|
Title: LONG LIVE THE FILIBUSTER Post by: ns33 on May 15, 2005, 05:08:16 AM (http://www.jimmy.org/films/stills/msgtw.jpg)
Title: LONG LIVE THE FILIBUSTER Post by: smi256 on May 15, 2005, 07:34:52 AM ok, I give. What has happened now in our oh-so-wonderful government that needed people to talk till everyone says "fuck this, I'm going home"? <_<
Title: LONG LIVE THE FILIBUSTER Post by: mole on May 15, 2005, 10:46:50 PM "see that man? HES a liberal"
Title: LONG LIVE THE FILIBUSTER Post by: smi256 on May 16, 2005, 12:00:12 AM sorry, can I have another clue? ;)
Title: LONG LIVE THE FILIBUSTER Post by: Perdition on May 16, 2005, 12:05:02 AM It's been around for ages but liberals are getting unhappy because now they may be forced to say something semi-coherent instead of just babbeling on about nothing.
Title: LONG LIVE THE FILIBUSTER Post by: smi256 on May 16, 2005, 12:10:45 AM ah, I guess that makes sense
there does seem to be something very wrong with it all <_< Title: LONG LIVE THE FILIBUSTER Post by: mole on May 16, 2005, 12:24:19 AM whats this all about?
Title: LONG LIVE THE FILIBUSTER Post by: Lord Lanair on May 16, 2005, 04:03:19 AM A filibuster is when a senator (or group of them) stalls to prevent a majority-approved bill from passing by taking the floor of the Senate and just talking for hours. :)
From what I know, nowadays filibusters and Senate business can occur at the same time (wheras in olden times, a filibuster stopped all other work in the Senate). I believe the Republicans are pushing to change this current system so Democrats don't hold up judicial nominations (or if they do, then a lot of people will get pissed and pressure them to accept SOMEone). ;) Title: LONG LIVE THE FILIBUSTER Post by: ns33 on May 16, 2005, 07:58:18 PM Let's consider history as we analyze the current crisis:
1. The Republicans were the first ever to filibuster judicial nominees during the 60s. 2. Democrats, who, in the 40s - 60s, held majority in the Senate, were infuriated that Republicans tried to slow down business by threatening filibusters. One of their actions was to reduce cloture from 67 to 60. One of their options was to eliminate the filibuster. And aren't they glad now that they didn't do that three or four decades ago. Of course, no one has ever credited the GOP for brains when it comes to political history. Quote From what I know, nowadays filibusters and Senate business can occur at the same time (wheras in olden times, a filibuster stopped all other work in the Senate). Filibusters only halt discussion on one topic, which ties up business, but not permanently. However, most other business, such as voting to vote on a bill or voting to execute parlimentary procedures, requires unanimous consent. This is where the Senate will stop. Without unanimous consent, no business may carry forward, a consequence 50 times worse than what the GOP is squabbling about. Title: LONG LIVE THE FILIBUSTER Post by: Godfather on October 23, 2005, 07:49:50 PM SOMEONE SAID LIBERAL
|