Skip to main content

View Diary: Reid sets up next move in filibuster fight (47 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Do it. (15+ / 0-)

    If the Dems. don't. The repugs. will do it anyway, next time they are in control. Mark my word.

    •  That's what I don't understand. This rule is... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ferg, Eman, Eric Nelson, northerntier

      GOING to change at the first chance a Republican President get's the majority.  The R's haven't adhered to ANY of the old rules since President Obama was elected.  This is not your grandfather's republican party.  It's obvious the President's domestic agenda is not going to happen.  He needs to start appointing these judges.  Change the filibuster to 57 and 53 for judges.  Simple as that.

      •  Yep (5+ / 0-)

        That's the thing. It will happen if McConnell is ever majority leader. It will happen in a heartbeat.

        "The NSA’s capability at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything. [...] There would be no place to hide."--Frank Church

        by Joan McCarter on Thu Nov 07, 2013 at 03:34:00 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I'm not sure it is going to change (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        WillR

        Too many Republicans value being obstructionists to give up that weapon easily.  Just as the resistance here is coming from Democrats who are considered to the left the party's center, I think there will be stronger opposition than you expect from the more conservative edge of the Republican caucus.

        •  Remember, Lindsay Graham has pledged to block ALL (0+ / 0-)

          of O's nominations until he gets something or other that he wants. All of them, for all bodies.  If he does this, the fight over the rule will be on.

          As to the DC Circuit, the Rs are already with mud on their faces, given the horrendous opinion cranked out by one of their judges just this last week as to why a pair of shareholders in a corporation should have the right in the name of the corporation to assert religious objections to buying ACA policies including contraception which the shareholders object to, for employees of the corporation. This is the opinion which tried to sustain the shareholders' lawsuit because the corp. which could not itself HAVE religious views which it separately could exercise, was a subchapter S so that the shareholders would have to write the checks or some such. Of course, the Rs love having this judge having maximum control over Federal agencies.

        •  They only value it when it is beneficial (0+ / 0-)

          to them.  They can change it while in the majority and change it back if it ever looks like they will lose the majority.  How many people pay attention to process?  Most folks don't understand WHY votes aren't happening they just know Shizz is not getting done.  Thus the blame both sides meme.

      •  why not get rid of it altogether? n/t (0+ / 0-)

        Join the War on Thinking. Watch Fox News- John Lucas

        by Jlukes on Thu Nov 07, 2013 at 09:57:32 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site