Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-08-2010, 02:28 PM
Riot's Avatar
Riot Riot is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,153
Default 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!)
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-08-2010, 02:35 PM
SOREHOOF's Avatar
SOREHOOF SOREHOOF is offline
Fairgrounds
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Peoples Republic of the United Socialist States of Chinese America
Posts: 1,501
Default

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!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-08-2010, 02:54 PM
Riot's Avatar
Riot Riot is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SOREHOOF View Post
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'
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-08-2010, 03:47 PM
SOREHOOF's Avatar
SOREHOOF SOREHOOF is offline
Fairgrounds
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Peoples Republic of the United Socialist States of Chinese America
Posts: 1,501
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
See other thread. BTW, one of the above is NOT Obama, and has nothing to do with him. Just sayin'
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.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-08-2010, 03:51 PM
Riot's Avatar
Riot Riot is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SOREHOOF View Post
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
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-08-2010, 03:55 PM
SOREHOOF's Avatar
SOREHOOF SOREHOOF is offline
Fairgrounds
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Peoples Republic of the United Socialist States of Chinese America
Posts: 1,501
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
By this time, I think we all basically know where we stand on stuff political
Sometimes you surprise me!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-08-2010, 04:20 PM
timmgirvan's Avatar
timmgirvan timmgirvan is offline
Havre de Grace
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Powder Springs Ga
Posts: 5,780
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
By this time, I think we all basically know where we stand on stuff political
yeah...but you keep drinking the kool-aid!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-08-2010, 03:55 PM
Antitrust32 Antitrust32 is offline
Jerome Park
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Ft Lauderdale
Posts: 9,413
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
See other thread. BTW, one of the above is NOT Obama, and has nothing to do with him. Just sayin'
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.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
Can I start just making stuff up out of thin air, too?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-08-2010, 04:01 PM
SOREHOOF's Avatar
SOREHOOF SOREHOOF is offline
Fairgrounds
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Peoples Republic of the United Socialist States of Chinese America
Posts: 1,501
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-08-2010, 03:03 PM
Cannon Shell's Avatar
Cannon Shell Cannon Shell is offline
Sha Tin
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 20,855
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
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!)
You say this like it is a bad thing...
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-08-2010, 03:15 PM
Riot's Avatar
Riot Riot is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell View Post
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 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.
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-08-2010, 03:53 PM
SOREHOOF's Avatar
SOREHOOF SOREHOOF is offline
Fairgrounds
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Peoples Republic of the United Socialist States of Chinese America
Posts: 1,501
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
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 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.
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.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-08-2010, 03:57 PM
Antitrust32 Antitrust32 is offline
Jerome Park
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Ft Lauderdale
Posts: 9,413
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
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 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.
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.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
Can I start just making stuff up out of thin air, too?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-08-2010, 04:04 PM
SOREHOOF's Avatar
SOREHOOF SOREHOOF is offline
Fairgrounds
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Peoples Republic of the United Socialist States of Chinese America
Posts: 1,501
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32 View Post
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.
No Bill should be longer than the Constitution. These crooks vote for bills they haven't read. That is insanity.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.