DADT possible vote tonight!

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

http://cheezburger.com/View/4245131008

[Riot]

The chart shows that the Dems are introducing unconstitutional, partisan, Nation changing Legislation at historic rates.

You mean like yesterday's filibuster by the GOP, routine funding of the Pentagon? Preventing it from being brought to the floor for a vote?

The Democrats were elected in an overwhelming majority, and after the 2010 election, still hold the majority. They are entitled to do what the majority of Americans elected them to do.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

interesting:
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.

It's not the same thing. The letter you speak of is just a straw poll of the Democratic caucus, it was taken today, showing 53 House Dems don't like the Obama-McConnell pact. But that cannot physically block the vote from coming to the floor as a filibuster can. It just says how they are going to vote, and hopefully the bill won't be brought until amended, if the President wants a positive vote.

The filibuster exists as an extreme obstructionist tactic. The Senate rules of debate, amendment, majority vote are supposed to rule the business of the day.

The GOP has a standing filibuster on bringing topics to the Senate floor. Not debate and discussion, not voting, but simply against the elected majority bringing topics to the floor to discuss. THEN the GOP also block debate, and block votes. Their whole point the past two years was to gum up the works of the Senate, including routine business, so the Dems couldn't pass anything, and it's worked very well.

There were 53 votes in the Senate to pass the tax extensions without extension of tax cuts for those over 1 million. That would have "passed" in any other Senate, and it "passed", according to the Constitution which states simple majority rules in the Senate.

Except the GOP filibusters every single thing, and that changes the rules (which is why they do it) now requiring a special vote of 60 votes to pass. Thus virtually everything that has passed in the Senate over the past two years - including the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - even when on party had the majority in the Senate, elected by the public, had to get, and got, at least 60 votes. Not the majority required by the Constitution for Senate votes.

And that's why the filibuster rules will finally be amended. Filibuster has never been abused to such an outrageous degree.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

There's 30 seconds left in the half and the Dems have the ball.

And they fumble. And fumble. And fumble.

The Dem House caucus straw polled their dislike of the Obama-McConnell bill today, we'll see what happens. I doubt the GOP will budge, they never do and don't have to because Obama caves to them. The House Dems are nuts if they block that stimulus, but I agree it has to be paid for, at least a little.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Riot

You mean like yesterday's filibuster by the GOP, routine funding of the Pentagon? Preventing it from being brought to the floor for a vote?

The Democrats were elected in an overwhelming majority, and after the 2010 election, still hold the majority. They are entitled to do what the majority of Americans elected them to do.

what the "majority of Americans" want, is not always best for the country. for cripes sake, the "majority of americans" dont even keep up with current events. thank goodness for the Philly Cheese steak. ooops, meant Phillybuster.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

what the "majority of Americans" want, is not always best for the country.

I'm waiting for the Tea Party to come out against this huge deficit bill. They have been strangely quiet, hiring long-time Washington insiders to be their chiefs of staff for the new Congress.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Riot

I'm waiting for the Tea Party to come out against this huge deficit bill. They have been strangely quiet, hiring long-time Washington insiders to be their chiefs of staff for the new Congress.

Pretty sure Palin has.. saw it on Cnn.com today

but she's also against life, liberty and the pursuit of redistribution.

[SOREHOOF]

I'd like to see a chart with the fillibuster as a percentage of Bills brought to the floor. There are many more bills put out than ever so of course there will be more fillibusters.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by SOREHOOF

I'd like to see a chart with the fillibuster as a percentage of Bills brought to the floor. There are many more bills put out than ever so of course there will be more fillibusters.

www.senate.gov look up the roll call votes for each session. Below is for the current Senate. Every time you see the word "cloture", that was a filibuster by the GOP (the cloture, if agreed to, is the end of filibuster). They can filibuster the Majority Leader bringing a bill to the floor (introduction), debate, and voting. Any one Senator can filibuster.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LI...menu_111_2.htm

All those guilty comments - the Senate impeached a Federal Judge yesterday.

Twenty years of comparative Senate history: http://www.senate.gov/reference/reso...comparison.pdf

[Riot]

In spite of having overwhelming public support, in spite of having already passed the House, in spite of having 57 votes in favor of repealing DADT in the Senate, a number deemed by our Constitution more than sufficient to pass a bill in the Senate; due to the GOP filibuster requiring that the measure now gain 60 votes (a supermajority) to even be brought to the floor and voted upon: Don't Ask, Don't Tell has been filibustered to death, thus has failed and is done in this session of Congress.

Thanks, GOP. You obstructive hypocrites suck. You didn't even allow it to come to the floor for a vote.

Oh, yeah: and they still have to fund the Pentagon's routine business, they filibustered that, too.

WASHINGTON -- A major defense authorization bill carrying the repeal of the military's 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' law was blocked on Thursday by Senate Republicans and one Senate Democrat after negotiations between the parties failed. A number of moderate Republicans who said they supported a repeal, including Scott Brown (R-Mass.) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), voted to filibuster the measure. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) joined their efforts.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), the prime negotiating partner of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's, voted to bring the bill forward but only after it was clear that the 60 needed to end a filibuster would not be achieved. Her vote came after she angrily roamed the Senate floor, rolling up text of the legislation and waving it around, smacking it on Sen. Dick Durbin's desk and hitting him on the arm with it. The final tally was 57 Senators in favor of moving forward, 40 opposed.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Pretty sure Palin has.. saw it on Cnn.com today

but she's also against life, liberty and the pursuit of redistribution.

And live caribou.

[Antitrust32]

well that fucl<ing blows.

Fucl< you John McCain.

[Riot]

How about the completely hypocritical jackwads who said, "Oh, I'm in favor of repeal, I'll vote for that!" but just voted to not bring it to the floor so they could vote on it! Two-faced political suck ups. And Blanche Lincoln? Loser.

Let's be really clear what happened here: DADT needs 51 votes to be repealed. It had 60. But the GOP filibustered it, including Senators who said they would vote in favor of repeal (!) so the 57 filibuster break votes was not sufficient, so it could not be brought to the floor and repealed.

The minority of 40 prevented the overwhelming majority of 60 in the US Senate from passing a bill to repeal DADT.

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), a lead proponent of repeal, promised after the vote to introduce stand-alone legislation quickly to repeal the ban. "Reid [told Lieberman] he would bring it up by the end of lame duck," a Reid aide said. "That is all that I know right now. And Reid will cosponsor it."

Sens. Brown and Murkowski had previously said they supported repeal of DADT but demanded an "open amendment process" to ensure Republicans can make changes to the defense bill. Reid, in turn, offered Collins 15 amendments -- 10 for Republicans and five for Democrats -- but she countered with a request for four days of floor debate.

Democrats on the floor conferred closely with Manchin, apparently in hopes of changing his vote. If he switched and Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) showed up to vote, Democrats would've gotten to 59, putting even greater pressure on Murkowski, but particularly on Brown, who is up for reelection before a liberal electorate in 2012.

An aide to Reid said that he wasn't immediately aware if the Majority Leader knew that Manchin was going to vote no. The West Virginia Democrat did, however, express his desire to review the issues more fully and was giving off indications that his vote was gettable. "I would say that if he was somehow the 60th vote, I do not think he would have voted the way he did," the aide said.

Reporters in the gallery watched closely for Lincoln, who ultimately arrived a considerable time after the vote ended. "I would like to have been recorded as voting yes," she said to a largely empty chamber. Lincoln, whose two-term career ends at the end of this session, was told that the rules do not allow such a revision. "Had I been here I would have voted yes," she said.

It's clear that Republicans don't want to hold a vote on 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,'" Reid said. "They want to block a bill on this at all costs, even if it means not passing the defense authorization bill for the first time in 48 years."

The defense authorization bill also includes a number of other provisions, including bonuses for service members and improved health coverage for troops, Reid pointed out. He said the bill is necessary and must move forward.

[Antitrust32]

yep... it makes sense to kick somebody out of the military who was willing to die for the USA, was the best man in his platoon, saved lives, took enemy life, was a fucl<ing hero... because some jealous person decides to out him.

yep, smart America at work.


arab translators are so over rated anyway.

[Antitrust32]

they dont need to change the PhillyBuster rules.

The rule that needs to change is TERM LIMITS. 2 TERM LIMITS in the Senate.. 4 term limits in the house.

[Riot]

In the previous two years, all of the following had more than enough votes, Constitutionally, to pass into law, and were passed or passable by the House, but were filibustered by the Senate GOP so that those votes could not even be taken.

In the new Senate, where the Democrats still hold the majority, these bills would still pass.

Health care with a public option
Tougher financial reform
A more aggressive recovery package that actually would have lowered unemployment
The DREAM act
A climate and energy policy
Renewal of the nuclear START treaty
Repeal of DADT
A middle class-only tax cut

I want my country back. I'm in favor of our Constitution. I'm in favor of voting for a House of Representatives, and a Senate, and allowing them to vote on the issues facing our country.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

In the previous two years, all of the following had more than enough votes, Constitutionally, to pass into law, and were passed or passable by the House, but were filibustered by the Senate GOP so that those votes could not even be taken.

In the new Senate, where the Democrats still hold the majority, these bills would still pass.

Health care with a public option
Tougher financial reform
A more aggressive recovery package that actually would have lowered unemployment
The DREAM act
A climate and energy policy
Renewal of the nuclear START treaty
Repeal of DADT
A middle class-only tax cut

I want my country back. I'm in favor of our Constitution. I'm in favor of voting for a House of Representatives, and a Senate, and allowing them to vote on the issues facing our country.

A bit hypocritical no? Even for a former republican!

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

A bit hypocritical no? Even for a former republican!

Hypocritical? That middle America co-opts a rightwing talking point? What's hypocritical about following our Constitution, and demanding our elected officials do the same? We have a small group working hard at blocking our governmental, Constitutional processes. Most of the issues, above, would pass, but I'm sure some would not. The point is, that our Constitution allows us to elect a House, and a Senate, and the Constitution says the important issues of our day get to be brought up, discussed, and voted upon by our elected representatives. The GOP is completely blocking our Constitutional processes. Enough is enough.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

Hypocritical? That middle America co-opts a rightwing talking point? What's hypocritical about following our Constitution, and demanding our elected officials do the same? We have a small group working hard at blocking our governmental, Constitutional processes. Most of the issues, above, would pass, but I'm sure some would not. The point is, that our Constitution allows us to elect a House, and a Senate, and the Constitution says the important issues of our day get to be brought up, discussed, and voted upon. The GOP is completely blocking our Constitutional processes. Enough is enough.

I highlighted the DREAM ACT and wanting your country back.

How does educating, giving citizenship and then employing ILLEGALS get the country back other than putting legals on the 3 yr unemployment plan? The illegals that sign onto the military are obviously taking the place of someone as we have no draft and I thought we (WE BEING LEGAL AMERICANS) have an unemployment problem?

But then again you agreed with the President saying we couldn't afford NOT to let the tax relief expire for those over 250K but now somehow have the money to not only continue the Bush plan for all but ALSO put in a payroll and SS tax reduction? What did we hit the lotto and I don't know it?