i think holding a formal vote to change how the senate does business is a "new precedent" but also a GOOD precedent -- rather than the kludgey mess we have now, where it operates on a morass of abused procedures remedied only by shaky agreements between cobbled-together 'gangs'. i mean, this is no way to live.
― goole, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 16:57 (twelve years ago)
also as i may have said its a precedent that the gop could just do themselves anytime they regain control
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 17:00 (twelve years ago)
making the precedent really fairly meaningless
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 17:01 (twelve years ago)
(side note, where is this stock image from, nambla? "attractive-thirteen-year-old-boy-with-chin-resting-on-fist--white-background.jpg" )
― goole, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 17:01 (twelve years ago)
I've been looking for a good chin-resting image.
― the objections to Drake from non-REAL HIPHOP people (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 17:03 (twelve years ago)
there's a surprising dearth of good ones
― twist boat veterans for stability (k3vin k.), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 17:04 (twelve years ago)
Their children go to this daycare thing with the children of lobbyists and special interest group representatives while the parents — the lawmakers and their spouses – go off to parties and are wined and dined by these corporations that have legislation before those state houses.
― reggie (qualmsley), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 17:20 (twelve years ago)
re: nuclear option. senate republicans seem to be goading reid to do it. they see it as a political win no matter what.
if he uses it, they can cry foul and raise a huge stink in the press for years, and large numbers of voters will believe them. if he doesn't use it, they can block every Obama nominee and leave dozens of empty seats on federal benches, waiting for a republican president to fill them, or else slow the courts to a crawl, making it more difficult to challenge the many bad laws coming out of the state legislatures.
― Aimless, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 17:33 (twelve years ago)
Large numbers of voters are going to vote GOP with or without nuclear option. They're not winning anybody over.
― the objections to Drake from non-REAL HIPHOP people (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 17:35 (twelve years ago)
i think you mean they can raise a huge stink in the press for two days and huge numbers of voters will never hear abou it
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 17:36 (twelve years ago)
this is arcane Beltway bullshit no one outside ILX and talk show green rooms cares about.
― the objections to Drake from non-REAL HIPHOP people (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 17:39 (twelve years ago)
feeding new resentments to the base is a republican pastime. the good ones last longer than a couple of days and there are plenty of media outlets who'll cling to this, just as there are plenty to keep the cry of 'Benghazi' alive.
― Aimless, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 17:42 (twelve years ago)
right, but those guys had resentments already. They ain't getting converts.
― the objections to Drake from non-REAL HIPHOP people (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 17:48 (twelve years ago)
They don't need converts to get a political win from this.
The alternative to republican obstruction is letting Obama have his judges with no fuss. If Reid goes nuclear, Obama gets his judges anyway, but they get to feed their base a new 'proof' of democrat perfidy, and also get a free road to nominate anyone they please when their chance arrives. Anti-abortion, pro-corporate judges are the coin in which they pay much of their base, so this just smooths the way for the worst judges they can find.
― Aimless, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 17:56 (twelve years ago)
Aimless, why do you care about political wins? Just turn off the news and head to ILX>
― the objections to Drake from non-REAL HIPHOP people (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 17:58 (twelve years ago)
the GOP is gonna act like scoundrels when they get the Senate and presidency. And you forget one thing: eliminating the filibuster may energize the Democratic base.
― the objections to Drake from non-REAL HIPHOP people (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 18:00 (twelve years ago)
Just a lonely guy here, thinkin about why the senate republicans would be such huge assholes and think it's a truly great idea. I'm senatesplaining.
― Aimless, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 18:01 (twelve years ago)
various notes:
condescension with subpar reading comprehension skills to boot o wow― reggie (qualmsley), Monday, November 18, 2013 8:22 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― reggie (qualmsley), Monday, November 18, 2013 8:22 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
board descrip
http://nypost.com/2013/11/18/census-faked-2012-election-jobs-report/― goole, Tuesday, November 19, 2013 9:50 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― goole, Tuesday, November 19, 2013 9:50 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
godless commies at the WSJ nicely dismantled this, though what i hear from my One Right Wing Friend is that Your Charts And Facts Mean Nothing
― creating an ilHOOSion usic sight and sound (BIG HOOS aka the steendriver), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 18:01 (twelve years ago)
I've been wishing for years that Reid would go nuclear, because both sides deserve the right to nominate whoever they want and get a vote on them when they're holding the Nominatin' Stick. I think the GOP doesn't have the restraint not to nominate the batshit and/or the dangerous when they get the chance (c.f. Miers) and can be further marginalized as the party of insanity + cruelty every time they step on their own dick. Maybe I'm naive.
― WilliamC, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 18:12 (twelve years ago)
miers actually less batshit/dangerous than the safe candidates who got on the court
― iatee, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 18:14 (twelve years ago)
otm
― the objections to Drake from non-REAL HIPHOP people (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 18:16 (twelve years ago)
I don't often quote Chait but:
But, as some Republicans have correctly noted, if the majority can constantly threaten a rule change to break a filibuster, then you might as well change the rules. The Republicans are right about something else, too: A world in which 50 senators can confirm a lifetime judicial appointment could one day have frightening ramifications. The general logic of abolishing the filibuster is that the majority party ought to be able to enact its program, and if they go too far, voters can install a new government to undo it. That rationale does not apply to judges who serve until they die and can rewrite the law however they choose.
Ideally, the Senate would find some mechanism that would be strong enough to allow the minority to block unusually extreme judges from the bench, but weak enough to prevent the minority from issuing a total blockade on even qualified judges. That would require the creation of some sort of creative power-sharing arrangement that gives formal definition to the devilishly ill-defined concept of “advice and consent.” But the trend in American government has been that power does not get shared, and instead flows to whichever party has the will to seize it. Senate Republicans have seized new powers by imposing a judicial blockade on the D.C. Circuit, and the only available Democratic response appears to be seizing back more power still.
Haven't seen a lot of defenses for the lifetime appointment thingie recently.
― Multiple Miggs (dandydonweiner), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 18:20 (twelve years ago)
congress should vote anonymous
― reggie (qualmsley), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 18:43 (twelve years ago)
congressional coked up international party bro photo album http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/trey-radel-international-man-of-mystery
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 19:29 (twelve years ago)
lol at misidentifying cambodia as colombia
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 19:31 (twelve years ago)
who even gives a shit what country were in wooooooo *shotguns local beer*
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 19:32 (twelve years ago)
idk dudes that looks like some booze-shaming to me
― goole, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 19:32 (twelve years ago)
"this guy was nailed for an 8 ball, here are some pictures of him with beer" uhh
― goole, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 19:34 (twelve years ago)
the partying around the world thing captures a certain type so perfectly
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 19:35 (twelve years ago)
Second comment on that article: "Congressman Dudebro (R-SPRIIIIIIIING BREEEEEEEAAAKKK!)"
― Ian from Etobicoke (Phil D.), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 19:35 (twelve years ago)
combined w the whole does coke but votes for drug testing food stamp recipients really paints a picture
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 19:36 (twelve years ago)
― lag∞n, Wednesday, November 20, 2013 2:32 PM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
^
^^^
― reggie (qualmsley), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 19:39 (twelve years ago)
well yeah, he's a sick hypocrite. that's not really my point.
― goole, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 19:40 (twelve years ago)
your point is some generalized shame shaming ignoring the context already provided by yours truly, shameful imho
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 19:41 (twelve years ago)
he shouldn't be in jail for buying the 8-ball, neither should anybody
he should not have voted for the drug testing for public assitance either
guy likes to party, is rightwing asshole, idk, seems like a matter for florida voters to mull over in their widsom, not the courts (which have been hilariously lenient as it happens, compared to those similarly charged [also not pictured here])
― goole, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 19:45 (twelve years ago)
was he actually leniently charged for a first offense w personal use qualities, doesnt seem like it, like im sure people have gotten worse but it seems pretty normal that you wouldnt get locked up or anything for a first possession offense
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 19:47 (twelve years ago)
that part i don't know, but i doubt he had his door kicked in. as i read it he was not even cuffed.
― goole, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 19:49 (twelve years ago)
One reason I never did cocaine was the firm belief that, if I ever got caught, I would get thrown up underneath a jail. Many of my white friends did not have this same concern, including 2 who were dealing pills out of their dorm room (which was within 100 yards of an elementary school, oops). That story didn't end happily.
― deX! (DJP), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 20:09 (twelve years ago)
How did it end?
― Multiple Miggs (dandydonweiner), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 20:10 (twelve years ago)
They threw up in jail
― you are kind, I am (waterface), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 20:11 (twelve years ago)
Which is even worse than throwing u0p anywhere else, b/c ur in jail
DJP, was that around '96? I think I know the two people you mention.
― Ornate Coleman (Moodles), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 20:15 (twelve years ago)
arcane Beltway bullshit no one outside...talk show green rooms cares about
One reason I never did cocaine (cept til way too late, twice) was Fleetwood Mac
― eclectic husbandry (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 20:20 (twelve years ago)
you guys there is still time
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 20:21 (twelve years ago)
hahaha yes it was
hello world, you are tiny
― deX! (DJP), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 20:22 (twelve years ago)
I would rather chew coca leaves than snort cocaine.
― Aimless, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 20:22 (twelve years ago)
thats ridiculous, someone put a lot of work in to turn those leaves into powder
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 20 November 2013 20:23 (twelve years ago)
(the story ended with them getting busted, threatened with a huge prison sentence due to their proximity to said elementary school unless they gave up their suppliers, and I believe them getting kicked out of school for a year, if not expelled)
― deX! (DJP), Wednesday, 20 November 2013 20:24 (twelve years ago)