Senate Democrats threaten to change filibuster rules on a party-line vote

Nov 21, 2013 Full story: Washington Post 252

Senate Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., speaks to the media on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Nov. 19, 2013.

Read more

“My Commander-in-Chi ef!”

Since: Jun 07

Obama got Osama!

#57 Nov 21, 2013
Once again you tea-baggers have to learn the hard way - never bet against Black…
I was celebrating as they reported this great news; another great legacy added to Osama bin Laden and the ACA will be the hundreds of judges that will get lifetime appointments now that Reid has put an end to the right-winger’s obstruction.

Thank God ‘We the People’ elected Obama… twice, LOL!
see the light

El Paso, TX

#58 Nov 21, 2013
Doesn't matter about filibuster. Everyone the Dems nominate is gonna be a criminal. That is the best they can offer. They are bringing their party down and it's enevitable.
see the light

El Paso, TX

#60 Nov 21, 2013
What's funny is that Barak Obama said in 2005 that Republicans shouldnt change the filibuster law cause it would lead to one party ruling. All he needs to admit now, is that he is a DICTATOR.
sandy1

New City, NY

#61 Nov 21, 2013
see the light wrote:
Doesn't matter about filibuster. Everyone the Dems nominate is gonna be a criminal. That is the best they can offer. They are bringing their party down and it's enevitable.
Good! Let them do permanent damage to their corrupt party. They deserve to be brought down once and for all.

Since: Mar 09

The Left Coast

#62 Nov 21, 2013
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>The rule hasn't changed in 200 years......
200 years? And, Obama decided to changed it, because? It was counterproductive to his agenda.(Don't give me the Senate did it -even liberal progressives like you know Reid/Pelosi do exactly what they are told to do) So Larry, I'm hearing a third term for Obama is not out of the question.
socalgawfer

Trabuco Canyon, CA

#63 Nov 21, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
That's before the GOPasaurs left them with no other option.
On the flip side, when the GOPasaurs get control of the Senate in 20-30 years they'll be able to reinstate the filibuster rule so they can keep with their principles.
And you'll notice, I said after the GOP tried the same.
If you believe one party is better than the other, then your
name is perfect
Responsibility

Petaluma, CA

#65 Nov 21, 2013
see the light wrote:
he is a DICTATOR.
Is that straight from Fuyx or Saul? LOLL

You guys are a hoot!

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#68 Nov 21, 2013
RustyS wrote:
<quoted text>
200 years? And, Obama decided to changed it, because? It was counterproductive to his agenda.(Don't give me the Senate did it -even liberal progressives like you know Reid/Pelosi do exactly what they are told to do) So Larry, I'm hearing a third term for Obama is not out of the question.
You just made my day!

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#69 Nov 21, 2013
Coke Kane wrote:
<quoted text>How many times a day do you take it up the pooper Laurie?
Pile of vomit in aisle four!
see the light

El Paso, TX

#70 Nov 21, 2013
Responsibility wrote:
<quoted text>
Is that straight from Fuyx or Saul? LOLL
You guys are a hoot!
Only you idiots listen and learn from Saul.
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

#71 Nov 21, 2013
socalgawfer wrote:
Sorry forgot link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =3GBu6-wMuj0XX
So, let's face it, the repubs tried the same thing to consolidate their power, now the Dems.
Hypocrites, and useless all
Obama, Reid, Biden and Feinstein. Such eloquent and well founded objections to the Reps when they tried to do the same.

How quickly the worm turns, but in this modern day of youtubes and Google, all can see what friggin' hypocrites they are. This rule change is going to bite us all, but it will be biting the Dems soon, unless something drastically changes between now and next November.
see the light

El Paso, TX

#72 Nov 21, 2013
see the light wrote:
<quoted text>Only you idiots listen and learn from Saul.
Are you from Hillbilly country? A HOOT-LOL
Shinichiro Takizawa

Tokyo, Japan

#73 Nov 22, 2013
You are wrong about King, emperor, Stalin, Lenin, communism and Mao.

This story consists of two-parts.

In short,
"Age of Enlightenment" caused American Revolutionary War, French Revolution, etc.etc. cival-power.

[1]
You think that there are generous-Kings and generous-emperors.
But, you are wrong.
World-History proves the failure.
There is NO such generous-Kings nor generous-emperors.

That was called "Enlightened absolutism".
That existed in 18th-century.
And, it failed.

After all, they were dictators and emperors.

Russian-emperor Catherine II loved that idea.
Russia and German were developing-countires in even that era.
Russian-emperor Catherine II loved Voltaire etc.(Social Thought).

Even in that era, British and France had middle-class citizens.

Russian-emperor admired British and France.
She mimicked British and France.

And, she failed, because aristocracy resisted gainst her.

German-emperor (Prussia-emperor) and
Holy Roman Emperor
too did, but failed.

AND, 1870, Japan micmicked Prussia-emperor, and Japan made the military-country.
So, Japan is crazy.
Japan is brainwashing its own people.

And, now, your top1% is doing the same to you.

[1-2]
[Wikipedia]
Enlightened absolutism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlightened_abso...
Enlightened absolutism (also called by later historians benevolent despotism or enlightened despotism) is a form of absolute monarchy or despotism in which rulers were influenced by the Enlightenment.

Rulers associated with enlightened absolutism
Catherine II of Russia
Frederick the Great of Prussia
Joseph II, Holy Roman Emperor of Austria

[1-3]
[Wikipedia]
Age of Enlightenment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlighten...
The Age of Enlightenment (or simply the Enlightenment or Age of Reason) was a cultural movement of intellectuals beginning in the late 17th and 18th century Europe emphasizing reason and individualism rather than tradition.
Its purpose was to reform society using reason, challenge ideas grounded in tradition and faith, and advance knowledge through the scientific method.
The ideas of the Enlightenment have had a long-term major impact on the culture, politics, and governments of the Western world.

Originating about 1650 to 1700, it was sparked by philosophers Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677), John Locke (1632-1704), Pierre Bayle (1647-1706), Voltaire (1694-1778) and physicist Isaac Newton (1643-1727).

The political ideals of the Enlightenment influenced the American Declaration of Independence, the United States Bill of Rights, the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, and the Polish-Lithuanian Constitution of May 3, 1791.
Shinichiro Takizawa

Tokyo, Japan

#74 Nov 22, 2013
[2-1]
As we see till now,
revolution or right of revolution (or right of rebellion)
is done by citizens (or middle-class).

John Locke too admit this.
Roman-Republic too done this.

So, the gap between the rich and the poor must be decreased.
In order ot protect democracy!

In western countries,
democracy is the fight between citizens and Kings and/or the fight between citizens and aristocracy.

[2-2]
[Wikipedia]
Right of revolution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_revolut...
In political philosophy, the right of revolution (or right of rebellion) is the right or duty, variously stated throughout history, of the people of a nation to overthrow a government that acts against their common interests.

[2-3]
[Wikipedia]
John Locke
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Locke
The concept of the right of revolution was also taken up by John Locke in Two Treatises of Government as part of his social contract theory. Locke declared that under natural law, all people have the right to life, liberty, and estate; under the social contract, the people could instigate a revolution against the government when it acted against the interests of citizens, to replace the government with one that served the interests of citizens.
In some cases, Locke deemed revolution an obligation.
The right of revolution thus essentially acted as a safeguard against tyranny.

[2-4]
Buit, in Russia and Soviet-Union and China,
there were (and are?) ONLY emperors, sodiers who protect the emperors and helots (villeinages).

Even Lenin said that
after capitalism, communism would come.

But, there were NO capitalism in SOviet-Union.
There were NO middle-class in Soviet-Union.
There were NO citizens in Soviet-Union.

After all,
Revolution in Soviet-Union and China
were done by helots (villeinages) who could not read nor write.

[3-1]
So, Revolution in western-countries and Revolution in Soviet-Union
were entirely different-thing.

So, Revolution in western-countries and Revolution in China
were entirely different-thing.

So, we need Middle-class in the U.S.
So, we need junior-high-school-education and high-school-education in the U.S.

Soviet-Union and China could NEVER do John Locke (Right of revolution),
because there were (are?) NO middle-class in their countries.

[3-2]
OR.
Do you want to be developing-countries?

So, we must take [2-2] and [2-3].

Soveit-Union and Demcracy (or what you call Left) is entirely different thing.

You are wrong.
Or, you are deceived.
Or, you are liars.

You are wrong.

This is NEVER communism.
This is the DEMOCRACY.

DEMOCRACY and Right of revolution
are based on middle-class and citizenes.

In fact, in Roma-Republic,
citrizens supported DEMOCRACY and Right of revolution.

And, they were soldiers of Phalanx.
(And, so, we Americans have right to bear arms.)

And, so.
when the gap between the rich and the poor increased,
Roman-Republic was destroyed.

So, we Americans must decrease the gap between the rich and the poor only in the U.S. only amopng Americans.

This is NEVER communism.
This is democracy.
In fact, you are destroying democracy.

And, so, top1% are wrong.
Shinichiro Takizawa

Tokyo, Japan

#75 Nov 22, 2013
In short,
In 18th-century, France and British were developed-countries, which had citizens and middle-class.
And, Russia and Germany at that era admired France and British,
and mimicked France and Britis,
but failed.
because there were strong-emeperors and strong-aristocracy in Russia and Germany at that era.

And, Japan mimicked the Germany in 1900.
I cannot understand why Japs think themselves as chosen-people.
I cannot understand Japan.
Shinichiro Takizawa

Tokyo, Japan

#76 Nov 22, 2013
Japs are crazy.
Shinichiro Takizawa

Tokyo, Japan

#77 Nov 22, 2013
Oh, what a great-country our America is!
I love the U.S.! I love Americans!
Jim Shortz

Philadelphia, PA

#80 Nov 22, 2013
Shinichiro Takizawa wrote:
You are wrong about King, emperor, Stalin, Lenin, communism and Mao.
This story consists of two-parts.
In short,
"Age of Enlightenment" caused American Revolutionary War, French Revolution, etc.etc. cival-power.
[1]
You think that there are generous-Kings and generous-emperors.
But, you are wrong.
World-History proves the failure.
There is NO such generous-Kings nor generous-emperors.
That was called "Enlightened absolutism".
That existed in 18th-century.
And, it failed.
After all, they were dictators and emperors.
Russian-emperor Catherine II loved that idea.
Russia and German were developing-countires in even that era.
Russian-emperor Catherine II loved Voltaire etc.(Social Thought).
Even in that era, British and France had middle-class citizens.
Russian-emperor admired British and France.
She mimicked British and France.
And, she failed, because aristocracy resisted gainst her.
German-emperor (Prussia-emperor) and
Holy Roman Emperor
too did, but failed.
AND, 1870, Japan micmicked Prussia-emperor, and Japan made the military-country.
So, Japan is crazy.
Japan is brainwashing its own people.
And, now, your top1% is doing the same to you.
[1-2]
[Wikipedia]
Enlightened absolutism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlightened_abso...
Enlightened absolutism (also called by later historians benevolent despotism or enlightened despotism) is a form of absolute monarchy or despotism in which rulers were influenced by the Enlightenment.
Rulers associated with enlightened absolutism
Catherine II of Russia
Frederick the Great of Prussia
Joseph II, Holy Roman Emperor of Austria
[1-3]
[Wikipedia]
Age of Enlightenment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlighten...
The Age of Enlightenment (or simply the Enlightenment or Age of Reason) was a cultural movement of intellectuals beginning in the late 17th and 18th century Europe emphasizing reason and individualism rather than tradition.
Its purpose was to reform society using reason, challenge ideas grounded in tradition and faith, and advance knowledge through the scientific method.
The ideas of the Enlightenment have had a long-term major impact on the culture, politics, and governments of the Western world.
Originating about 1650 to 1700, it was sparked by philosophers Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677), John Locke (1632-1704), Pierre Bayle (1647-1706), Voltaire (1694-1778) and physicist Isaac Newton (1643-1727).
The political ideals of the Enlightenment influenced the American Declaration of Independence, the United States Bill of Rights, the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, and the Polish-Lithuanian Constitution of May 3, 1791.
I love to have sexy time with asian women
Shinichiro Takizawa

Tokyo, Japan

#82 Nov 22, 2013
Jim Shortz wrote:
<quoted text>
I love to have sexy time with asian women
Yes, I admit that Japanese-women and Japanese-girls may seem .....

http://goo.gl/hCd6Gk
http://goo.gl/7m33za
http://goo.gl/oFRJp3

https://www.google.com/search...
https://www.google.com/search...
https://www.google.com/search...

And, I donot stop them.
I do NEVER care.
Because, I want to be an American.

Yeah, yeah, Kabukicho! Kabukicho!

I DO love the U.S.!

“Moderately yours....”

Since: Aug 12

Buffalo, NY

#83 Nov 22, 2013
Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama, Reid, Biden and Feinstein. Such eloquent and well founded objections to the Reps when they tried to do the same.
How quickly the worm turns, but in this modern day of youtubes and Google, all can see what friggin' hypocrites they are. This rule change is going to bite us all, but it will be biting the Dems soon, unless something drastically changes between now and next November.
In spite of your spasm of partisanship....You are correct...How Our Senators view this issue largely a question of who is in power. If it were President Romney attempting to navagate his nominees and policies through the Senate the song would be the same, only the singers would change. The are about 100 hypocrites on this issue in the Senate.
I think that every nominee the President sends up should be certain of an up or down vote after a hearing. In particular are those offices, like cabniet posts that are vacated when the President leaves office. In these posts the President aught to get their choice unless 51 Senators disagree. The need to have a fillibuster proof nominee for each and every post is just obstruction for it's own sake. After all the nominee will leave that post with the President
I think the only thing that should be subjected to filibuster is legislation

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

John McCain Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News 1 dead and 5 wounded in Mesa, Arizona; suspect ... Mon ZonaBound 9
News 'Llama drama' owners say USDA draws line agains... Sun ima-Ilis Myka Ash... 1
News Bergdahl trade criticism to top Sunday talk sho... (Jun '14) Sun Le Jimbo 240
News In Feingold loss, his base turns on its own (Nov '10) Sun Fat for me 75
News Obama: Bergdahl 'was never forgotten' (May '14) Mar 27 ima-Ilis Myka Ash... 103
News Warren: Ted Cruz has no shot to be prez, but is... Mar 26 woodtick57 42
News Cruz opposes U.S. 'boots on the ground' now to ... Mar 25 swedenforever 32
More from around the web