Posted on 01/22/2013 2:41:23 PM PST by Sub-Driver
“Am I right on this?”
Except for the fact that they would need 67 votes to override a veto.
“I read that the GOP’s problem is that they want to be LIKED by Democrats and the press. They’re fools.”
More like a one legged man in a ass kicking contest.
What a *blankety-blank-blank-blank*
Boehner to Reid: Anything that comes to the House as a result of your nuclear option is DOA and will never make it to the floor.
My thoughts too. he nailed it!
I guess being liked is more important than being honorable and honest.
To the DC critters it is.
Give the Democrats the exact opposite of everything they want.
Disgusting is too polite of a word for these monsters.
A) Make him do it, and B) Send Rubio, Lee, Johnson, Scott, and Cruz out on the media circuit right afterwards. Enough with the Sunday morning geezer club (McConnell, McCain, etc). Get strong, likable young leadership out front.
Great plan but I think this is a bluff. I don’t see the dems going bat crap crazy before the midterms. Note the kenyan did back down a tad on gun control after all the hysterical rhetoric.
Now after 2014 it will be Katy, bar the door and the dems will try to cram down everything on their marxist agenda.
We'll see if he can get away with it.
RIGHT.
You know....I was listening to Rush or Beck today... hard to say I had a lot of clients to see today...
but somewhere in there somebody was discussing the “give up” to the democrats and just sitting back and letting them own the whole damn thing...
they wont’ negotiate, they won’t compromise...right?
there’s a bunch of low information voters that need to ‘wake-up’
And ya’ know ...there is the old saying...
“Give’em enough rope to hang themselves.”
It is an option I really haven’t thought about much.
I agree.
It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity.
It is when we all play safe that fatality will lead us to our doom.
It is the "dark shade of courage" alone that will allow their spells to be broken.
Someone please explain the “nuclear option.” Does this simply mean breaking the rules to make new rules?
Don’t worry the Republicans will do what Harry says.
At the start of every new Congress, it's SOP for the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader to meet and negotiate the Rules of Procedure that will govern that particular Congress.
There is an assumption that such negotitations will take place in an atmosphere of good faith and mutual respect.
However, if one of these parties is Harry Reid, the assumption ceases to be valid.
That's illegal?
... except on a measure or motion to amend the Senate rules, in which case the necessary affirmative vote shall be two-thirds of the Senators present and voting ...
I'd like to see him pull the trigger on the cloture rule, which has been abused mightily for about a decade.
Reid's plan differs from the GOP plan of about eight years ago, in two respects. The GOP plan was to limit modification to the cloture process to those instances where the issue was a judicial nominee; and the GOP mechanism was to get a ruling from the chair on that narrow (judicial nominee) point, allowing a simple majority to overcome the minority veto commonly referred to as "filibuster" (using the rules to delay decision).
Reid may be planning to get a ruling from the chair that allows simple majority rewrite of the rules at every start of a Congress, each two years. Who knows, the fellow is a few bricks shy of a full load, and lies like a rug.
Let them do it. They will regret it.
my thoughts exactly, would not be tragic if DC gets nuked
let him try it. it will be fought in court. never before, no precedent, ignoring existing senate rules.
imagine obama, democrat leadership, libtard press, if republicans were attempting the exact same thing.
you know they’d be calling for republican senators’ heads. that repubs weretaking over the governent.
but when socialist democrat libtards do it, no concern , no peep out of the press.
We can hope, can't we?
Nope. It was only threatened to be used for Judicial appointments that the Progressives refused to consider. Nothing else was on the table.
imagine obama, democrat leadership, libtard press, if republicans were attempting the exact same thing.
If the Senate rats do this, they will blame the GOP because they are not being bipartisan or whatever. Then their presstitutes will happily carry the meme to the American people.
Any change of the rules by majority will set the precedent.
Reid has 30 or 40 members who really want this, newer members and members who came up through the House, or are deeply indebted to special interest groups- or to Obama’s machine.
He’s got about a dozen who don’t want to lose the power the present system gives individuals or don’t want to tarnish their ‘moderate’ ‘bipartisan’ patina.
I don’t think he can do it, or can afford to. Though it would give him more power personally.
The Senate rules have been changed by a simple majority, but that was early in the history of Congress; like about 10-15 years in. The "unlimited debate" paradigm came about when the motion to call the question was eliminated in, IIRC, 1804. That rule change was adopted by a simple majority.
The Senate is a truly dysfunctional body. Congress has run the country into the ground. There isn't enough shame and opprobrium in the universe to give Congress the legacy it has earned itself.
I quit watching the Senate close, about 4 years ago. I suspect you are correct that he doesn't have a simple majority to go along with his plan to toxify the body.
FUHR to der Fuhrer
“his plan to toxify the body” or ‘de-toxify’?
The Senate’s problem is that it’s a ‘federalist’ body in a centralized media world. The national media can change a Senate race by ten points.
The Senators’ special privileges are those of representatives of the parts of the republic- the states- in a world where states no longer matter. What matters is only what the national networks say matters.
If he makes a radical change in the operating parameters, he will create hard feelings.
Although, on reading the article, it appears he has his sight set pretty low, just to eliminate the right to object to bringing a bill up for debate. Objectors retain the right to object to voting on the bill (or amendment), so can still stall implementation.
and then filibuster it.
Tell that old goofball to shut up!
Reid...You’ve got a deal..just DO YOUR JOB AND CREATE A BUDGET!
HA! HA! HA!
They can get away with all this stuff, because the media has become completely, openly, a propaganda arm of the liberal democrats. Unless the Repubs figure out how to defeat the liberal media, they are going to lose.
THEY get a debt increase IF IF IF the Dems do a budget...very different game the Reps are now playing...ha. ha.
You are missing the NEW game the Reps are playing.They said”ok on increase, but Reid you have to do a Budget.” which puts it all on the Dems. now.
Yeah, if he can get a little something he can save his hotheads from themselves.
And McConnell should use this to drive a wedge between the liberal and the crazy-liberal factions of Reid’s caucus by offering only a pittance. But he’s McConnell (I started to write “McClellan” LOL!
they ARE refusing to negotiate...they are saying “YOU do the budget and we will talk.”
The collapse of the United States will happen sooner than later.
Why do not the Senate republicans just walk in mass every time there is a vote. Nothing can be passed as there needs to be 60 votes. The 51 votes may not be enough so the Democrats cut their own throats.
perhaps some kind soul could summarize what
Reid would have for the Senate.
for example, (Reid wants) would filibusters be changed to
old-fashion, standing, reading the phone book?
or would filibusters be eliminated?
or something else?
..................
if Republicans don’t like what Reid does,
they should stop cooperating on routine matters,
ask for quorum calls at 4 in the morning, etc
But not as they go, and not when it suits them.
Don't they vote on a rules package at the start of the Congress, and then operate under those rules for the whole session?
How can anyone plan a strategy when the rules change whenever the ball-owner decides?
What are they playing over there, Fizzbin? Cups?
-PJ
It would be stupid to shelve the filibuster when you don’t hold the House. You might as well wait and see who wins in 2014. If you take the House THEN you deep six the filibuster.
I don't remember that. Do you have any links?
Look this is simple. There are 2 choices and only 2.
1. Make Reid do it and hope there is a backlash. With congressional approval where it is I would not count on it. As far as sending people out on media tours the Dems have a larger megaphone at the moment.
2. Negotiate a watered down version and get what you can. Obviously in the end this sucks but might beat the alternative.
That's my thought too - given that the GOP holds the House, this only matters on issues where the Senate votes alone, i.e. judicial nominations. That's important of course (that's why the GOP tried to change the rules a few years ago), but it's an interesting precedent.
If the Dems nuke the filibuster, with the only real legislative advantage being a few judicial nominees, then they lose all leverage to complain in 2015 if the GOP takes the Senate and keeps the Dem rules.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.