Let the Games Begin

[whell]

Originally Posted by merrylander

That is really a cople of senators plan, names escape at the moment. About time those dumbass rules were changed, I gather they also want to eliminate the anonymous hold by a single senator and make things more transparent. Isn't transparency what the GOP has been yammering about for the last two years?

No, that was Obama's campaign promise. Just more BS as it turned out.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

No, that was Obama's campaign promise. Just more BS as it turned out.

Both parties want the other party to be transparent, not their own.

As for the current filibuster rules, they absolutely need to be changed. I'm no fan of Harry Reid, but I wish him all the luck in the world with this.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

As for the current filibuster rules, they absolutely need to be changed. I'm no fan of Harry Reid, but I wish him all the luck in the world with this.

Why the need to change?

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Why the need to change?

When one anonymous Senator can stop legislation in its tracks without identifying who he is or even needing to go to the floor to articulate his objections, I think it's problematic. Filibusters were designed as an outgrowth of the desire to allow unlimited debate on the Senate floor. Fine - but at least identify yourself and debate issues on their merits.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

When one anonymous Senator can stop legislation in its tracks without identifying who he is or even needing to go to the floor to articulate his objections, I think it's problematic. Filibusters were designed as an outgrowth of the desire to allow unlimited debate on the Senate floor. Fine - but at least identify yourself and debate issues on their merits.

Since when do Democrats invite debate of issues on the merits? Certainly hasn't been what this last session of congress was about. Fillibusters are part of the poker game that is politics, and allows the minority to register some level of restraint over single party rule in one or more houses of congress.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Since when do Democrats invite debate of issues on the merits? Certainly hasn't been what this last session of congress was about. Fillibusters are part of the poker game that is politics, and allows the minority to register some level of restraint over single party rule in one or more houses of congress.

... and is that a good thing? I've long felt that the way the filibuster was implemented was an anachronism, without regard to which party was doing it.

I'll readily agree that Ried's timing may be suspect. That said, anytime is a good time to rationalize this silly rule.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by whell

Since when do Democrats invite debate of issues on the merits? Certainly hasn't been what this last session of congress was about. Fillibusters are part of the poker game that is politics, and allows the minority to register some level of restraint over single party rule in one or more houses of congress.

As near as I recall it was the party of NO that fillibustered so that debate would not take place. Fine, as long as the senator from the minority party wants to stand on the floor and harrangue the senate as a whole during debate, let that stand, but at least debate the issue.

I sometimes wonder if the Framers knew what they were doing.

[merrylander]

Hypocrisy thy name is Cantor, I see by the WashPost that Cantor says the people have spoken and the Adminstration and the Democrats must cooperate with the GOP. Funny, I thought the people also spoke in 2008 but did the GOP cooperate?

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by merrylander

Hypocrisy thy name is Cantor, I see by the WashPost that Cantor says the people have spoken and the Adminstration and the Democrats must cooperate with the GOP. Funny, I thought the people also spoke in 2008 but did the GOP cooperate?

The trouble is that this maroon actually seems to believe it. There's a fine line between hypocrisy and delusion that I think he's crossed.

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by merrylander

Hypocrisy thy name is Cantor, I see by the WashPost that Cantor says the people have spoken and the Adminstration and the Democrats must cooperate with the GOP. Funny, I thought the people also spoke in 2008 but did the GOP cooperate?

Did Cantor read the polling data that says the people still trust the Democrats more than the Republicans? Did he see that Obama's approval is rising, and that he is considerably more popular than Congress? If the GOP's entire focus is undoing things rather than doing things, Boehner will have another reason to cry in two years. Maybe one thing that the Democrats should learn from the past election is that the voters aren't all that interested in looking behind them, even if it is relevant. That doesn't make a rehash of the entire healthcare debate a winning issue.

Regards,

D-Ray