Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 134

Thread: The Filibuster - Kill It for the Good of Democracy

  1. #21
    Not buying both-siding this.


    Itís worth considering which party is striving to actually govern reasonably well and which seems to have no clue or interest in this. Seeking power by utterly dishonest politicking, gerrymandering and voter-suppression for minority rule, embracing reflexive obstructionism and dishonest/destructive myths as guiding principles should hopefully result in folks coming together to keep Republicans out of power as much as possible.

    Theyíve earned these efforts and I hope thereís growing appreciation for the need to remove and keep them from power and influence until they can embody a more honest and honorable ethos.


    Sure, removing minority party powers can and will hurt Democrats when theyíre in the minority. Therefore, since Republicans have proven they donít either understand or give a damn about good governance, every reasonable effort to keep them out of power and influence is appropriate.

    I wish this were not so, but it is.
    I love mankind...itís people I canít stand!!

  2. #22
    Lol

    Iím not both-siding anything. Iím one-siding it: the Demsóaloneóare trying to get rid of the filibuster in a craven effort to retain power. Youíre the one both-siding this.

  3. #23
    PM a mod to cement your internet status forever
    PhDeac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    120,354
    Youíd think the last several years would make it clear that Republicans do not compromise especially on judges and justices. Obama tried with Garland and got completely stonewalled. Republicans are bad faith actors who have no desire or plan to govern even when they have power.

    Look at this discussion of ďunity.Ē Republicans spent two months declining to unite and accept that the country elected a longtime centrist known for his desire to make deals across the aisle in order to get things done. They arenít going to budge on any issues. Theyíre job is to keep things as bad as possible to improve their chances in 2022.

  4. #24
    Rusty Larue
    DeaconSig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    God's Country
    Posts
    11,371
    So predictable, yet so insipid.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by WakeBored View Post
    Lol

    Iím not both-siding anything. Iím one-siding it: the Demsóaloneóare trying to get rid of the filibuster in a craven effort to retain power. Youíre the one both-siding this.
    You are both-siding a grasp for power.

    But I'm saying it's not altogether the same thing because I think it matters why each party wants power and what they will likely do with it.
    I love mankind...itís people I canít stand!!

  6. #26
    It's pretty disingenuous to act as if the Dems getting rid of the filibuster for circuit justices was some unprompted norm-breaking, when the real norm breaking was McConnell's unprecedented obstructing of Obama's nominees. It's also willfully naive to act as if Republicans would not have nuked the filibuster for Gorsuch if the Dems hadn't nuked it for the circuit court justices.

  7. #27
    PM a mod to cement your internet status forever
    PhDeac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    120,354
    LOOK AT THOSE CRAVEN DEMS WHO WANT TO NUKE THE FILIBUSTER TO MAINTAIN A FUNCTIONING GOVERNMENT AND HELP REGULAR AMERICAN PEOPLE!!!!! #BENGHAZI!!!!!!!!

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by WakeBored View Post
    For the past 4 years, the drumbeat from the Dems has been how the Pubs just wanted naked power. Whether true or not, turns out that accusation was a bit of a projection, and, in light of the Dems' about face from April 2017, a good reminder that there is no moral high ground in politics.
    The frustration is that the Dems with their slim majority in the house and in the senate represent 10s of millions more people than the pubs with their slim minority. In congressional races tallied up across the country the Dems regularly get 10+ million more votes than Pubs and Dems have won the popular vote in all but one presidential election since 1988...yet we are still ruled by the minority. The 50 Republican senators, representing, I think, 47 million fewer people than the 50 dem senators, will block the entire Democratic agenda. What the hell kind of a system is that? We are not talking about grabbing naked power, we are talking introducing some semblance of equitable representation of power in the federal government.
    Birds are real.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by WakeBored View Post
    Lol

    Iím not both-siding anything. Iím one-siding it: the Demsóaloneóare trying to get rid of the filibuster in a craven effort to retain power. Youíre the one both-siding this.
    The reason the Democrats ended the filibuster for lower-court federal judges was because the Republicans under McConnell were filibustering and delaying the appointment of said judges. What else should the Democrats have done so that a President could fulfill his function to appoint federal judges? Compromise? McConnell has always made clear that he has never had any interest in compromising with Democrats. Contrary to Republican claims that Democrats set a precedent, there was no precedent for Republicans under McConnell to raise the stakes and end the filibuster for Supreme Court Justices - which I think you would agree is rather more severe than removing the filibuster for lower-court judges. I'm wondering how Obama and Democrats could have filled all those lower court vacancies without removing the filibuster. One reason there were so many vacancies to be filled under Trump was because McConnell and Senate Republicans had dragged their feet on filling vacancies.

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by deactherunner View Post
    It's pretty disingenuous to act as if the Dems getting rid of the filibuster for circuit justices was some unprompted norm-breaking, when the real norm breaking was McConnell's unprecedented obstructing of Obama's nominees. It's also willfully naive to act as if Republicans would not have nuked the filibuster for Gorsuch if the Dems hadn't nuked it for the circuit court justices.
    ^This. Republicans always seem to leave out that little nugget - the ending of the filibuster for lower-court judges was due to McConnell and the GOP's unprecedented filibustering and foot-dragging on said nominees.

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by birdman View Post
    The frustration is that the Dems with their slim majority in the house and in the senate represent 10s of millions more people than the pubs with their slim minority. In congressional races tallied up across the country the Dems regularly get 10+ million more votes than Pubs and Dems have won the popular vote in all but one presidential election since 1988...yet we are still ruled by the minority. The 50 Republican senators, representing, I think, 47 million fewer people than the 50 dem senators, will block the entire Democratic agenda. What the hell kind of a system is that? We are not talking about grabbing naked power, we are talking introducing some semblance of equitable representation of power in the federal government.
    Quote Originally Posted by Highland Deac View Post
    The reason the Democrats ended the filibuster for lower-court federal judges was because the Republicans under McConnell were filibustering and delaying the appointment of said judges. What else should the Democrats have done so that a President could fulfill his function to appoint federal judges? Compromise? McConnell has always made clear that he has never had any interest in compromising with Democrats. Contrary to Republican claims that Democrats set a precedent, there was no precedent for Republicans under McConnell to raise the stakes and end the filibuster for Supreme Court Justices - which I think you would agree is rather more severe than removing the filibuster for lower-court judges. I'm wondering how Obama and Democrats could have filled all those lower court vacancies without removing the filibuster. One reason there were so many vacancies to be filled under Trump was because McConnell and Senate Republicans had dragged their feet on filling vacancies.

    Yep.
    I love mankind...itís people I canít stand!!

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Highland Deac View Post
    ^This. Republicans always seem to leave out that little nugget - the ending of the filibuster for lower-court judges was due to McConnell and the GOP's unprecedented filibustering and foot-dragging on said nominees.
    And Dems always seem to leave out the little nugget that the filibuster was not a part of the confirmation process until they started doing it in 2002.

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by WakeBored View Post
    And Dems always seem to leave out the little nugget that the filibuster was not a part of the confirmation process until they started doing it in 2002.
    And yet it was Republicans who filibustered Obama lower-court nominees to leave those seats vacant, thus requiring an end to said filibuster to get lower-court nominees appointed, and it was Republicans who ended the filibuster for Supreme Court justices and voted them onto the court in almost record time - especially in the case of Barrett. Your side continues to ignore those points, which are what is relevant to the argument here. Nice way to try to change the subject.
    Last edited by Highland Deac; 01-23-2021 at 03:54 PM.

  14. #34

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by WakeBored View Post
    And Dems always seem to leave out the little nugget that the filibuster was not a part of the confirmation process until they started doing it in 2002.
    BFD. It's like a child crying "But Mom, he started it!"

    The GOP has shown that they will do anything to maintain power. The Democrats need to use every available opportunity to do the same.

  16. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by LilburnDeac View Post
    BFD. It's like a child crying "But Mom, he started it!"

    The GOP has shown that they will do anything to maintain power. The Democrats need to use every available opportunity to do the same.
    If Dems didn't start it, it wouldn't have gotten started. Do you see how that works? If you're looking for the root cause of the breakdown of the system, that's where you look. At the start. And that's on the Dems.

  17. #37
    Never Murdered My FIL
    Deacfreak07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    'Murica
    Posts
    65,765
    Quote Originally Posted by WakeBored View Post
    If Dems didn't start it, it wouldn't have gotten started. Do you see how that works? If you're looking for the root cause of the breakdown of the system, that's where you look. At the start. And that's on the Dems.
    Plus they hurt Borkís feelings and stuff !

  18. #38
    PM a mod to cement your internet status forever
    PhDeac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    120,354

    The Filibuster - Kill It for the Good of Democracy

    Quote Originally Posted by WakeBored View Post
    If Dems didn't start it, it wouldn't have gotten started. Do you see how that works? If you're looking for the root cause of the breakdown of the system, that's where you look. At the start. And that's on the Dems.
    Republicans started not participating in governing. Republicans started not working with the other side or the White House. Theyíre still doing it. They keep ignoring the will of the people as demonstrated in elections to the point where they denied the election results for two months.

    If Mitch McConnell did a AITA, youíd probably call him an asshole. But in the world of team politics, you canít see it.
    Last edited by PhDeac; 01-23-2021 at 06:22 PM.

  19. #39
    TIL AITA is a thing.
    I love mankind...itís people I canít stand!!

  20. #40
    Banhammer'd
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    HB, CA
    Posts
    78,116
    Quote Originally Posted by Deacfreak07 View Post
    Plus they hurt Borkís feelings and stuff !
    Just because Bork supported private, racist and sexist clubs, doesn't mean he would just those issues fairly on the Supreme Court.

    Just because when no one else would carry out the Saturday Night Massacre for Nixon and Bork would doesn't mean he doesn't understand what's right and what's wrong. This alone should have made it impossible to nominate hm.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •