DADT possible vote tonight!
 

Wow, they may get to DADT vote in the Senate tonight - Reid is going to bring the appropriations bill with the DADT repeal, and they think they have the 60 votes, via GOP defections, to overcome the Republican filibuster!**

(** yes, remember the GOP has routinely filibustered everything brought to the floor in the Senate this past year, so it always takes 60 votes to bring up, discuss, or pass bills that our Constitution says takes a majority of 51. Weird "Obama Obstruction on Everything Rules" the GOP has made. So this appropriations bill, even though it has far more than 51 votes and would pass easily and routinely in any other Senate than Minority Leader Mitch McConnel's, first has to have 60 votes for cloture so it can be discussed then voted upon. But if there's 60 to break the Republican filibuster, there's 60 for the bill. If not - then DADT is dead for this Congress. Good for Majority Leader Reid for bringing it up!)

I'm just glad the Repubs were able to stop TARP, The Stimulus, Omnibus Spending Bill, and Obamacare. Or we would really be in the hole!

See other thread. BTW, one of the above is NOT Obama, and has nothing to do with him. Just sayin'

You say this like it is a bad thing...

There are multiple plans to amend the filibuster rules so that first, the filibustering party has to physically hold the floor, instead of simply saying "filibuster!" and going home or to the bar for the week it takes to work that out :D I think that's good. It will make C-Span tons more interesting to watch.

Then not including the ability to filibuster certain types of bills that Senators can already hold up by themselves, I think that's good, too.

And there's a really cool suggestion that once a filibuster is in place, that as time goes on (two days, four days) the number of votes it takes to overcome decrease. 60 in the first two days, 57 after than, then 53, etc.

The Dems will do something, I'm sure, in January. The past 2 years has been seriously ridiculous. There are over 400 bills the house has passed, that the Senate hasn't yet looked at, during the past 2 years. Just queued up, waiting.

Bush bequeathed half of the TARP package to Obama. Roughly $350 Billion to him. I didn't see anything on the HuffPooPoo saying he turned it down or gave it back. Obama voted for TARP as a US Senator so I'd say it had a little something to do with him. He was already Prez-Elect at the time I believe. This doubles as my response to you in the other thread. I can't keep them straight anymore.

By this time, I think we all basically know where we stand on stuff political :D

They should leave the fillibuster alone. I said the same thing when the Repubs had control. The Dems will rue the day they change the rules, just like the Repubs would if they did. It's only a matter of time before the new party in charge wears out their welcome. Most people are sick of all of these 2 faced lying thieves in office.

Sometimes you surprise me!:)

well he voted for it while being a senator and talked it up while running for prez so i wouldnt go as far as saying it had nothing to do with him.

the founding fathers wanted the filibuster to be used. They didnt think it was good precident that if one party has a majority, they can just pass anything they want through.

the founding fathers actually thought the smaller amount of bills passed, the better for the country.

Eventually China is going to get sick and tired of financing Americas social programs. The interest on the debt is a HUGE part of the Federal Budget.

No Bill should be longer than the Constitution. These crooks vote for bills they haven't read. That is insanity.

I currently have a hunting license in two states :eek:

I like politics, and I like arguing about politics.

noooooooooooooooo, really? ;)

I'm currently getting ready to chow down on some nice fresh venison! MMM MMM! Smells great ! Backstraps!

I had an office manager, part of his contract was he got three days off when bow season opened :D

yeah...but you keep drinking the kool-aid!:p

I was a member of that congregation, I was kidnapped and deprogrammed ;)

How one GOP Senator is holding up having DADT come to the floor via filibuster (vote now moved to tomorrow)

Via TPM

Whatabout PFC Bradley Manning????

filibustering won't be changed. the dems had a better hand the last two years then they've got now and didn't attempt to change the rules. they recognize that they might need the same powers one day. then the r's will be yelping that the d's are holding everything up.
and i'm doubting there won't be near the posts/threads about the evils of the practice when it happens.

Obama should finally man up and increase taxes. Like RIOT and the people who voted for him wanted. Renounce DADT, affirm DREAM, kick a soldier in the nuts then wish happy holidays while denouncing all religion and return to Hawaii. With the mayoral race in Illinois going on and the guy he said would make a good mayor not willing to put his kids in Chicago public schools while all other candidates promissed to do so is a sweet treat for Christmas!

Today the GOP filibustered simply opening discussion on giving seniors a $250 check as their Social Security hasn't had a COLA raise in 2 years.

The GOP isn't filibustering as they and the Dems both have in the past, averaging 40-50 per session (filibustering = parlamentary obstruction). The GOP have not reserved it for really important stuff, the votes on bills, etc.

The GOP has a standing filibuster on simply bringing stuff to the floor of the Senate.

The GOP has been blocking the Senates work - bringing topics (bills) up for discussion. A filibuster takes about a week to be taken off.

Let alone the GOP putting additional filibusters on voting, etc.

They have been, IMO, obstructing the Constitution, which requires a majority in the Senate - not a supermajority of 60 - to bring things up, do the normal business of the Senate, pass legislation and get stuff done. There has been historical inaction in the Senate. We all have to hope it will be changed. We elect leaders to discuss and vote on the issues of the day. The GOP minority has single-handedly blocked that.

And no, neither the Dems nor the GOP has ever done this before. "Both parties do it" does not apply here. What the GOP has done is exceptional.






What the data clearly shows is that he GOP is filibustering at twice the rate of what the Democrats did before, including what they did under Bush. So Republicans can't claim that Democrats did it too - they didn't. Not like this.

:tro::tro::wf

There is a difference between discussing and arguing politics in the abstract, because it's fascinating, and simply defending one's own political views. Not the same thing.

I'm a pretty mellow guy, but your pointed/slanted questions dont appear to me to be a discussion.......just sayin

You mean you don't like that I strongly hold opinions that differ from your slanted/pointed opinions :D Do you think that during debate, people should argue their opinions, certainly, but do you think that factual inaccuracies matter? And if you really like debate, you could be perfectly happy debating stuff that personally, you may not agree with <G>

I know you have strongly held opinions...you're stuck in the clinic all day....and the cats won't talk to you....your frustration is understandable. See, you asked me 2 questions that framed your opinion of me before the dust settled in this forum. I'm impressed with facts...but you see them through the myopic scope of HuffPo and Mother Jones and other of their ilk. I can hardly answer correctly given your stance.....It's not CHESS...it's talking.

Strangely, in light of your concern about "framing", that's not how I spend my day ;)

Thought my smiley-face gave away that was a joke.

You seem to be confusing fact with opinion. One is generally indisputable, and the other is interpretation of the first. I can assure you I form my own opinions. You?

It is indisputable that you form your opinions....it's the disposition of the truth
that is your "Waterloo":p

You still seem to conflate opinion with fact :D

The current GOP in the Senate have obstructed more business via filibuster than any other Senate before them. Do you think that's truth, or fiction?

Obama is a Kenyan-born non-citizen of the US. Truth, or fiction?

The answer is yes to both questions, but I'm not familiar with the word "conflate"!

Now...."Don't FRAME" Me, Sis !!


p.s....there are "qualifiers" in that answer;)

And tomorrows GOP filibuster is .. the DREAM act
 

Geesh. Let the bills come to the floor, debate them, then vote on them. Filibustering being able to vote on the bill, one Senator preventing all from addressing a topic with their vote, is simply obstructionist, unconstitutional BS on the part of the GOP (yeah, that's opinion ;)

Sorry, "confuse" will do. And you are entitled to your qualifiers :D;) 'cause that's where the FUN starts <G>

The chart shows that the Dems are introducing unconstitutional, partisan, Nation changing Legislation at historic rates. I'm just glad someone's trying to stop them or at least slow them down. What if they just voted on DADT without all the other BS tacked on? Collins votes with the Dems most of the time anyway. There is lots more to this than meets the eye.

you're right that numbers are higher now. your assertion that the "Republicans can't claim that Democrats did it too - they didn't. Not like this." is not exactly correct. the volume may be different, the practice remains the same. and like i said before, there's a reason the dems didn't attempt to make any changes when they may have been able to do so. they know damn good and well that they may need to employ the same tactics in future.
it's not as tho the electorate shows a clear, clean cut leaning of this country in one direction. our form of govt was set up in a way to always enable the minority groups to have a say in the process. are the reps abusing it? perhaps. is there potential for the same in future? of course. you're fastened on this particular subject as a way to put the republicans in a bad light. no doubt there are other, better examples of what they've gotten wrong-such as keeping the tax cuts on the wealthiest.

interesting:


Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-OR), Jim McDermott (D-WA) and Jay Inslee (D-WA) are crafting a letter to share with the House Democratic Caucus that would try to prevent the Speaker from bringing the tax bill to the floor.

They hope to get 60 signatures on their letter (which is still being drafted) and then force a vote in the caucus. DeFazio says he thinks that if a majority of House Democrats are against this compromise, they shouldn't bring it to the floor.

In other words, they are seeking a majority of the majority to move this and a senior House democratic source indicates they don't know if they have a majority of democrats, saying they haven't whipped this yet.

In an interview with Fox, DeFazio criticizes the president and says a majority of the House Democratic Caucus does not support the tax rate compromise. "There does not seem to be a majority of the Democrats who support the deal negotiated by Vice President Biden," DeFazio said. "So we want to have a record vote in the caucus on a resolution that says this resolution should not go to the floor without a majority of Democratic votes."



there are a variety of ways both parties attempt to block legislation. but somehow, i bet this instance won't be quite as horrifying as it would be if republicans attempted it.

There's 30 seconds left in the half and the Dems have the ball. The Reps are just trying to stop any scoring drive and go to the locker-room knowing they get the ball and a whole slew of fresh players for the second half. So far they're knocking down those hail mary's. Hopefully the Dems fumble and end up losing the chance to kick the GOP tax field goal with all that crap attatched to the ball.

wow..are these fatcharts..