Do you think changing the filibuster rules was the right thing to do for our future?

[LoneLaugher]

It would be nice if at least a few nutters would make an attempt to understand exactly what was done yesterday.

A complete 180 degree turn by the democrats was done yesterday.

Does anyone really need to go dig up quotations from democrats, about the sanctity of the rights of the minority, when they were blocking Bush 43 nominees?

No. How about just telling us what is different between the use of the filibuster now and the use of it when the Democrats were in the minority? Be honest about this.

 

[Sherry]

It would be nice if at least a few nutters would make an attempt to understand exactly what was done yesterday.

A complete 180 degree turn by the democrats was done yesterday.

Does anyone really need to go dig up quotations from democrats, about the sanctity of the rights of the minority, when they were blocking Bush 43 nominees?

No. How about just telling us what is different between the use of the filibuster now and the use of it when the Democrats were in the minority? Be honest about this.

How many nominations has Obama made, and how many have been successfully blocked?? Be honest about this.

 

[Sallow]

This is a very sad day for America. This undermines everything our Founders intended. I don't care about political party or scoring political points. This is a very, very bad thing.

If this was what the founders "intended" why isn't it in the Constitution?

This was done, by the way, by Aaron Burr. Who basically has about the same standing as Benedict Arnold.

 

[JakeStarkey]

We don't need any neo-cons, dems or pubs, in the Senate.

Hate to break it to you, but the republican caucusses, in both houses, up to and including the leadership, are loaded down with them. But I suspect you already knew that.

Helena, neo-cons exist among the Dems as well.

 

[G.T.]

Yes. It brings us one step closer to civil war. Let's just get it done already Why wait for Obama and Soros to tank the US dollar?

You aren't fighting anyone man, stfu



I voted yes.

 

[FJO]

The question in the OP can be answered honestly and with validity only by Senator Philip Buster.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yes. It brings us one step closer to civil war. Let's just get it done already Why wait for Obama and Soros to tank the US dollar?

You aren't fighting anyone man, stfu



I voted yes.

True because if it were up to me it wouldn't even be much of a war, you just need to eliminate a small handful of the real leaders and not trained monkeys carrying out the orders

 

[Polk]

I don't think the filibuster should exist in the first place.

 

[Freewill]

I voted YES absolutely yes. Because now when the democrat party becomes the miniority they can whine all they want but it was THEY and Dirty Harry who pulled their dirty trick. I can't wait for it to back fire on the thieving democrats. It will be great to hear their howl of protest when Republicans use it against the democrats. But you know what I bet the democrats are so low of beings that if they do get kicked to the curb they will change the rule back as lame ducks. Then if the Republicans try to change it back they will cry foul. That is how low the democrat party really has sunk.

But I look at this scumbag move with great joy, although I don't believe that is what they should have done. I look at this way. Everything a liberal ever does the opposite happens from the stated intent. So this too will follow suit and the Republicans will gain greater power over the Democrats and they will pee their panties like little girls.

More wishful thinking from the Pubs

That they have a hope of taking the Senate

Have you actually looked around lately? The rich are getting richer and the poor poorer. But the liberal left could care less. I am not sure what makes democrats so sure they are not threatened nothing is right in the country. Even if it were right the political worm turns every so many years. People get tired of the same party controlling things and after 7 disastrous democrat controlled years it is about time.

What we all should fear is that the democrats will use this to open the candy store buying as many votes as they possibly can.

 

[Freewill]

I don't think the filibuster should exist in the first place.

I thought liberals were all about protecting the minority, guess not.

 

[thereisnospoon]

In a democracy the majority rules with obvious minority input, that the republicans tried only to block our democratically elected president and not accomplish a damn thing, YES, IT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. Time America did more than just whine. You guys keep whining - time and change come, sometimes slowly. Hurrah again for Harry Reid.

When Conservative Republicans get the Majority, we will accept nothing less than the Unconditional Surrender of the Statists to our complete agenda

Doing nothing but whining - how will that be an agenda?

Obama wanted a rubber stamp for his socialist agenda. He thinks he has it.
Oh, he will go on and appoint radical leftist people in to the federal bench.

And legislators on your side have already acknowledged this is a very high risk move.
There are many vulnerable democrats in the mid terms.
All this did was further polarize the Senate.
Where you libs go the idea that the legislative branch exists to do the bidding of the President is a mystery.
Your side will pay dearly for this indecency.

 

[thereisnospoon]

It would be nice if at least a few nutters would make an attempt to understand exactly what was done yesterday.

Explain it to us.

 

[HelenaHandbag]

It would be nice if at least a few nutters would make an attempt to understand exactly what was done yesterday.

A complete 180 degree turn by the democrats was done yesterday.

Does anyone really need to go dig up quotations from democrats, about the sanctity of the rights of the minority, when they were blocking Bush 43 nominees?

No. How about just telling us what is different between the use of the filibuster now and the use of it when the Democrats were in the minority? Be honest about this.

No difference. Except that the republicans didn't change the rules because they didn't get their way.

No, they engaged in some of that deal cutting and compromising thing that all the democrats are so enamored with, as long as it's the opposition doing the compromising.

Were the democrats as willing to deal and compromise, a-la the gang of 14 in 2005, they would have tossed a few token nominees overboard (see: Luttig, Owen and Rogers Brown) to secure the approval of the rest. But the democrats aren't interested in compromise. They want it all and they want it right now, just like the tantrum-throwing spoiled little brat children that they are.

 

[thereisnospoon]

If I were a talented political cartoonist, I would draw a cartoon with a Harry Reid like image representing the Democrats, being bit on the ass, titled "Unintended consequences in the future" and then republish it when the future, when the time comes, titled "I told you so!".

Is he being bit on the ass by a real-life Kentucky talking turtle?

Proof once again that those on your side have nothing but rhetoric and insults.
There is nothing here for your side except "yippie, WE WON!"..
Won? Won WHAT?
If this were a poker game and your side was short stacked, do you think you could simply change the rules because you were losing?
The sad part is Senators on your side have declared they can change the rules of the Senate any time they wish because they are in the majority. Essentially, they have made a statement. That statement is that there are no rules. They have stated that if they cannot have everything they want, they will change the rules to ensure they do get everything they want. From this day forward, no democrat ever again dare say a WORD about bipartisanship.
Nice going. Tragic.

 

[BDBoop]

I was going to vote yes, but I cannot deny my love for lamp.

 

[thereisnospoon]

My question that no one wants to answer is this:

If the party that holds both the Presidency and the majority in the Senate should not have the right to appoint and approve judges of their choosing...

who should?

Someone should be able to do it. Someone should have the power to get the job done.

Who?

The problem occurs when the majority party chooses people who are so far to one side of the political spectrum or so unqualified yet have ties to the President( patronage appointment) that there is no way the minority party will put up with it.
The filibuster was put into place to give fair representation to the minority party. It was also put into place to make sure the Executive Branch would not be able to wield power to the extent of usurping the Legislative Branch.
The democrats in the US Senate have taken that away. This is an unprecedented and very dangerous decision. It also ensures States with Senators in the minority party have ZERO representation in Washington.
Ask yourself....Is this the kind of government you really want? Where some states have no voice just because those voters did not kowtow to the wishes of the majority?
Imagine NY, MA,CA. NJ, CT and other traditionally Blue states with no representation in the Capitol? Come Jan of 2015, this is a real possibility.
Guess what? No crying. Your side has made their bed. Now you must sleep in it.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I don't think the filibuster should exist in the first place.

I thought liberals were all about protecting the minority, guess not.

Only if the members of that group agree with them.
Example, look at how they react to people like Thomas Sowell, Dr. Benjamin Carter, Condee Rice and Justice Clarence Thomas. All prominent black people. All conservatives. All have been vilified and pilloried by the lib media and opposed by democrats. Why? Because libs cannot stand people who think for themselves.

 

[Jarlaxle]

A complete 180 degree turn by the democrats was done yesterday.

Does anyone really need to go dig up quotations from democrats, about the sanctity of the rights of the minority, when they were blocking Bush 43 nominees?

No. How about just telling us what is different between the use of the filibuster now and the use of it when the Democrats were in the minority? Be honest about this.

How many nominations has Obama made, and how many have been successfully blocked?? Be honest about this.

If I recall what I heard on the radio yesterday: 210 and 3, respectively!

 

[rightwinger]

I don't think the filibuster should exist in the first place.

Which is what it all comes down to

It was a simple custom which allowed a Senator to hold the floor. It evolved into a tool in which a 60 vote majority was required in the Senate

It has exceeded it usefulness

 

[DiamondDave]

No... new legislation, new powers, new expansion, etc SHOULD BE HARD TO ACCOMPLISH