Skip to main content

View Diary: Harry Reid just earned himself a Democratic primary challenger in 2016 (60 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  thank you! the short-sightedness of people (3+ / 0-)

    who don't see the reality in front of their eyes is really frightening.

    nothing is guaranteed - especially after the fiasco of 2010 and the recent taking of so many statehouses during a census year.

    redistricting has made our job 1000x more difficult in 2014.

    i, too, am glad the filibuster has not been eliminated.

    •  It's not short-sighted (13+ / 0-)

      If Republicans take majority they have the power to change the filibuster if they want to. Us not changing it doesn't in any way guarantee that it will be in tact when/if Republicans are in charge. This was an opportunity for us to actually get something done and it didn't happen. The lack of reform does not in any way protect us from a future Republican majority.

      •  these diaper pissing sell outs cause thug wins - (0+ / 0-)

        sunlight kicks off photosynthesis

        sell outs, dressed up as 'compromise' by the condescending, by the politically stupid, and by the yuppie sell out scum of the DLC Blue Dog Turd Way ...

        sell outs kick off apathy and create 2010, create rich walker scott brown scott palin perry newt mitt.

        screw harry


        Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous

        by seabos84 on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 06:00:42 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  The Republican filubuster CAUSED 2010 (7+ / 0-)

      They deliberately obstructed everything Obama tried to do in his first two years, which killed popular enthusiasm for his agenda.

      Their ability to gum up the works also helped energize the teabaggers.

      The rest is miserable history.

    •  As if Republicans (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Would not use that "majority" to effectively neuter the Dem minority if they could.

      Had McConnell been majority leader against Reid's obstruction - the Filibuster would be finished.

      "Short Sightedness" to me is only thinking one move ahead, and playing "defense" with a defeated party -that should be running for the hills.

      That said - adding the requisite to make it a "talking" filibuster was the plan, in other words make the people's "employees" explain themselves in public for their obstructionist nonsense ... this was never about getting rid of it all together.

      The Octogenarians couldn't stomach the idea of actually having to "stand" for something - so now they will fall for anything ... the Senate is a joke, our own "House of Lords". And their perceived "nobility" has gone to their heads.

      If not us ... who? If not here ... where? If not now ... when?

      by RUNDOWN on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 06:35:05 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You forget they tried to do that already (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Back in 2004. It failed badly, and of all people it was us liberals who opposed them.

        Republicans are far more socialist than Democrats. Just because they want to redistribute the wealth upwards does not make it any better.

        by MrAnon on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 08:22:53 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Only Democrats care about setting precidents (0+ / 0-)

          The GOP does not, just like the executive over reach of the 'Dubya administration.

          Yes, Dems could very well find themselves in a minority in the future, but what does that have to do with restoring the talking filibuster?

          Politicians who wish to "hide" from the people - I don't care what party they are from - they have no business, doing the people's business, out of sight of the people.

          That defeatist attitude seems to be all too common amongst liberals in general.

          If not us ... who? If not here ... where? If not now ... when?

          by RUNDOWN on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 10:37:42 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site