Obama Backs Harry Reid’s Efforts To Change Senate’s Filibuster Rules…

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Stephanie, Nov 28, 2012.

  1. Stephanie
    Offline

    Stephanie Diamond Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2004
    Messages:
    70,236
    Thanks Received:
    10,818
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +27,360
    link to article at site

    SNIP:
    Because every wannabe dictator needs a rubber stamp politburo.

    Via WaPo:


    President Obama supports Senate Majority Harry Reid’s efforts to reform the filibuster, a White House spokesman said Wednesday.

    “The President has said many times that the American people are demanding action,” White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer told The Huffington Post. “They want to see progress, not partisan delay games. That hasn’t changed, and the President supports Senator Reid’s efforts to reform the filibuster process.”

    all of it here with comments
    Obama Backs Harry Reid’s Efforts To Change Senate’s Filibuster Rules… | Weasel Zippers
     
  2. g5000
    Offline

    g5000 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2011
    Messages:
    56,168
    Thanks Received:
    9,359
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +24,612
    Just like Dictator wannabe Bush wanted in 2005.

    Cheney Enters Filibuster Fight, Backing Change in Senate Rules






    What we have here today are raging hypocrites on both sides of the aisle.

    .
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. Dot Com
    Offline

    Dot Com Nullius in verba Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    49,403
    Thanks Received:
    7,547
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Fairfax, NoVA
    Ratings:
    +16,297
  4. Stephanie
    Offline

    Stephanie Diamond Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2004
    Messages:
    70,236
    Thanks Received:
    10,818
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +27,360
    SNIP:
    FLASHBACK: Reid Says Effort to Curtail Filibuster ‘Is About the Arrogance of Power’




    November 27, 2012

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). (AP Photo/Harry Hamburg)


    (CNSNews.com) -- In 2005, then-Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said that a plan by Republican Senate leaders to end the use of filibusters against presidential judicial nominations demonstrated "the arrogance of power."

    “Rather than changing the Senate rules, shouldn’t we be concerned about the largest deficits in the history of the world?” Reid asked at a March 15, 2005 event entitled “Rally to Save the Courts.”


    “This is not about judges, it’s about the arrogance of power,” Reid said.

    On Jan. 4, 2005, at the start of the 109th Congress, then-Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn) expressed support for changing Senate rules related to judicial nominations if Senate Democrats continued to filibuster President George W. Bush's judicial nominees.

    all of it here
    FLASHBACK: Reid Says Effort to Curtail Filibuster
     
  5. kiwiman127
    Offline

    kiwiman127 Comfortably Moderate Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2010
    Messages:
    8,422
    Thanks Received:
    2,581
    Trophy Points:
    315
    Location:
    4th Cleanest City in the World-Minneapolis
    Ratings:
    +3,848
    I think it's hilarious that the GOP is whining about any changes with the filibuster rules. They were for it before they were against it. That seems to be their MO. It just signals that they just want to continue getting nothing done.
     
  6. eflatminor
    Offline

    eflatminor Classical Liberal

    Joined:
    May 24, 2011
    Messages:
    9,261
    Thanks Received:
    1,401
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,073
    From the founding of America until 1917, the minority in the Senate, no matter how large the majority, could stop bills from becoming law by debating them as long as they wanted. Just one guy could do this. This was what the founders intended.

    In 1917, the Senate implemented Rule 22; they went from having NO ability to forcibly end debate to requiring 66 votes to end debate.

    Then in 1975 it was lowered to 60 votes and now 51 with the use of "Reconciliation".

    We have gone from a Republic with a Senate that was sure to do its job by ensuring no unlawful bills became law to a Democracy in which the majority rules. Democracies always end up as tyrannous Oligarchies...always.
     
  7. kiwiman127
    Offline

    kiwiman127 Comfortably Moderate Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2010
    Messages:
    8,422
    Thanks Received:
    2,581
    Trophy Points:
    315
    Location:
    4th Cleanest City in the World-Minneapolis
    Ratings:
    +3,848
    Yup, Reid was against it before he was for it. :lol:
    I just love the Washington Circus run by the clowns of both parties. (OK, I'm lying) When is America going to get a clue?
     
  8. Dot Com
    Offline

    Dot Com Nullius in verba Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    49,403
    Thanks Received:
    7,547
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Fairfax, NoVA
    Ratings:
    +16,297
    yep. They want to continue stonewalling. ESPECIALLY since they don't have to talk the whole time like they used to have to under the old rules. Now they just say- "I object" then get on a jet & leave town.

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tp15QDPVgg0"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tp15QDPVgg0[/ame]
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2012

Share This Page