Skip to comments.
Some Democrats Want To Modify Filibuster Rules [Translation: Dems Want One-Party Rule]
LATimes ^
| January 09th 2010
| Janet Hook
Posted on 01/09/2010 8:42:57 PM PST by Steelfish
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-62 next last
1
posted on
01/09/2010 8:42:58 PM PST
by
Steelfish
To: Steelfish
Democrats are funny - they never think the laws they enact will EVER BE USED AGAINST THEM...
2
posted on
01/09/2010 8:46:34 PM PST
by
2banana
(My common ground with terrorists - they want to die for islam and we want to kill them)
To: Steelfish
Let’em change. It will make it that much easier for President Palin to ram through her agenda in 2013.
3
posted on
01/09/2010 8:47:06 PM PST
by
Lou Budvis
(She never bankrupted Alaska or bowed to royalty.)
To: Steelfish
Time for the Gutless Old Party to “reach across the aisle” and beg the dems for some playing time.
4
posted on
01/09/2010 8:47:26 PM PST
by
353FMG
(Save the Planet -- Eliminate Socialism)
To: Lou Budvis
“Letem change. It will make it that much easier for President Palin to ram through her agenda in 2013.”
If that happens it would be an Act of God. Since Gov Palin is a believer, who knows.
5
posted on
01/09/2010 8:50:06 PM PST
by
Fee
(Peace, prosperity, jobs and common sense)
To: Steelfish
The irony was that talk radio called for republicans to do the same for judges make it 51, if they did Health Care Reform would be passed last July. Because the moderates (RINOs) Gang of 14 stopped it, they had to get 60 for health reform. Moderate democrats wont dare change the rule now.
I thought talk radio was right at the time but they were wrong.
6
posted on
01/09/2010 8:50:22 PM PST
by
sickoflibs
( "It's not the taxes, the redistribution is spending you demand stupid")
To: Steelfish
One word.
Political commercial.
Wait, okay, that's two words...
Still, this is good stuff for the 2010 elections (and this is 2010).
.
7
posted on
01/09/2010 8:51:25 PM PST
by
Seaplaner
(Never give in. Never give in. Never...except to convictions of honour and good sense. W. Churchill)
To: 2banana
That isn’t true.
When it appears that it will be used against them, they scream about how unfair it is that it will be used against them.
They always want it both ways. When they are the majority, they are for the tyranny of the majority. When they are the minority, they are for the tyranny of the minority.
8
posted on
01/09/2010 8:52:21 PM PST
by
Secret Agent Man
(I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
To: Steelfish
It is not the 60 Dem votes they have now. It is the 60 Dem votes they are not going to have after the Massachusetts special election.
9
posted on
01/09/2010 8:58:10 PM PST
by
gov_bean_ counter
(Sarah Palin - For such a time as this)
To: Secret Agent Man
And they will change it back whenever it suits them.
10
posted on
01/09/2010 8:58:29 PM PST
by
Luke21
(USA RIP)
To: 2banana
Democrats are funny - they never think the laws they enact will EVER BE USED AGAINST THEM... Maybe they figure that with their plan to steal elections they'll never have to worry about that.
11
posted on
01/09/2010 8:58:29 PM PST
by
Bernard Marx
(I donÂ’t trust the reasoning of anyone who writes then when they mean than.)
To: 2banana
12
posted on
01/09/2010 9:03:08 PM PST
by
freekitty
(Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
To: Luke21
Just look at all the rationalization and obvious double standards they’ve done regarding Ted Kennedy’s seat.
13
posted on
01/09/2010 9:03:48 PM PST
by
Secret Agent Man
(I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
To: Steelfish
Unless the GOP grows a pair, that’s what’s gonna happen.
14
posted on
01/09/2010 9:04:10 PM PST
by
rbosque
(11 year Freeper! The real reason the left wants to disarm us is becoming clearer.)
To: sickoflibs
The irony was that talk radio called for republicans to do the same for judges make it 51, if they did Health Care Reform would be passed last July. Because the moderates (RINOs) Gang of 14 stopped it, they had to get 60 for health reform. Not quite. The proposed rule change dealt solely with the President's appointment power and the Senate's advise and consent role. It did not pertain to legislation.
The Gang of 14 thus has nothing to do with the healthcare debate.
15
posted on
01/09/2010 9:05:04 PM PST
by
okie01
(THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
To: gov_bean_ counter
We need eight more Senators -- and having Texas insist on compliance with the 1845 admission promise of being able to split into four more states for a total of five Texas states would do that. We would have ten Senators from Texas with five Texas states -- West Texas, South Texas, East Texas, North Texas, and Central Texas.
To: okie01
Yes quite!
If Republicans changed the rule to pass Bush’s judges using 51 votes instead of 60, then the democrats on the gang of 14 would not have an argument against calls from the liberal house members to change it to pass health reform WITH a public option now.
In fact this is just what McCain warned of at the time. Not a McCain fan but right is right,
17
posted on
01/09/2010 9:20:11 PM PST
by
sickoflibs
( "It's not the taxes, the redistribution is spending you demand stupid")
To: BuckeyeTexan
To BuckeyeTexan, please ping your Texas list for the above suggestion of gaining eight more Senators from Texas by dividing Texas into five States.
Even Snopes agrees that it can be done.
Claim: A clause in the document annexing Texas to the United States allowed for Texas to be divided into five different states.
Status: True.
Congress on 1 March 1845, which included a provision allowing Texas to be sub-divided into up to four more states with slavery being banned in states carved out of Texas territory north of the Missouri Compromise line and left up to popular sovereignty in states formed south of the line.
To: Aroostook25
No thanks on splitting Texas, personally I prefer secession.
To: She hits a grand slam tonight
“I am going to Texas and y’all can go to hell” - Davey Crockett to the US Senate.
20
posted on
01/09/2010 9:32:13 PM PST
by
Illuminatas
(Being conservative means never having to say; "Don't you dare question my patriotism")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-62 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson