Reply
Thu 31 Oct, 2013 12:27 pm
New York Times reports:
Senate Republicans on Thursday blocked the confirmation of two of President Obama’s nominees, one to a powerful appeals court and another to a housing lending oversight post, setting up a confrontation with Democrats that could escalate into a larger fight over limiting the filibuster and restricting how far the minority party can go to thwart a president’s agenda.
The Senate voted 55 to 38 to move forward with the the nomination of Patricia Ann Millett to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, four votes short of the 60 required to break the Republican filibuster.
The vote to advance the nomination of Representative Mel Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, to become the head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency was 56 to 42, four votes short. Forty one Republicans opposed Mr. Watt, two supported him.
Some pundits suggest this may lead to consideration of amending the filibuster rules for the Senate. For a variety of reasons, I kinda hope not.
But...
@Frank Apisa,
Me too Frank though for reasons diametrically opposite
For instance I envision dominance of the Tea Party, a majority bill outlawing the morning-after pill, defining its use as murder
@dalehileman,
dalehileman wrote:
Me too Frank though for reasons diametrically opposite
For instance I envision dominance of the Tea Party, a majority bill outlawing the morning-after pill, defining its use as murder
Maybe no so "diametrically opposite", Dale!
@dalehileman,
dalehileman wrote:
In what sense Frank
Because I also fear what you fear...those guys taking over. I'd like to be able to ride herd on them if they do.
@Frank Apisa,
Frank forgive an old Average Clod but I assumed the conclusion to your OP a leaning in the cons' favor but now I see you mean that you wouldn't favor weakening the filibuster,
in spite of its rejection of our libs' candidates
@dalehileman,
dalehileman wrote:
Frank forgive an old Average Clod but I assumed the conclusion to your OP a leaning in the cons' favor
Not sure of what you are saying here, Dale.
My feelings are that changing the filibuster rules may work to stop this nonsense from the Republicans for now...but there may come a day where those rules are needed to stop some of the nut-cases on the right from pushing through some of the crap they are trying to push through.
@Frank Apisa,
Yea Frank, where the confusion arises is my terrible habit of amending a posting during which time another participant is responding
@Frank Apisa,
What do you know Frank. Those on the right feel the same exact way. Stopping some of the nut cases on the left from pushing through some of the crap they are trying to push through.
I'm happy you know that the political waves can shift. Some of those on your side of the fence don't think they will ever shift again.
@Baldimo,
Baldimo wrote:
What do you know Frank. Those on the right feel the same exact way. Stopping some of the nut cases on the left from pushing through some of the crap they are trying to push through.
I'm happy you know that the political waves can shift. Some of those on your side of the fence don't think they will ever shift again.
They'll shift...they always do. Anyone who thinks they won't is making a bad estimate. That is why I suggest everyone be careful of what they wish for.
@Frank Apisa,
As long as we have our guns we dont need no fuken judges. We'll just stand our ground.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace