Focus, a link please or are you just pulling this **** out your ass.
In total they have confirmed 1600 nominees.
After filibuster change, expect only more partisanship | Kyle Wingfield | www.ajc.com
Outside of Rush's opinion Elena Kaegan is respected and held in the highest regard by conservatives and progressives alike,
She is, what can only be described as, a centrist.
Thank you....
I'm going to break ranks here and say this isn't a good idea. If it wasn't a good idea when Republicans proposed it, it definitely isn't a good idea now that Democrats have put it to work.
oh my--I know both sides since I watch your station also--
cussing, a sure sign you're losing today's politics--
Focus, a link please or are you just pulling this **** out your ass.
That is just your opinion..........Conservatives do not like Christie....I am not even sure he will win the nomination.......I am not sure I would vote for him.
Sen. Grassley confirmed this today saying GOPers would do this on SCOTUS Justices, something Reid said he still won't do..I'm going to break ranks here and say this isn't a good idea.
If it wasn't a good idea when Republicans proposed it, it definitely isn't a good idea now that Democrats have put it to work.
try "the green papers" to more fully understand the nomination process..
No TEAt-member has the brains to make it through, as Romney showed..
You used to be for him..
Repubs have threatened for years to do far worse than Reid did today and Sen. Grassley confirmed that today with his statement that RepubLies would do this with SCOTUS nominees, something reid has said he wouldn't do
as usual, today's GOP is on the wrong side of History on their unprecedented use of the filibuster only matcdhed by their unprecedented lying about not using the filibuster when agreements are made in January--McCarthy-style
it has to be good news with so many people cheering him on...
why don't you like the other side's facts??Just ignore him.
Sounds like you need to write your own constitution then.So what if it's 60/40? Majority rule leads to tyranny for the simple reason that they can then vote the minority out of power. While certain administrative stuff is fine to decide via simple majority it's not appropriate for more significant decisions which would ABSOLUTELY include executive appointments.
If he is nominated I will probably vote for him but he would not be my first, second or third choice.
whine partisan while offering nothing--GOP-like--you only needed to type" NIMBY was here" .. i already know what you are going to say long before you say it.
partisans are nothing if not predictable.
of course a GOP partisan hack like you doesn't careI don't care what the GOP said they were gonna do...
Sounds like you need to write your own constitution then.
Majority rule leads to democracy not tyranny. If a majority party is indeed deemed tyrannical by the electorate then they will lose in the next election cycle.
It would be nice if all legislation could be voted into law by huge majorities every time, but democracy calls for only a simple majority. The three fifths filibuster rule was OK when it was reserved to special circumstances but it has become the standard not the exception in modern legislation. The filibuster has stood in the way of compromise more than it has facilitated it.
If the minority knows that it can stop a piece of legislation without any need to compromise their position they will.... and recently they have.
Sounds like you need to write your own constitution then.
Majority rule leads to democracy not tyranny. If a majority party is indeed deemed tyrannical by the electorate then they will lose in the next election cycle.
It would be nice if all legislation could be voted into law by huge majorities every time, but democracy calls for only a simple majority. The three fifths filibuster rule was OK when it was reserved to special circumstances but it has become the standard not the exception in modern legislation. The filibuster has stood in the way of compromise more than it has facilitated it.
If the minority knows that it can stop a piece of legislation without any need to compromise their position they will.... and recently they have.
If he is nominated I will probably vote for him but he would not be my first, second or third choice.
Sounds like you need to write your own constitution then.
Majority rule leads to democracy not tyranny. If a majority party is indeed deemed tyrannical by the electorate then they will lose in the next election cycle.
It would be nice if all legislation could be voted into law by huge majorities every time, but democracy calls for only a simple majority. The three fifths filibuster rule was OK when it was reserved to special circumstances but it has become the standard not the exception in modern legislation. The filibuster has stood in the way of compromise more than it has facilitated it.
If the minority knows that it can stop a piece of legislation without any need to compromise their position they will.... and recently they have.
Hatuey, the GOP has said they will do this anyway if they get control of the Senate..
Sen. Grassley confirmed this today saying GOPers would do this on SCOTUS Justices, something Reid said he still won't do..
How many more years does the GOP get to wage unilateral War ?
That is what I thought...You pull **** out of your ass and throw it up against the wall and hope something sticks.
Harry Reid finally comes through
The Senate has voted to change its rules so that a simple majority is required to confirm judicial nominations and executive branch picks — the so-called “nuclear option.”
The final vote was 52-48. The previous threshold was 60 votes to bring such nominations to a final up-or-down vote.
“The threshold for cloture on nominations not including the Supreme Court, is now a majority,” Sen Pat Leahy (D-Vt.), the Senate president pro temp, declared after the vote.
Three Democrats voted with Republicans against the change: Carl Levin (D-Mich.), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Mark Pryor (D-Ark.). Levin is a longtime senator; Manchin and Pryor come from red states.
Shortly after the vote, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) office sent around a memo noting that the Senate has changed its procedures using a majority vote 18 times since 1977. Republicans, though, note that none of the changes rise to the level of today’s change.
Senate approves nuclear option
Majority rule in congress is not in the constitution. And democracy does not mean majority rule, either. It simply means decision making according to one person one vote. We have plenty of things in this country which require more and less than a majority to pass.
Stupid move, and Dems will be crying about the consequences of it soon enough.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?