SCREW McConnell-DESTROY the filibuster option.
Yes, it is a Salon article, but it reflects my opinion 100 percent. At this juncture, the Republicans and the Right are to get NOTHING. No peace in our time.
https://www.salon.com/2021/01/22/mcconn … ull-swing/
1. Barack Obama had hardly taken his oath of office on January 20th 2009, before "Machiavelli" Mitch McConnell pledged that he was committed to making him a one term President. That translated to obstructing Obama at every turn. And looking back over the Obama years, I would say his naivety in attempting to accommodate the ruthless GOP Right was his biggest mistake. But, not so THIS TIME.
2.Mitch is notoriously duplicitous, who NOW talks about power sharing when he never considered the concept when he and the loathsome Republicans dominated the Senate.
3. The people have spoken in giving the Dems the majority in the Senate and the House along with the gavel, I want President Biden to successfully roll out his agenda with all deliberate speed and without obstruction.
4. These are critical times and for effectiveness all of the Trump nonsense needs to be rescinded without delay. That also mean that the blue dogs and DINOs need to get in line.
5. I and the majority of the voters want Mr. Biden to succeed in repairing the Trump train wreck. And if that means running down McConnell with the political equivalent of a Mack Truck, then so be it.
Elizabeth Warren says that she has had enough of Mitch McConnell, and so have I.Even though I knew better, I did read your link. I thought the best description of the author's perspective was in her listed credits
"Amanda Marcotte is a senior politics writer at Salon and the author of "Troll Nation: How The Right Became Trump-Worshipping Monsters Set On Rat-F*cking Liberals, America, and Truth Itself."
Then, your opening line wiped out any focus on McConnel's action, (which if true, sorry I don't trust your author's word for it), is a crappy and counter-productive move.
You set the tone with this:
"Yes, it is a Salon article, but it reflects my opinion 100 percent. At this juncture, the Republicans and the Right are to get NOTHING. No peace in our time."
[WARNING: ATTEMPTED SARCASM ALERT]
You go guy! They did it so now you get to do it. It's like math; a minus times a minus = a positive. Proof that two wrongs do make a right. An eye for an eye, right? Who cares if the whole world ends up blind, at least you, (Democrats and Progressives, now, maybe Republicans and conservatives later?), will have your revenge.
[END ATTEMPTED SARCASM ALERT]
Geesh Cred, we have lived the results of this type of attitude for most of our adult lives, and you haven't learned a damn thing.
I am not asking you, (Democrats and Progressives), to "take the high road," or "turn the other cheek," I am just asking that you do what is right for our nation, not for your petty power-drunk desire for punishment or revenge.
Why is your only possible choice the elimination of a tool that is a minority group protection? Why not beat McConnel at his own game?
Are you convinced there is no Parliamentary Procedure tool the Democrats can use? Sounds weak to me. What about calling his bluff? Your author noted that his actions would tarnish the public's view of the new administration because they would be seen as not getting anything done. Doesn't that blade cut both ways? Don't you think the public would see the truth of McConnel's anticipated action if a filibuster was all over the daily news every day, with Democrat speakers explaining why they were where they are? I think that would be effective for a majority of the public.
You guys are looking like a team that can't win playing by the rules, so you demand that the rules be changed. Double geesh.
GA1) Do you think that the filibuster drives compromise, as the article says is argued by two senators who want to keep it?
2) How is changing the rules not playing by the rulres, if it is within the rules that they can be changed?
3) if the filibuster is eliminated by Democrats, then it could be reinstated by Republicans when they are back in power if they truly think it is a fair and valuable tool. Otherwise, they will use its absence to move their agenda forward without fear of obstruction from Democrats, right?
Given how Congress has been operating recently, I see this as a way forward to get things done. If Democrats are able to more freely implement their agenda, people will more clearly see what Democrats do or don't do for the country. To me, this is a good thing. Either people will like what the Democrats do with their majority, or they won't, but at least their agenda will be given a fair chance. If people are not happy with it, they ca n vote them out in four years and it will be the Republicans turn to show what they can really do.1) Yes
2) Like changing horses in mid-stream?
3) Sounds like Cred, "You did it so I can do it too."
GAYes, it was. But I felt it appropriate. For me, the situation is a simple one. For the Democrats, if you can't get what you want playing by the rules, simply change the rules.
I don't agree with that, and it doesn't take a lot of words to say so.
Think back on which party uses this tactic—the Democrats. Back in 2013, Reid used it when he changed the rules for nominee confirmation to a simple majority. And it came back to bite him in the butt relative to SCOTUS nominees.
When they have the power they bulldoze legislation through, regardless of minority opposition, (think Obamacare, which most knowledgeable folks admit was a flawed program), and when they don't have the power to steamroll their legislation they want to change the rules.
The filibuster has a history going back to 1850, (thanks Google), and since that time the Democrats didn't have a problem using it for their benefit. It was also a Democrat that argued against Henry Clay's threat to do away with the filibuster in our early days.
Now, once again, the Democrats are crying about opposition to their plans. Well, duh! That is the structure of our government. Neither party gets what they want just because they want it.
Cred's post comments are an excellent example of why this is as it should be.
"At this juncture, the Republicans and the Right are to get NOTHING. No peace in our time."
The minority party is not just a turd to step on. Minorities have Rights too. Unless of course, you are not in a minority—as the Democrats see themselves now.
So there you go. A lot more words saying the same thing as my previous "lame" reply. Was this reply any better? I don't think so.
GAMy, my, did you feel so offended by the majority stepping on the minority with Mitch at the helm? I seem to recall you defending his right to obstruct even considering the appointment of Merrick Garland.
And, yes, the beauty of a rule change is that it applies to everyone. I don't see Congress functioning effectively under the current rules. Perhaps a change is in order. And, yes, that change will eventually benefit the Republicans.You recall wrongly. I criticized the Garland obstruction at the time, and after the fact—regarding the Republican's last nominee.
If it is worth the effort I am sure those comments can be found in the forum archives. You will find that I thought Kavanaugh's nomination was tainted and that because of their Garland proclamations they should not approve the Barrett nomination.
As for Mitch, what rule change did he propose?
GA
GA, I agreed with the article position and content. My Dems don't have the time or luxury to pussyfoot around or to make irreparable mistakes at the outset.
Your missing it, who said anything about revenge? Biden has a one time shot to show that he can "build back better" and in all fairness since he won the election and the Democrats control the Senate, he should be given a wide berth to initiate his plan.
If he failed because of GOP obstruction and parliamentarian BS, the President, his administration and the Democratic controlled congress will be held to blame. And that is what Mitch is hoping for and a outcome I want to avoid even if it means dispensing with McConnell's political power and influence.First, it was; "At this juncture, the Republicans and the Right are to get NOTHING. No peace in our time."
. . . and now it's . . . .
". . . the President, his administration and the Democratic controlled congress will be held to blame. "
. . . whining.
You seem to have a low opinion of your fellow citizens. They can see progression but they can't see obstruction. Is that your position?
GAWhining?
I have a low opinion of Republican members of Congress. Do you really think that most people are going have the patience to see obstruction for what it is? People are only looking at who is in charge and what is holding up the remedies. Don't you think that McConnell is well aware of that and would use it to discredit Democrats by 2022 and get the Senate control back?
"People are Dumb"
Dutch Schultz, 1934I seem to recall a long post from GA describing a nephew-in-law who believes election fraud occurred, at least in part because he didn't take the time to watch or read the news and only saw what appeared in his Facebook feed. So, will this guy, and others like him, recognize obstruction? I think probably not.
I was just thinking about that very post which was directed to me. Most folks are apolitical and can not appreciate the finer points of the political games being played. People are only interested in results, not excuses. There is too much riding on the Biden agenda to have it side lined before it even can start.
I remember GA admitting that he did not like the way McConnel controlled the Senate as majority leader. So, is there any reason to allow him to continue in the capacity as the real guy behind the curtain while the Democrats are just figureheads?
It is BS to say that only Democrats change the rules, GA can be very accommodating to Republicans whose behavior over the last year was deplorable and that includes Mitch McConnel who will do whatever it takes, rules or no rules, to stay in power. That's a nonstarter and I won't have it.
Winning elections has it rewards and benefits, a fact Republicans have employed at every point when they had the advantage."Most folks are apolitical and can not appreciate the finer points of the political games being played."
Well damn, why do we even let them vote? (I have a long-handled shovel, (only slightly used), if you would like to borrow it.)
You can easily show my bias in accommodating the Republicans Just show their past 'rule-change-to-get-what-they-want' efforts.
However, you are right about my opinion of McConnel. I would rank him right up there with Schumer.
GA
And that is your view of the American public? Only the smart and involved ones know what is best for all of them?
Would that be only enlightened Democrats, or will some "smart" Republicans also see what is really going on? What about us Independents, do we have the involvement to recognize achievement and obstruction?
Of course, those deplorable Trump supporters could never recognize the difference. Bless their hearts.
Damn, I am beginning to appreciate my lowly non-educated position in life. I wouldn't know what was good for me if I didn't have y'all to help me out.
GANo, that is not my view of the American public, that was your description of some people who believe the election was stolen. I only brought it up to respond to your comment: "I do think they will see obstruction as clearly as they see accomplishment."
I never said or even implied that only the smart and involved ones know what is best for all of them." And I think you know I don't believe that. I do believe a growing number of people are having difficulty discerning what is true and what is manufactured. Our current media landscape makes it much harder than it used to be.Okay. Maybe I was a bit harsh. I can go with your "what is true and what is manufactured" thought.
And whether they are Republican or Democrat I can agree that many voters are only going to see what they want to see. But I cannot agree that the majority of citizens won't recognize the difference between obstruction and accomplishment. I will not validate politics as beyond the understanding of the general public.
I think Gingrich and the Republican disaster of 96-98 proves that. As well as the public's blaming of the Republicans for the 2013 government shutdown.
GAI am not maligning the intelligence of people. You admitted the case about your nephew in law and me about my mom. They are not dumb people, they are engaged in other matters.
It is only Rightwingers that think that people have to be "smart enough" to vote. The right to vote belongs to everyone who is a citizen and over 18."It is only Rightwingers that think that people have to be "smart enough" to vote. The right to vote belongs to everyone who is a citizen and over 18."
Okay, I am going to end my night with this one bud. My jaw dropped when I read your comment.
"only Rightwingers that think that people have to be "smart enough" to vote."
And it is only Democrats that think voters can't tell the difference between obstruction and accomplishment. And only Democrats that think they must do what is best for the voters because they don't know what is really best for them.
Geez Louise, what a comment to end the night on.;-0
GAI think he is referring to actual attempts by Republicans to require passing "tests" to be able to vote. I am unaware of such attempts by Democrats.
This is true, conservatives have always been the biggest on literary tests.
Is there any difference? Republicans want smart voters, (the obvious implication is that the voters aren't smart), and the Democrats don't trust the voters to know the difference between progression and obstruction, (an equally obvious implication the voters aren't smart).
GA
Alright, I will throw you a turnip
Perhaps, the only way to avoid dispensing with the filibuster option is that the Dems have to win more than 66 percent of the seats. That would express a more unanimous attitude toward a change in direction. As it is now, the numbers support only a tepid movement away from the Trump policies.
I am not relieved, because inaction when there is not consensus from 66 senators will simply mean that nothing gets done, as Republicans are and will be obstructionist, to a man or woman.
Good point about Gingrich and the 2013 shutdown. Hmmm, I might have to concede on your point about the public being able to see obstructionism for what it is, BUT I will point out that disinformation is much more prevalent than it was just eight years ago.
Like credence, though, I still don't want Mitch and the Republicans continuing to block any legislation that isn't a tax cut for the wealthy. I've had quite enough of that, thank you. And, by the way, we and 81 million others voted for Democrats so they could actually do something positive. Let's let them try.Thank you, Panther. Sitting on the Biden agenda legislation means nothing is getting done. Passing "muster" with Republicans could well mean no action at all.
I don't want just another Republican administration in every way except the fact that I now longer have to look at Trump's ugly mug,That works for me. Hopefully what they try to do will be positive. But like Cred with the Republicans. . . I will be watching.
GA
. . . and I have a low opinion of many members of Congress—with no party affiliation driving that view.
Yes, I viewed your quoted comment as "whining." It sounded like a kid saying, "I won, why can't I have what I want?" Is that really how you want a government of 300+ million people to work? Majority rules, the minority be damned!
If your "wants" can't stand the challenge of obstruction, then maybe they aren't the right "wants."
But, I will toss you a carrot. Our politics suck. The political machinations of both parties are often more harmful than helpful, and the will of the people too often suffers for it, but that is our structure, and it has worked for over 200 years.
Both parties have tried political shenanigans such as your desire to do away with the filibuster, but fortunately, for our nation, Congress generally accepts that we have rules for a purpose.
And once again, I don't share your low opinion of the intelligence of the general public. I do think they will see obstruction as clearly as they see accomplishment.
Your Shultz quote is appropriate. But you should consider which "people" we are talking about in this discussion.
GAGA, the people had made a choice, allowing Republican approval,whose has voted to a man in the past to obstruct Democrats, is not a wise way to build back better. I want Biden to succeedand having a handful of obstinate Republicans sit on every Biden legislative goal to the point where nothing gets done at all is not the reason I voted the way I did..
Yeah, rules are there for a purpose, as long as Republicans are not held to that standard. In this political mileau, it is either kill or be killed and I did not vote for Biden so that he and our agenda were to be the victims.
The nostalgia about bipartisan approaches to arrive at legislation has gone by the wayside. That is just an unfortunate reality of politics within the last 20 years.
I get it, you don't trust Democrat policies and feel the need for Republicans to pour cold water on everything. Well, I don't trust Republicans period, and Joe Biden will need to show me that he is prepared to nudge a bit further left to impress me. We have differing goals and objectives, I understand as we can never be on the same plane, really.You only 'half get-it' bud. You are right that I don't trust many Democrat policies. And I do want the Republicans there to make sure only the most survivable policies get through . . . but I also want Pres. Biden to succeed. I also want his good-for-the-nation policies to succeed. Our nation desperately needs a successful presidency.
But, that doesn't mean I want the Democrats to have carte' blanc. If their policies can't survive the gauntlet, then they probably aren't the right policies.
As for your "unfortunate reality of politics within the last 20 years." that is what must be changed first, and I don't think your demonstrated attitude or that of the Democrats proposing eliminating the filibuster is helpful at all. Both are just a continuation of the same ol' same ol'
How about we both root for Pres. Biden's declarations that he is the president for all of us and will work across the aisle with Republicans and Democrats. How about we root for that kind of change—a little less of the same ol' same ol'?
GAI've been rooting for that since....forever.
Yeah, I know what you mean. Instead, we have been seeing things appearing to get worse.
I have heard many political historians say our modern times 'ain't nothing, you should look at our early history of politics'. Well, I suppose that is something . . .
GA
I concur, I think we witnessed what trying to be considerate, and working within the established decorum got us back in 2008-2016.
I remember back in 2015-2017 telling you to be patient, many times over, the pendulum would swing, and it has.
And now, every effort must be made to ensure the Republicans and the likes of Trump and those who avidly supported him never have the opportunity to gain control again, they must not only be silenced, they must be removed from positions of authority, removed from the body politic in its entirety.
And until the likes of Schumer and Pelosi are considered our extreme right wing element in this country, they have not gone far enough.Yes, the pendulum may have changed, but GOP obstruction which is as certain as a sunrise puts a damper on that pendulum's movement.
The Republicans have a right to partipate in the political process as the Democrats do. But, when you lose, you lose.
There are still quite a few points well to the "right" of Polosi and Schumer
before I could even consider them "rightwing".
The bright side will be if Trump can start his Patriot Party, the GOP can actually dilute itself.....I doubt there will be a Patriot Party, and if so it won't live long.
The GOP acts as obstructionists just like the DEMs act as obstructionists.
What you fail to realize, is this is exactly as it is intended to be.
So that people like you, avid supporters of one side/party can blame the other side... and not the Government/Congress itself.
This is how they promise people to do away with NAFTA, but never do.
This is how they promise to rid us of the ACA, or fix it so that it actually works for ALL Americans, but it never gets done.
Ultimately it is the corporations and banks and wealthy 1% that continue to get all the breaks, receive all the bailouts, get funded all those trillions in stimulus funds... while the people get nothing more than a pittance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYS647HTgks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzQYA9Qjsi0
I can see you are passionate about all you have stated. Not even going to attempt to respond. I will give you all the time and space you need to enjoy this wonderful afterglow moment. Hey, it's only fair.
But, Amanda Marcotte? Come on, she is a foul mouth sensationalist, trying to get her 15 minutes with her far-left ideology pieces.
In regard to Mitch, I think he should have retired long ago. I am for term limits all for bringing in some young fresh faces, with fresh ideas. This was one of the things I liked about Obama when he was running the first time around it was one of the ideas he ran on. He endorsed term limits and railed against careerism in Congress. However well you know, once he was in office --- never heard about it again.Yes, I am worked up over these issues as I have participated with Stacy Abrams of Georgia to bring out the Democrat voters in the state.
Amanda is the left's equivalent of Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, etc, who I consider vulgar at face value.
The afterglow won't last long if Republicans can stimie the progress and the plans to build back better, the party will be over.
We may agree that there may be a reason for term limits, to break up these "empires" that so many legislators have created.Yes, the Filibuster will certainly prevent measures from being brought to a vote by means of obstruction. It's been a problem for most administrations. But it also is a safeguard. It works in preventing one party from fundamentally reshaping America in a drastic manner.
It can work to check the rash and radical impulses of the majority, to prevent the “tyranny of the majority of either party. Also, it promotes a focus on building consensus and crafting legislation that in the end hopefully appeals to the broad spectrum of Americans.
Now, this is just my opinion, I think it is obvious the country is very split right down the middle. We have two sides with totally different ideologies and, and many different ideas on what direction we hope to see the country go... Our society has become like vinegar and oil.
The left’s extremist agenda does not sit well with a huge number of citizens. Perhaps the Filibuster will work as it was meant to and used to craft legislation that in the end will appeal to the broad spectrum of Americans.
Good read. Thanks.
(I did indulge a little pat on the back because I did know the filibuster wasn't an original Constitutional implement, and I was aware of the circumstances of the 1917 cloture Rule. But the Aaron Burr "mistake" detail was news)
GAThanks for posting, I have a new found respect for the idea. But the structure only guarantees that Biden's agenda would be unacceptably compromised to the point that we begin the day with a series of broken promises and commitments.
- PrettyPantherposted 3 years ago
0I see a lot of overreacting from right-leaning folks here on the forums. Of course, I realize that is how you viewed our reaction to Trump and Mitch. I don't think you can rationally deny that Mitch is a master obstructionist whose primary focus is obstructing Democrats and retaining power. So, your viewing Democrats in the same light is not surprising.
I just want something to get done. If the Democrat policies are as awful as you believe they are, then their implementation will doom their chances for re-election.
On the other hand, if they get the pandemic under control, get the economy back on track for low-income workers, take steps to finally address climate chage, and repair our relations with other nations, then we all benefit.
I'm so over Mitch. He is not the majority leader any longer and that should be reflected in how Congress operates from this point forward.
Related Discussions
- 72
First Successful Legislative Filibuster Mounted By the GOP Minority
by Sharlee 3 years ago
The GOP Held Strong Using The First Filibuster To Stop The Democrats Cold In Their Tracks May 28, 2021 --- "Senate Republicans on Friday halted an effort to form a bipartisan Jan. 6 commission to investigate the Capitol attack, marking the first successful legislative filibuster...
- 32
Bad Day For Biden His Voters Right Act Appears To Be Dead In The Water
by Sharlee 2 years ago
Biden’s promise to update Voting Rights Act hits Senate roadblockPresident Joe Biden's campaign promise to update the Voting Rights Act has hit a roadblock in the Senate today, threatening a key campaign promise made by Biden about civil rights.Biden's live statement to press --- ...
- 38
Should Ds Filibuster Gorsuch or Wait For the Next Nominee?
by Scott Belford 7 years ago
My thought is No, they should go ahead and filibuster Judge Gorsuch now and not wait. The fear of filibustering now is that the Rs might use the "Nuclear Option" - using a simple majority to change Senate rules to eliminate filibustering for Supreme Court nominees; just as Democrats...
- 26
The GOP is Blocking the Ability to Pay for Their Own Debts
by J Conn 3 years ago
Democrats have the votes to raise the debt ceiling with a straight up and down vote. The GOP chose to filibuster the ability to raise it. This is not about future spending, this is about paying for the debts already incurred, including the $7.8 trillion added while they had control of...
- 116
Danger: Biden's Presidency akin to the Weimar Republic redux?
by Credence2 10 months ago
I was disturbed by an article I had recently read. The main theme emphasizing similarities between the current administration and the period during the 1920's after WWI and before the deluge of Hitler's ascendency in Germany. Yes, the article is from Salon but its content is still food for thought....
- 37
A clean sweep. The big Trifecta. Republicans win the House!
by Tim Mitchell 4 weeks ago
Republicans win House in major boost for Trump's agenda by BBC (Nov 14, 2024)https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2n9g21xqyoOr, pick and choose. Google landing page for search phrase, 'Republican win House'https://www.google.com/search?client=fi … win+house+A surprise?Thoughts, criticisms,...