quite reaching 50%..
Thrilla said:
215 nominees approved.... don't forget to add that number to whatever it you are trying to do here
Click to expand...
All the GOP hammered away in 2005 was an "up-or-down-vote"..
Let's play twister .
 
ChezC3 said:
Well, there is no accounting for taste, but interesting choice of words, really telling -- your feeling that you are "under" Obama...
Click to expand...

He is your leader as well ...like him or not.
That use of the word "under" is common parlance going back centuries when speaking about a national leader's administration.
I would use the same terminology for any president.
Read into it what you will,... If you must, but Navy Pride used the term "under Obama" as well.
 
Last edited:
NIMBY said:
What were the rules 40 years ago in the Senate when they were last changed..40 years is a drop in time..
Click to expand...

I don't know and even if I did, I'd have to see exactly which rules were changed and why. Regardless of what you present, it wouldn't change my mind on why this rule is particularly dangerous.
 
eohrnberger said:
My pride of being an American and my pride of America isn't affected by which idiot politician is currently, and temporarily, sitting in the White House.
Click to expand...

Perhaps it isn't something you're consciously aware of, but I do remember the general attitudes of Americans about America then and in comparison to now, Today, esteem is remarkably low by comparison.
 
Buck Ewer said:
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.
Click to expand...

Really..ALL OF THEM? Or is this just ANOTHER example of the 'revisionist history, typical liberal/progressive meme'...check this:

List of federal judges appointed by Barack Obama

Based on the link 36 appointed to Court of Appeals, 168 District Courts...again, ALL OF THEM?
 
not at all--you have shown that only "your kind" of President can allow you to be proud
ChezC3 said:
It's called a sense of pride, sense doesn't allow choice. You don't choose to be prideful

but at least you admit he's a failure as well...;)
Click to expand...
 
NIMBY said:
The current GOP Senate has proven beyond even a rightist hack's shadow of a doubt that this is not 2005..
They want to put a hold on every nominee and investigate two dozen faux outrage scandals, as stated by Sen. Graham..
I'm surprised you would quote that the filibuster is about compromise when you know better..
The GOP is super mad today cuz they can't criticize PPACA and McConnell said just this on the Senate floor!!

There are no more moderates on the GOP side with respect to the nuclear option in public..They have given up on their own GOP..Off the record today, many Sen. Collins-types are relieved this is finally out there..

Cloture died today, blame who you will or dance the 2-step that you're not on either side .
Click to expand...

Enjoy it to the fullest Linc, I can guarentee you when the Republican gain control of the senate they will utilize the Senator Harry Reid Option to the fullest. The precedence has finally been set, the cat is out of the bag. I am all for any president, this one, the last one, future ones to nominate anyone he chooses and to surround him with them. The filibuster was wrong, but what happened to day was ten times worse. What Senator Reid has done is to abolish the rights of the minority party. Perhaps this may be the only time Reid will use it, may be he will use it again and again on different nominees, then on to legislation.

I can guarentee you if the Republicans pick up those 6 seats in the senate next year, on anything important they want passed in the senate, expect to hear the Senator Harry Reid Option being used again and again. You better hope come 2016 that Christie or anyother Republican does not win the presidency and that the GOP doesn't control both chambers of congress. I am sure as horse fly being swated away by the horses tail they will use the Senator Harry Reid Option to repeal Obamacare, to cut taxes on the rich, to do away with the EPA and on and on. Write this down as every Democrat now bask in the glory of Senator Harry Reid.

I do not think he or anyone else who voted Aye thought this through. But Senator Harry Reid made his bed along with their Democratic Senate collegues, now they must sleep in it from this point in time on.
 
Buck Ewer said:
He is your leader as well ...like him or not.
That use of the word under is common parlance going back centuries when speaking about a national leader.
I would use the same terminology for any president.
Read into it what you will,... If you must but Navy Pride used the term "under Obama" as well.
Click to expand...

Though I didn't read you usage as anything out of the ordinary, have to say using "under" that way is something Americans used to avoid at all costs. Something about our disdain for royalty and the system we fought to become a country.
 
Perotista said:
Enjoy it to the fullest Linc, I can guarentee you when the Republican gain control of the senate they will utilize the Senator Harry Reid Option to the fullest.
Click to expand...
you mean the GOP will expand the Sen. Frist option to include SCOTUS Justices and whatever the **** else they want..Now you know why the fight over voting rights and PPACA is to the very bitterest end--to get the Senate..Repubs were fully exposed to the American people today .
 
NIMBY said:
82 for Obama, 86 for 43 Presidents
Click to expand...

Hmmm, if that's true, and it doesn't sound right because Clinton had the same trouble, could easily be that points to Obama being ****ty where it comes to making judicial appointments.
 
Dickieboy said:
Really..ALL OF THEM? Or is this just ANOTHER example of the 'revisionist history, typical liberal/progressive meme'...check this:

List of federal judges appointed by Barack Obama

Based on the link 36 appointed to Court of Appeals, 168 District Courts...again, ALL OF THEM?
Click to expand...

... I don't mean to nitpick, but your list only shows the ones which have been appointed. It doesn't show which ones have been filibustered. One can be filibustered and still be appointed once the filibuster ends. The weight is on him to show that ALL of them have been filibustered - you showing which ones have been appointed does nothing to contradict his claim.... or maybe I'm wrong about filibusters.
 
Buck Ewer said:
He is your leader as well ...like him or not.
That use of the word under is common parlance going back centuries when speaking about a national leader.
I would use the same terminology for any president.
Read into it what you will,... If you must but navy Pride used the term "under Obama" as well.
Click to expand...

Eh, no. He is the leader of a government in a country I happen to reside. To be someone's leader means that one must follow. I turned my back long ago.

No, no...:naughty no need in explaining your word choice, it was just an observation...
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
is it right for the minority to abuse the majority?
Click to expand...

Enjoy it my friend. One better hope come 2016 that the Republicans do not retain the house, gain control of the senate and the presidency. If they do, you can count on them to use the Senator Harry Reid Option or Precedence to repeal Obamacare, to cut taxes on the rich, to do away with the EPA and so on. Mark my word, the Republicans will use the Senator Harry Reid Option to the max. When they do this, no Democrat at all should complain or holler, after all this is exactly what they wanted. Hurray.
 
NIMBY said:
not at all--you have shown that only "your kind" of President can allow you to be proud
Click to expand...

What kind is that?

Reagan? I already stated he was not a favorite of mine.

Oh, hehehe, were you pulling out the race card? :lamo

Good lord...:roll:
 
Hatuey said:
I agree with the exception of Harry Reid being the most dangerous senator ever. I think his heart is probably in the right place, his mind however is poisoned by partisanship and he has chosen the coward's way to approach this. In my book, the most dangerous senator award goes to McCarthy but that's a different discussion for a different thread.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I dislike both Reid and McConnell. Both put their party way ahead of country and anything else. If Mitchell and Dole were in charge of the senate, this wouldn't have come to a vote, it wouldn't even have been threaten. Heck, even Daschle and Lott wouldn't have let it get this far. I tell you this, I never seen this coming.
 
Lutherf said:
I'm most certainly not a Communist but I have no doubt whatsoever that a whole bunch of people in this country (and government) have a sincere appreciation for Leninism even if they have never been told that's what it is.

In a very real way people who were born in the mid 70's and later never experienced full blown Marxism-Leninism. The Soviet Union is simply something they had to read about in school. They've probably never even heard of Shalamov or Solzhenitsyn and have no idea how a political concept that starts with noble intentions becomes warped into tyranny.
Click to expand...
I am not so young that I don't remember the tyrannical nature of many communist states and there are lots of tyrannical states that are not socialist in nature today. But social democracy does not have to lead down any path ...it can be an end in itself.
Look at modern Germany.
 
Perotista said:
I am all for any president, this one, the last one, future ones to nominate anyone he chooses and to surround him with them.
Click to expand...
But he hasn't been able to due to unrelated events, like two dozen phony scandals..
The filibuster was wrong, but what happened to day was ten times worse.
Click to expand...
It is about nominees but play your "worse" games if you must..
What Senator Reid has done is to abolish the rights of the minority party.
Click to expand...
Reid has temporarily stopped the "wrongs" of the minority party, not their rights..
Perhaps this may be the only time Reid will use it, may be he will use it again and again on different nominees
Click to expand...
he must continue to use it again on nominees held up due to TEAparty primaries back home--at no time has he brought up SCOTUS nominees--please clean this noise up
then on to legislation.
Click to expand...
No Dem., especially Sen. Reid, has ever brought up legislation..please clean this up also..And, you can be sure McConnell will push this legislative filibuster to create another crisis .
 
Perotista said:
Yeah, I dislike both Reid and McConnell. Both put their party way ahead of country and anything else. If Mitchell and Dole were in charge of the senate, this wouldn't have come to a vote, it wouldn't even have been threaten. Heck, even Daschle and Lott wouldn't have let it get this far. I tell you this, I never seen this coming.
Click to expand...

Today, we're in full agreement. This whole thing has been blown out of proportion. Changing the rules because you want to give your team a momentary advantage is not only petty, it's downright unsportsmanlike. I would completely support Republicans if they made this an election issue and dragged Democrats through the coals for it. It's disgusting.
 
Summerwind said:
Finally the Senate is a step closer to it's constitutional mandate which reserves super majorities for specific things, not everything.

He should've done this 3 years ago.
Click to expand...

They've only been doing this for 225 years...
 
Hatuey said:
That's the problem. The politcally right wing people who matter in Congress won't be too forgiving about this. Aides on both sides will draft speeches feeding the masses bull**** and then they'll use outrageously dangerous options like this as they wish. This is all coming from Hatuey. Proud member of DebatePolitics who has supported and defended Democrats on the forum for nearly a decade.
Click to expand...

Ok yes, that's true. And democrats will blame them even though they caused it. Just like passing a unpopular bill in the middle of the night with a bare majority. Which caused the GOP to use it as a wedge every chance they get. That's what comes of majority rule.
 
Perotista said:
Enjoy it my friend. One better hope come 2016 that the Republicans do not retain the house, gain control of the senate and the presidency. If they do, you can count on them to use the Senator Harry Reid Option or Precedence to repeal Obamacare, to cut taxes on the rich, to do away with the EPA and so on. Mark my word, the Republicans will use the Senator Harry Reid Option to the max. When they do this, no Democrat at all should complain or holler, after all this is exactly what they wanted. Hurray.
Click to expand...

here is a thought, maybe the republicans are (ab)using the filibuster so that they can prove their message that government does not work and use it as their message to campaign on.

maybe we can bring balance by adopting the old roman system of tribunes of the people.

of course that had its own problems too, as shown in this documentary of tiberius Gracchus and how he was a radical in roman politics for wanting land reform:

( the important parts in the video i am referencing is from 1:27- to 4:10)

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom