Skip to main content

View Diary: What stands in the way of "forcing" a filibuster? (251 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Excuse me, but (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SoCalSal

    Change the rules of the senate now = refusal to work in a bipartisan fashion.

    Fine by you and me but anathema to the electorate.

    "I want my America back!" -- But, which America is that?

    by alliedoc on Sun Feb 21, 2010 at 06:46:35 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Actually I'm not so sure the voters would care. (11+ / 0-)

      The voters say they like bipartisanship, sure, but they like results even more.  I'd like to see the question asked in polls, do you value results or bipartisanship more?  I bet you'd see a lot more 'results'.

      I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken. - Oliver Cromwell

      by Ezekial 23 20 on Sun Feb 21, 2010 at 06:48:47 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  According to Ezra Klein on Olbermann this (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Gorette, Naniboujou, Mistral Wind

        week.  After the letter came out, he called senate offices of the signers and they said they were "afraid" because the message from Massachusetts was that we need more bipartisanship.  I totally don't get it but that is what he said.  And, I am still screaming at the Economist who blamed Obama for lack of bipartisanship.  yes, I know it is the Economist but I used to learn something when I read it.

        "I want my America back!" -- But, which America is that?

        by alliedoc on Sun Feb 21, 2010 at 06:56:38 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Heh. (12+ / 0-)

          Well, again, what Klein was talking about was the perception of Congresscritters as to what the voters want, based upon one election.  And we know that no matter what message is sent in such a case, the message Dems actually hear is 'run to the right'.

          I honestly think the vote there was far more local politics than any referendum on HCR.  Coakley ran a bad campaign, and got whacked for it by the voters.

          I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken. - Oliver Cromwell

          by Ezekial 23 20 on Sun Feb 21, 2010 at 07:04:01 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  How convenient an interpretation. (7+ / 0-)

            Again they get to blame the voters instead of themselves as they sell out to lobbyists and corporate interest.  

            They're asking for another four years -- in a just world, they'd get 10 to 20. ~~ Dennis Kucinich

            by dkmich on Sun Feb 21, 2010 at 07:11:48 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Their interpretation? (15+ / 0-)

              Yes, the interpretation that 'voters want bipartisanship' is convenient for those who want Dems to move right.

              It's the stupid 'myth of the middle', that people actually want something 'in between' Dem and Republican ideas, even when, as some pundit put it, Repubs want anthrax and broken glass for dinner, and Dems want spaghetti.

              I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken. - Oliver Cromwell

              by Ezekial 23 20 on Sun Feb 21, 2010 at 07:20:01 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Great example of this is HCR (10+ / 0-)

                The public wants certain things. They don't get that so they dislike the bill while continuing to like certain things like the public option. We are told by DC "oh the public hates the public option or is uncertain about it because look at the polling numbers for hcr." When in fact one number has nothing to with the other. What the HCR is showing is not that people care about process, but that they care about how the bill will affect their  lives. They don't want something in between the GOP and Democrats. In some cases, they want what the GOP has to offer, and in other issues, they want what the Democrats have to offer. You can not pull a Solmon splitting of the baby as a way to address that. You have to accept that they want the public option but not the excise tax. But DC follows its own logic, so they end up with a bill with the excise tax that the public hates, while leaving out the public option that the public loves because dc is using process to obscure accountability while the public remains concerned with the policies that will affect them directly.

                •  Very, very well put. (5+ / 0-)

                  "Bipartisanship" is an inside-the-Beltway obsession to which both parties pay lip service.  When the GOP is in power, "bipartisanship" means twisting Democratic arms to vote for Republican initiatives. When the Democratic Party is in power, "bipartisanship" is the desperate hope that a largely imaginary center can legislate to the right of the stated positions of the Democratic Party.  The former form of bipartisanship is less illusory than the latter; with the notable exception of the Bush tax cuts, the last administration usually got a good chunk of the Democratic caucus voting for its most odious laws.

                  The difference between the two forms of bipartisanship has to do with at least two factors: 1) we don't have a center-right country, we do have a center-right political class that dominates our punditocracy; 2) the folks paying the piper in the Democratic Party are more at odds with the party's electoral base than the folks who fund the GOP are with its base.  Many Democrats want to be "forced" to move to the (perceived) center, and bipartisanship forms a kind of frame for this move.  There are a few issues about which the GOP does this (i.e. abortion....they're happy to nibble around the fringes of reproductive freedom, but they will never pass the Human Life Amendment that the Christianists want), but the Democrats--especially in the Senate--do this on issue after issue: EFCA, the PO, our various wars, etc. etc.

                  Meanwhile, outside the Beltway, people are less ideological, support a mix of the positions of the two parties (not the same thing as supporting the center on anything necessarily), and want, most of all, to see s**t get done and our lives improved.

                  Stop Obama's Wars Now! Bring the Troops Home!

                  by GreenSooner on Sun Feb 21, 2010 at 08:00:23 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

    •  The problem we're seeing with 'bipartisanship' (8+ / 0-)

      is that, like so many things today, the facts don't matter.  In our Fair and Balanced national dialogue, it only takes one side to pull the pin on the grenade and then the whole body gets blamed for the 'partisanship.'  Witness jerkwad Evan Bayh scoring, 'moderate' points for slamming the whole Senate.  If he was being honest and saying 'Republicans aren't acting in the best interests of the country when they simply block all efforts at reform to try to gain political power."  THAT'S what is happening.  But if he described it then he wouldn't be Fair and Balanced and he would just be jammed into the 'partisan' box by the press.  The very paradigm that pretends to demand results from congress is also what makes it so easy and profitable for the Republicans to behave in a completely destructive partisan manner.  

      You hold out your hand and it gets bitten.  If you try to point this out you get lumped in with the one who bit you.  

      I only go to Huffpo for the uh, er, articles.

      by Sun dog on Sun Feb 21, 2010 at 06:58:53 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  What electorate? (7+ / 0-)

      The ones that are making disapproval numbers skyrocket, or the ones that voted for fundamental change?  If you think anybody thought "change" meant making nice with the people who destroyed our economy and lied us into two wars at the expense of reform, then I have no clue which country your electorate lives in.

      They're asking for another four years -- in a just world, they'd get 10 to 20. ~~ Dennis Kucinich

      by dkmich on Sun Feb 21, 2010 at 07:09:33 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Good point you are making: (0+ / 0-)

        If you think anybody thought "change" meant making nice with the people who destroyed our economy and lied us into two wars at the expense of reform...

        And it's funny thinking about how various GOP say now of Obama, "Is that change?" or "How do you like that changey thing..." --as if they thought change would be good.

        Change and bipartisanship agreement are incompatible.

        I really don't understand how bipartisanship is ever going to work when one of the parties is insane. - John Cole

        by Gorette on Sun Feb 21, 2010 at 08:40:24 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Bullshit. The electorate does not care about (9+ / 0-)

      your process issues.

      I really  wish some of you would read polls rather than repeat talking points. No one gives a shit about how DC does what it does so long as the policies that come out effect their lives positively. It is at the level of policies being effective and helpful that most voters interactive with our government.

      to say other wise, is to live in the land of DC delusional. No one gives a shit about politics because they already assume you are not going to be accountable and assume you are not going to produce policies that will help their lives.

      The process is an excuse for you, but not for them.

    •  based on what evidence? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ferg, GreenSooner, bruh1

      Electorate cares about results.  They could care less about process.  This is the fundamental error Democrats continue to make.

      Republicans talked about up or down votes endlessly.  It had ZERO impact on their electability.

      "Just today, Senator McCain offered up the oldest Washington stunt in the book - you pass the buck to a commission to study the problem." Sen. Barack Obama

      by justmy2 on Sun Feb 21, 2010 at 07:40:00 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (148)
  • Community (68)
  • Elections (34)
  • Media (33)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (31)
  • Environment (30)
  • 2016 (29)
  • Culture (29)
  • Law (29)
  • Civil Rights (28)
  • Science (25)
  • Barack Obama (25)
  • Hillary Clinton (24)
  • Climate Change (23)
  • Republicans (23)
  • Labor (23)
  • Economy (20)
  • Marriage Equality (19)
  • Josh Duggar (19)
  • Jeb Bush (18)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site