American Politics Thread 2013: I'm a cool Rodham grandma in the USA

The filibuster has its place in a system where the minority understands it is a minority and has some respect for the ordinary process of majority rule, so that it is invoked rarely. atm that respect has evaporated so completely that all that is left is a gummy residue of rhetoric about minority rights.

― Aimless, Thursday, November 21, 2013 1:58 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

the filibuster is anti democratic and distortive of legislative/electoral incentives and unsurprisingly does not exists in governmental systems that work much better than our own

filibuster is so weird to me. so inefficient. it reminds me of street cleaning, just a bunch of people sat in their cars on the other side of the street waiting until 11am so they can park and do something with their day.

a real filisbuster

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/dailymusto/6d37973f633e0cb039cf4dab377rhoda.jpg

^^ A real Phyllis-buster

Lagoon OTM. I do not understand the filibuster at all. It is too "slow down" the allegedly deliberate body of the Senate? I guess I'll have to be reminded of all the great things that come from endless oratories and circle jerks of "standing by principles" or some shit.

So, if a simple majority can change the rules...are the rules in the eyes of the majority?

can anyone name any worthwhile or okay horrid legislation that needed the palliative effects of filibustering? Seriously, I can't think of any.

SOPA maybe

larry summers at fed

So here's what I wonder: why weren't Republicans ever willing to negotiate a reform of the filibuster that might have kept it within the spirit of the orginal founding intent of the Senate?

LOL yeah why weren't they willing to negotiate? Huh, this seems so unlike this current batch of morons.

but in general yeah i think this rules.

being pro-transparency means being anti-filibuster. it's very hard for the public to know how decisions are being made with so much gum in the works, breeds maxiumum cynicism of the rulers and ruled

filibustering is great political theater and void of logic, unless you think "giving people more time to scheme of ways to cover their political asses" logical

related: is there anyone in this thread not cynical about our rulers?

"cynical" is the wrong word; it's closer to "I laugh my ass off when Ted Cruz opens his mouth"

classic-style filibuster has its uses, i doubt anyone apart from corrupt politcos will defend the bullshit kind of filibusters that the senate has generally actually relied on in the past decade or so

Which uses were those? I'm feeling even dumberer than normal right now, JD.

A successful filibuster was once the sign that a very substantial minority had extreme reservations about a bill, extreme enough to merit bringing the Senate's business to a complete halt for the rest of the session if need be. Now the Republicans are committed to halting any legislation or appointments they think are not perfectly aligned with their desires, even if they are a minority.

how long are Any Dem Will Do voters gonna be around?

^^^ Morbs style filibustering

Asking again: why couldn't they have just changed the rules to force filibuster-ers to stand and actually filibuster, old school style? If the fallout from Cruz's theatrical buffoonery showed anything, it's that many legislators might think twice about making such a public ass of themselves over silly stuff, and save it for the big battles. It'd really have to be worth their while to stand and deliver.

standing filibusters would probably result in fewer things actually getting accomplished in the senate, which is bad for a senate majority that wants to accomplish things

what are you talking about, cruz filibuster (well, long speech, technically) made him a huge hero and laid the groundwork for whipping the house into the shutdown

A successful filibuster was once the sign that a very substantial minority had extreme reservations about a bill, extreme enough to merit bringing the Senate's business to a complete halt for the rest of the session if need be.

I laugh when I think of how serious these jackasses take themselves. I wonder if Byrd is spinning in his grave.

the real reason probably that making each other stand and talk amounts to pissant trolling of each other, might as well just get rid of it. we're talking about a bunch of old people here.

it's just too bad democrats didn't come around last time that happened (and too bad ted kennedy died) otherwise we'd have a much better healthcare law right now and cap and trade and prob all sorts other cool laws

opium is wonderful, huh

Teddy was losin' it twd the end, about the best he could do after 2000 was crap like No Child Left Behind.

most honorable classic example i can think of would be la follette leading filibuster against US entrance into WW1. struggling to think of a more recent example where it's been used well.

opium is wonderful, huh

― eclectic husbandry (Dr Morbius), Thursday, November 21, 2013 3:10 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

you realize the house passed cap and trade right, once again see the problem w using the everything is fucked heuristic in place of actual knowledge, opium is meh imho fwiw

what are you talking about, cruz filibuster (well, long speech, technically) made him a huge hero and laid the groundwork for whipping the house into the shutdown

Yeah, how'd that work out for them? If it wasn't for the ACA's unforced error they'd still be in the ropes. To mix sports metaphors.

struggling to think of a more recent example where it's been used well.

http://patdollard.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/mr_smith_goes_to_washington_61073-1920x1200-600x300.jpg

yeah. cruz and rand paul doing their one-man filibusters was a deliberate echo of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington and had no other purpose than to generate publicity. as legislative tactics, they were pointless nonsense. if we went through a period where this happened with any regularity, that aura would soon vanish and people would start to see it more clearly as vapid posturing. the spectacle of a talking filibuster is only compelling for its current novelty, not any inherent drama.

crazy that one event didn't totally turn the tide, mustve not worked at all then

josh, your statement was "If the fallout from Cruz's theatrical buffoonery showed anything, it's that many legislators might think twice about making such a public ass of themselves over silly stuff, and save it for the big battles."

the fallout from cruz's theatrical buffoonery was that he got even more popular and powerful, so

advocating for the talking filibuster is pretty hilarious it's like if there's one thing that clearly demonstrates what an absurd nonsensical practice it is

we shd make them talk a lot be cut then theyll have to talk a lot and um um

yeah, like, why would "ability to stand up bullshitting non-stop for 8+ hours at a stretch" be a characteristic you'd seek out in a legislator

becuz politics are entertainment duh

xpost Did he? I was under the impression Cruz's position and power has been weakened. I mean, he'll keep his seat, but that was a given.

lets not only continue the filibuster but make it take up more time and produce easy bs media ops yay

filibuster motherfucker!
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_29_shKT4Elw/S2HlIkDMVgI/AAAAAAAAJXk/ZlX5qgy-eX8/s400/camachobbb.jpg

I'd advocate for it because it is absurd and I don't think many people would do it. If you told me I could shovel shit by pressing delete on my computer all day, I'd do it. If you told me I had to actually grab a shovel, I'd think twice about volunteering.

his fellow senators think he's a blowhard asshole but the primary voter base and RW mediasphere love him. the first is not insignificant but the latter is huge.

xp

Do you all think that if you had to do a stand til you drop filibuster every time you wanted to stop something, there'd be just as much stuff getting blocked? You think the Republicans would be doing OK if they were visibly holding things up, loudly and stupidly, all day every day, for months, rather than doing it from some back room? I think they'd get laughed out of office.

are we really making the case that Cruz has long term staying power because of that stunt? I'm not convinced.

republicans are doing okay despite visibly holding things up loudly and stupidly for decades

he might stay, but he's not gonna get anything accomplished legislatively

xpost No, man, I mean actually doing shit like reading Green Eggs and Ham for hours.

(Which for all I know is how most of them spend their time, anyway, brushing up on the ol' phonics)

they spend most of their time fundraising.

I think they'd get laughed out of office.

i think you're a little naive frankly

besides, sen. reid chose to skip right past this delightful compromise position so idk why we're gaming it out

Do you all think that if you had to do a stand til you drop filibuster every time you wanted to stop something, there'd be just as much stuff getting blocked? You think the Republicans would be doing OK if they were visibly holding things up, loudly and stupidly, all day every day, for months, rather than doing it from some back room? I think they'd get laughed out of office.

― Josh in Chicago, Thursday, November 21, 2013 3:28 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

thing youre not considering is the quorum of democrats has to be there the whole time to vote when you give up, it sounds all nice and cinematic but when you really think abt it its deeply silly and untenable, senators are busy raising money and jerking each other off they dont have time for this sort of thing

yes exactly, they all know the job is 100 old people on the phone all day

nah, all it needs is one bored senator in the chair to send out the quorum call when the lad or lass drops.

Nobody hangs out in the Senate anymore; that's why Cruz can read Dr. Seuss for hours.