PDA

View Full Version : The Filibuster, should the rules be changed?



Robot Jesus
26th November 12, 04:59 AM
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/84195.html?hp=f2

As I see things the filibuster was supposed to be a very annoying protest, but has become a way for a losing party to sabotage the winning one.

Syntactical Disruptorize
26th November 12, 05:20 AM
Which you somehow only care about when you don't like the losing party.

Why does it never occur to people like you that you may soon be the losing party again? Or will your outrage then be focused on the loss of this fundamental right, conveniently forgetting that you yourselves demanded its disappearance?

Go read some remedial economics for that other thread and shut the fuck up.

nihilist
26th November 12, 06:20 AM
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4062/4464222264_63cfc280d9.jpg

Spade: The Real Snake
26th November 12, 08:02 AM
Why does it never occur to people like you
By "people like you", of course you are meaning "Canucklestanians with no stake in the AMERICAN political process", correct?

Robot Jesus
26th November 12, 01:31 PM
Which you somehow only care about when you don't like the losing party.

Why does it never occur to people like you that you may soon be the losing party again? Or will your outrage then be focused on the loss of this fundamental right, conveniently forgetting that you yourselves demanded its disappearance?

Go read some remedial economics for that other thread and shut the fuck up.

no one is talking about eliminating the right to filibuster, only to make it require effort on the part of the person filibustering. You can't deny that the record number of filibusters in the last four years is abusing the rules as they exist.

nihilist
26th November 12, 01:42 PM
The Repugs used the right to filibuster in an attempt to make it look like Obama was completely ineffectual as a president by blocking every piece of legislation offered.

The difference between R and Ds, is that Rs know how to wield power and coagulate like a giant cheese curd to either roll over the competition or block the colon of shit getting done.

Spade: The Real Snake
26th November 12, 02:38 PM
The Repugs used the right to filibuster in an attempt to make it look like Obama was completely ineffectual as a president by blocking every piece of legislation offered.

The difference between R and Ds, is that Rs know how to wield power and coagulate like a giant cheese curd to either roll over the competition or block the colon of shit getting done.

Democrat (later flipped after filibuster)
Democrat
Independant/ Democrat (filibuster while Independant)
Progressive
Democrat (http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/uscongress/tp/Five-Longest-Filibusters.htm)

Syntactical Disruptorize
26th November 12, 02:49 PM
You can't deny
That phrase is called a "tell". It tells me that you know you're full of shit, and hoping to carry the argument through flat assertion and lots of incredulous expostulations.

Believe it or not, our government was not designed to let the President ram through anything he liked. But as I said before, you will immediately recall this when the party you like more is out of favor.

Robot Jesus
26th November 12, 03:50 PM
and what you're presenting is a false dichotomy. There should be a way to rework how filibustering works That would preserve it a a tool for a minority to confront a majority, without being able to throw a wrench into the entire business of governance. Bringing back the vocal component perhaps?

Spade: The Real Snake
26th November 12, 04:16 PM
and what you're presenting is a false dichotomy. There should be a way to rework how filibustering works That would preserve it a a tool for a minority to confront a majority, without being able to throw a wrench into the entire business of governance. Bringing back the vocal component perhaps?
How the fuck else are you going to know how Mama Huey Long made her World Famous Cornbread?

Syntactical Disruptorize
26th November 12, 07:52 PM
and what you're presenting is a false dichotomy.
Actually, what you're presenting is a long-term solution to a short-term problem. Those tend to bite people in the ass in the long term.

nihilist
26th November 12, 09:22 PM
Apparently I have to reach far into history to make an spectacularly flaccid point.

nihilist
26th November 12, 09:24 PM
Actually, what you're presenting is a long-term solution to a short-term problem. Those tend to bite people in the ass in the long term.

People are all too eager to surrender what little freedom they have left for instant gratification.

Robot Jesus
26th November 12, 11:09 PM
Actually, what you're presenting is a long-term solution to a short-term problem. Those tend to bite people in the ass in the long term.

A valid point, how many cycles of this as the standard would qualify it as a long term problem that needs addressing?

See what happens when you counter someone's point instead of making wild accusations about their motivation.

Syntactical Disruptorize
27th November 12, 05:14 AM
A valid point, how many cycles of this as the standard would qualify it as a long term problem that needs addressing?
Why do you think it's a problem that requires addressing? I strongly doubt you'd think so if the shoe were on the other foot.


See what happens when you counter someone's point instead of making wild accusations about their motivation.
What, you wind up presenting a false premise as if it were somehow reasonable? That's the result I just got from you, and I can't say it encourages me.

Syntactical Disruptorize
27th November 12, 05:15 AM
How the fuck else are you going to know how Mama Huey Long made her World Famous Cornbread?
I can never get enough of David Copperfield read aloud by a supremely boring orator in tennis shoes.

Robot Jesus
29th November 12, 01:10 PM
In 05 the republicans threatened to remove the filibuster entirely, and it was a bad idea; all people are talking about now is making the tactic more difficult to abuse. Banning it's use in blocking debate on a bill, and requiring discomfort and effort on the part of the individual who opposes the majority. It still is a tool for the weaker party to stand up to the stronger and to try to prevent them from steamrolling in legislation, but it would be far more difficult to filibuster everything because you didn't like how the last election went.

Syntactical Disruptorize
1st December 12, 12:53 AM
In 05 the republicans threatened to remove the filibuster entirely, and it was a bad idea; now people I actually like are attacking the filibuster, so it's all good

billy sol hurok
1st December 12, 08:56 AM
This is almost as good as the Abolish Teh Electoralol College arguments, depending on whose guy won the popular vote but lost the EC vote.

nihilist
1st December 12, 02:05 PM
The only things I'm really against are voter suppression, unlimited anonymous campaign contributions and the systematic exclusion of third-party candidates in the political process.

It is debatable though as to whether the elections were stolen in the two GWB residencies.

Spade: The Real Snake
1st December 12, 02:09 PM
It is debatable though as to whether the elections were stolen in the two GWB residencies.
:sad panda:

nihilist
1st December 12, 04:17 PM
I voted for him the first election for the simple reason that I wanted to have a hilarious moron in the white house.

nihilist
1st December 12, 04:19 PM
No.

I like a system where both parties have a hard time making laws because most new laws proposed suck.

The duopoly has produced nothing but suck.
Therein lies the problem.

Syntactical Disruptorize
1st December 12, 04:20 PM
The duopoly has produced nothing but suck.
Therein lies the problem.
His conclusion scales to n parties.

nihilist
1st December 12, 04:22 PM
Pardon?

FickleFingerOfFate
1st December 12, 04:25 PM
Pardon?

For which of your crimes?

nihilist
1st December 12, 04:26 PM
I've never been convicted.

Spade: The Real Snake
1st December 12, 05:57 PM
I voted for him the first election for the simple reason that I wanted to have a hilarious moron in the white house.

Clinton scratched that itch


Sent by telekinesis via Cerebro

Syntactical Disruptorize
1st December 12, 07:54 PM
Pardon?
I'm saying a love of gridlock does not depend upon a two-party system. Gridlock is in general a pretty good thing, however many parties you have. Most ideas are bad and should not be acted upon.

Robot Jesus
1st December 12, 08:51 PM
You could have just said you like gridlock, instead of suggesting I was being partisan.

I don't think gridlock is a good thing, so I think that how one party has been treating a point of procedure isn't in line with how the system should be run. To my mind filibustering should be a tool for the minority party to hold up specific bills and force a second look at them, and attempt to draw support away from them. as it's used now it's a way for one party to prevent debate and prevent the government from governing because they lost. Reintroducing the vocal component at least would mean that people would only use it when they feel that holding up a bill is worth reading the entirety of Moby Dick aloud.



as to the two party system vs a multi party system, look at Canada in the 90's. no gridlock, one party did whatever it wanted because of the multiple party system; ended badly for that party, but I still vote for them.

nihilist
1st December 12, 09:16 PM
I'm saying a love of gridlock does not depend upon a two-party system. Gridlock is in general a pretty good thing, however many parties you have. Most ideas are bad and should not be acted upon.

Gridlock is only a pretty good thing when the ideas presented are a pretty bad thing.

Injecting some common sense into the current system is what is needed.

That's not going to happen with the current system of political hos.

Syntactical Disruptorize
1st December 12, 09:39 PM
You could have just said you like gridlock, instead of suggesting I was being partisan.
Why would I tell only half the truth? The two ideas are certainly not mutually exclusive.


I don't think
Thanks for telling the rest of the truth. You can go now.

Syntactical Disruptorize
1st December 12, 09:41 PM
Gridlock is only a pretty good thing when the ideas presented are a pretty bad thing.

Injecting some common sense into the current system is what is needed.

That's not going to happen with the current system of political hos.This is the straight-up truth. Until the hos improve, I want frequent gridlock. After that, when we get better people, maybe they can be trusted to do a few things.

Spade: The Real Snake
1st December 12, 10:05 PM
It seems like we can't have a half-year go by without another trotting-out of the Ultimate Nullifier.

Robot Jesus
2nd December 12, 12:32 AM
there are more options here, cosmic cube or infinity gauntlet is a better comparison.

Maybe motherbox, but I'm not much of an authority on DC.

Hedley LaMarr
2nd December 12, 01:34 AM
http://images.wikia.com/marvel_dc/images/9/9e/Pariah_0003.jpg