Harkin Revisits Legislation To End Filibuster

Moderator: Super Moderators

Cherry Kelly
Pirate
Posts: 12852
Joined: 07-29-2000 02:00 AM
Contact:

Post by Cherry Kelly » 02-25-2010 03:38 PM

Cynthia Lynn -- goodness girl did you fail to comprehend I was responding to what racehorse had posted. The dems who were so against this passing bills with 51 votes (senate) and are all NOW for it - in just a few short years.

Of course I've seen GOP do some of the same in the past.

THIS is about health care. This is about the majority of the US citizenry who do NOT want it. (Well if you believe all the major polls.)

Now back to watching the debate or at least listening to whatever you want to call it....

User avatar
racehorse
Pirate
Posts: 14976
Joined: 01-04-2003 03:00 AM
Location: Commonwealth of Kentucky

Post by racehorse » 02-25-2010 03:43 PM

Cynthia Lynn wrote: Actually, Maddow thinks the Senators who are doing the filibustering should have to actually filibuster... you know, as in the old days when they had to talk for days instead of simply invoking cloture.

I don't watch Hannity, but we'll see how Newt feels about obstructionism when the Republicans are once again in control... and eventually they will be.

I must say, however, that the Republicans are masters of obstructionism.

In addition, at present, they are abusing the process of the filibuster.


Yes, Maddow thinks this too. That is silly and if actually implemented would tie up all Senate business while a Filibuster is in progress. Thankfully that no longer happens.

There is a good chance that Republicans will be in control again after this year's elections. ;)

Democrats also used "obstruction". President Bush's top priority for a second term of Social Security reform is a prime example from the recent past.

This is not new. The opposition to a Filibuster always says the supporters are "abusing the process" and are thwarting the clear will of the majority. Too bad.

Some Democrats have even suggested it is unfair that every state has two Senators regardless of population and would favor constitutional reform, as well of that "undemocratic " concept which tends to favor Conservatives. Like changing the Filibuster that won't happen either.
racehorse
Image

Cynthia Lynn
Pirate
Posts: 2703
Joined: 06-12-2001 02:00 AM

Post by Cynthia Lynn » 02-25-2010 04:10 PM

Cherry Kelly wrote: Cynthia Lynn -- goodness girl did you fail to comprehend I was responding to what racehorse had posted. The dems who were so against this passing bills with 51 votes (senate) and are all NOW for it - in just a few short years.

Of course I've seen GOP do some of the same in the past.

THIS is about health care. This is about the majority of the US citizenry who do NOT want it. (Well if you believe all the major polls.)

Now back to watching the debate or at least listening to whatever you want to call it....


CK, well goodness girl yourself! :D

Uh, I believe I addressed your concerns.

Yes, this is about health care, and I don't personally even like the Dem Senate bill; however, I do believe we should join the rest of the civilized world and make an effort to insure that all our people have access to decent health care!

I personally believe we should have a Canadian-style plan or even better, a plan such as the one France uses. E-gads, huh? I suppose that makes me a Radical Socialist. :rolleyes:

Cynthia Lynn
Pirate
Posts: 2703
Joined: 06-12-2001 02:00 AM

Post by Cynthia Lynn » 02-25-2010 04:16 PM

racehorse wrote: Yes, Maddow thinks this too. That is silly and if actually implemented would tie up all Senate business while a Filibuster is in progress. Thankfully that no longer happens.

There is a good chance that Republicans will be in control again after this year's elections. ;)

Democrats also used "obstruction". President Bush's top priority for a second term of Social Security reform is a prime example from the recent past.

This is not new. The opposition to a Filibuster always says the supporters are "abusing the process" and are thwarting the clear will of the majority. Too bad.

Some Democrats have even suggested it is unfair that every state has two Senators regardless of population and would favor constitutional reform, as well of that "undemocratic " concept which tends to favor Conservatives. Like changing the Filibuster that won't happen either.


Gee, I don't how the Senate got anything done before 1975 with all that filibustering goin' on. :rolleyes:

Can we just agree that all this Hullabaloo is about nothing other than thwarting the Democrats and their agenda.

We had a vote in November of 2008. I think the Dems won.

User avatar
racehorse
Pirate
Posts: 14976
Joined: 01-04-2003 03:00 AM
Location: Commonwealth of Kentucky

Post by racehorse » 02-25-2010 04:22 PM

Cynthia Lynn wrote:
Can we just agree that all this Hullabaloo is about nothing other than thwarting the Democrats and their agenda.


Each of us will decide that for ourselves, just as we do about what is in the best interests of our country. All of us, I think want that.

Great debate, Cynthia Lynn. :)
racehorse
Image

Cynthia Lynn
Pirate
Posts: 2703
Joined: 06-12-2001 02:00 AM

Post by Cynthia Lynn » 02-25-2010 04:28 PM

racehorse wrote: Each of us will decide that for ourselves, just as we do about what is in the best interests of our country. All of us, I think want that.

Great debate, Cynthia Lynn. :)


Touché.

Now back to CNN. :)

User avatar
Rombaldi
Call Me "Hussein"
Posts: 9916
Joined: 09-05-2003 01:03 AM

Post by Rombaldi » 02-25-2010 04:28 PM

Hey Horsey, where is the Filibuster in the Constitution?
Republican - re·pub·li·can (r-pbl-kn) - political party, which will control part of Congress 2011-2012, undermining the strength of the country - on purpose, in public, without apology or shame - simply for a campaign advantage in 2012.

User avatar
racehorse
Pirate
Posts: 14976
Joined: 01-04-2003 03:00 AM
Location: Commonwealth of Kentucky

Post by racehorse » 02-25-2010 04:34 PM

Rombaldi wrote: Hey Horsey, where is the Filibuster in the Constitution?


It is a time honored tradition of the Senate, Rom. ;)

As I recall you joined me in being a big supporter of keeping it unchanged in 2005 when Bill Frist wanted to end it.

You were right then. :eek: :D
racehorse
Image

User avatar
Rombaldi
Call Me "Hussein"
Posts: 9916
Joined: 09-05-2003 01:03 AM

Post by Rombaldi » 02-25-2010 04:55 PM

Wasn't what I asked you Horsey... where is it in the Constitution???
Republican - re·pub·li·can (r-pbl-kn) - political party, which will control part of Congress 2011-2012, undermining the strength of the country - on purpose, in public, without apology or shame - simply for a campaign advantage in 2012.

User avatar
racehorse
Pirate
Posts: 14976
Joined: 01-04-2003 03:00 AM
Location: Commonwealth of Kentucky

Post by racehorse » 02-25-2010 05:00 PM

racehorse wrote: It is a time honored tradition of the Senate, Rom. ;)

As I recall you joined me in being a big supporter of keeping it unchanged in 2005 when Bill Frist wanted to end it.

You were right then. :eek: :D


I did not say it was in the Constitution, Rom.

Neither did you back in 2005 but you still supported it. ;) :cool: :D
racehorse
Image

User avatar
Rombaldi
Call Me "Hussein"
Posts: 9916
Joined: 09-05-2003 01:03 AM

Post by Rombaldi » 02-25-2010 06:17 PM

Then if it's not in the Constitution, the do it the way it's supposed to be done.. stand there and talk., and when you stop talking, we vote. Got any problems with that?
Republican - re·pub·li·can (r-pbl-kn) - political party, which will control part of Congress 2011-2012, undermining the strength of the country - on purpose, in public, without apology or shame - simply for a campaign advantage in 2012.

User avatar
racehorse
Pirate
Posts: 14976
Joined: 01-04-2003 03:00 AM
Location: Commonwealth of Kentucky

Post by racehorse » 02-25-2010 10:29 PM

Rombaldi wrote: Then if it's not in the Constitution, the do it the way it's supposed to be done.. stand there and talk., and when you stop talking, we vote. Got any problems with that?


Only if Democrats want to bring government to a complete halt. As Speaker Gingrich (who is impressing me more and more lately as a potential President) has also noted that is not necessarily a bad option. ;)
racehorse
Image

User avatar
Rombaldi
Call Me "Hussein"
Posts: 9916
Joined: 09-05-2003 01:03 AM

Post by Rombaldi » 02-25-2010 11:55 PM

racehorse wrote: Only if Democrats want to bring government to a complete halt.
You mean like the 290+ billls in the senate that he Grand Obstructionist Party have been blocking??? Obstruction for the sake of obstruction.

Give it up Horsey, your so-called party are worthless liars.
Republican - re·pub·li·can (r-pbl-kn) - political party, which will control part of Congress 2011-2012, undermining the strength of the country - on purpose, in public, without apology or shame - simply for a campaign advantage in 2012.

User avatar
racehorse
Pirate
Posts: 14976
Joined: 01-04-2003 03:00 AM
Location: Commonwealth of Kentucky

Post by racehorse » 02-26-2010 12:12 AM

The American people think otherwise, as you will witness in November. ;)
racehorse
Image

User avatar
Rombaldi
Call Me "Hussein"
Posts: 9916
Joined: 09-05-2003 01:03 AM

Post by Rombaldi » 02-26-2010 12:39 AM

racehorse wrote: The American people think otherwise, as you will witness in November. ;)
You said that in '08 too...
Republican - re·pub·li·can (r-pbl-kn) - political party, which will control part of Congress 2011-2012, undermining the strength of the country - on purpose, in public, without apology or shame - simply for a campaign advantage in 2012.

Post Reply

Return to “Politics and Government 2010-2013”