SCREW McConnell-DESTROY the filibuster option.

Jump to Last Post 1-3 of 3 discussions (43 posts)
  1. Credence2 profile image80
    Credence2posted 12 months ago

    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 These are critical times and for effectiveness all of the Trump nonsense needs to be rescinded without delay.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.

    1. GA Anderson profile image89
      GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      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.

      GA

      1. profile image0
        PrettyPantherposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        1) 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. GA Anderson profile image89
          GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          1) Yes

          2) Like changing horses in mid-stream?

          3) Sounds like Cred, "You did it so I can do it too."

          GA

          1. profile image0
            PrettyPantherposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            That was a lame response. ;-)

            1. GA Anderson profile image89
              GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              Yes, 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.

              GA

              1. profile image0
                PrettyPantherposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                My, 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.

                1. GA Anderson profile image89
                  GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  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

      2. Credence2 profile image80
        Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

        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.

        1. GA Anderson profile image89
          GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          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?

          GA

          1. Credence2 profile image80
            Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

            Whining?

            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, 1934

            1. profile image0
              PrettyPantherposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              I 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.

              1. Credence2 profile image80
                Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                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.

                1. GA Anderson profile image89
                  GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  "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

              2. GA Anderson profile image89
                GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                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.

                GA

                1. profile image0
                  PrettyPantherposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  No, 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.

                  1. GA Anderson profile image89
                    GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    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.

                    GA

            2. GA Anderson profile image89
              GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              . . . 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.

              GA

              1. Credence2 profile image80
                Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                GA, 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.

                1. GA Anderson profile image89
                  GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  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'?

                  GA

                  1. profile image0
                    PrettyPantherposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    I've been rooting for that since....forever.

    2. Ken Burgess profile image91
      Ken Burgessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      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.

      1. Credence2 profile image80
        Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

        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.....

        1. Ken Burgess profile image91
          Ken Burgessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          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

    3. Sharlee01 profile image83
      Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

      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.

      1. Credence2 profile image80
        Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

        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.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

          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.

  2. profile image0
    PrettyPantherposted 12 months ago

    This is interesting.

    The History of the Filibuster

    1. GA Anderson profile image89
      GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      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)

      GA

    2. Credence2 profile image80
      Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Thanks 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.

  3. profile image0
    PrettyPantherposted 12 months ago

    I 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.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)