The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

[Kepler]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

LOL. You'll justify anything as long as that clown Itch and the Bone Man get their way.

Flag doesn't strike me as a Cecil fan at all.

 

[Priceless]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Wait... filibusters are bad now?

Until 2017, when they will resume being a vital part of Democracy, Freedom and Apple Pie.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

No, it shows a complete lack of a clue as to exactly what Itch has done for the last 6 years and what he's attempting to do now. People think Harry is bad? Harry's a pussycat compared to that clown.

So it's OK for Reid to do it, but it's not OK for McConnell to do it? Congratulations on solidifying yourself as an arrogant partisan hack. Granted, arrogance was never in question.

 

[walrus]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Until 2017, when they will resume being a vital part of Democracy, Freedom and Apple Pie.

Just like it was before 2015

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

So it's OK for Reid to do it, but it's not OK for McConnell to do it? Congratulations on solidifying yourself as an arrogant partisan hack. Granted, arrogance was never in question.

Nope, not what I said. But I wouldn't expect anyone to understand the history of what has happened since Bush II left office.

 

[joecct]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Do we want to keep Guy Fawkes out of the basement?

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

So it's OK for Reid to do it, but it's not OK for McConnell to do it? Congratulations on solidifying yourself as an arrogant partisan hack. Granted, arrogance was never in question.

Now, that's exactly the opposite of what he was saying. He's pointing out that when Reid did it the GOP squealed about the irreparable harm to the World's Greatest Deliberative Body, but now that the GOP has a majority all of a sudden it's just good horse sense. That's GOP hypocrisy. If the Dems in return say that the GOP doing that will be An Affront to God and Man, then that will be Dem hypocrisy.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Now, that's exactly the opposite of what he was saying. He's pointing out that when Reid did it the GOP squealed about the irreparable harm to the World's Greatest Deliberative Body, but now that the GOP has a majority all of a sudden it's just good horse sense. That's GOP hypocrisy. If the Dems in return say that the GOP doing that will be An Affront to God and Man, then that will be Dem hypocrisy.

No, it's exactly what I was saying. As much as your points about the hypocritical GOP are true, you must remember that despite the fact that Reid is filibustering now, he exercised the nuclear option in 2013. The fact that you are neglecting that piece of information shows that are also participating in political pandering.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

No, it's exactly what I was saying. As much as your points about the hypocritical GOP are true, you must remember that despite the fact that Reid is filibustering now, he exercised the nuclear option in 2013. The fact that you are neglecting that piece of information shows that are also participating in political pandering.

Oh, what a crock.

He only used the nuke option so they could actually fill some of the positions they couldn't fill because everyone Obama wanted to hire got filibustered.

Your ability to completely ignore facts is staggering.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Oh, what a crock.

He only used the nuke option so they could actually fill some of the positions they couldn't fill because everyone Obama wanted to hire got filibustered.

Your ability to completely ignore facts is staggering.

And yet, you forget the constant filibustering for 2005. Amazing how you have such a short term memory.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

And yet, you forget the constant filibustering for 2005. Amazing how you have such a short term memory.

Another crock. The Bush administration was the last one to see true compromise and all the compromise came from the Democrats. No one said here that the filibuster wasn't a valid tactic.

Now go get some more Heritage Foundation talking points like you always do. Do you have them on speed dial?

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

So it's OK for Reid to do it, but it's not OK for McConnell to do it? Congratulations on solidifying yourself as an arrogant partisan hack. Granted, arrogance was never in question.

He needed solidifying?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

The Dems may have actually won one.

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/293955951.html

WASHINGTON - Senior Republicans conceded on Tuesday that the grueling fight with President Obama over the regulation of Internet service appears over, with the president and an army of Internet activists victorious.

The Federal Communications Commission is expected on Thursday to approve regulating Internet service like a public utility, prohibiting companies from paying for faster lanes on the Internet.

Yay.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

The Dems may have actually won one.

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/293955951.html



Yay.

I'll believe it when I see it. But that would go a way towards convincing me it's a battle of good vs evil rather than less evil vs more evil.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

No, it's exactly what I was saying. As much as your points about the hypocritical GOP are true, you must remember that despite the fact that Reid is filibustering now, he exercised the nuclear option in 2013. The fact that you are neglecting that piece of information shows that are also participating in political pandering.

For Pete's sake, Flag, I wasn't ignoring it, IT'S THE CENTRAL POINT IN MY POST!!!

I understand what you're saying and it's true -- Reid used it so if he now complains he's a hypocrite. But what Scoob said is also true -- Mitch bleated about it so if he now embraces it he's a hypocrite. We have both parties switching their rhetoric just based on where they stand at the trough, so both are hypocritical.

Why are you taking shots at people who are agreeing with you that sauce for the goose is good for the gander?

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

For Pete's sake, Flag, I wasn't ignoring it, IT'S THE CENTRAL POINT IN MY POST!!!

I understand what you're saying and it's true. But what Scoob said is also true. You have the parties switching their rhetoric just based on where they stand at the trough, so both are hypocritical. Why are you taking shots at people who are agreeing with you?

Because they willfully ignore the entire argument.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Because they willfully ignore the entire argument.

Oh, no. I willfully accept the entire argument. What I don't accept is how Harry Reid is vilified and the Slimy Turtle Itch is given a free pass. You should read back through my postings and find the one on Franken and what happened in the judiciary committee. Reid didn't run his caucus like Itch does.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Because they willfully ignore the entire argument.

Well, I can only speak for myself. I'm not just addressing your argument, I'm broadening it. To repeat: I understand what you're saying and it's true -- Reid used it so if he now complains he's a hypocrite. But ALSO: Mitch bleated about it so if he now embraces it he's a hypocrite. We have both parties switching their rhetoric just based on where they stand at the trough, so both are hypocritical.

I personally think the filibuster and super-majority cloture and blue slips and anonymous holds should all be thrown in the dustbin of history. The way they are used isn't protecting minority rights, they allow a recalcitrant minority with no desire or plan to compromise AT ALL to gridlock the government completely. This is particular attractive to a small, radicalized group who believe the more they gum up the works the more their donors can get away with, so they actively attempt to sabotage the rule of law; but even were that not so, you have to have a system where eventually somebody can govern.

When parties were cross-matrixed with ideologies the system worked, but that's no longer the case because ideologies are now completely nationalized -- locality no longer has diversity. There are two solutions: either give the majority more power and let the minority stew, or split the country in half, and let the Eloi live in a country where Dems run against Liberals and the Morlocks run a country where the Republicans run against Libertarians.

(There's probably one other choice: break the two-party stranglehold and let a hundred parties bloom. If you do that you probably also have to get rid of the presidency and just have a prime minister. That to me is even more radical and less likely than a clean Czech/Slovak split.)

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Well, I can only speak for myself. I'm not just addressing your argument, I'm broadening it. To repeat: I understand what you're saying and it's true -- Reid used it so if he now complains he's a hypocrite. But ALSO: Mitch bleated about it so if he now embraces it he's a hypocrite. We have both parties switching their rhetoric just based on where they stand at the trough, so both are hypocritical.

I personally think the filibuster and super-majority cloture and blue slips and anonymous holds should all be thrown in the dustbin of history. The way they are used isn't protecting minority rights, they allow a recalcitrant minority with no desire or plan to compromise AT ALL to gridlock the government completely. This is particular attractive to a small, radicalized group who believe the more they gum up the works the more their donors can get away with, so they actively attempt to sabotage the rule of law; but even were that not so, you have to have a system where eventually somebody can govern.

When parties were cross-matrixed with ideologies the system worked, but that's no longer the case because ideologies are now completely nationalized -- locality no longer has diversity. There are two solutions: either give the majority more power and let the minority stew, or split the country in half, and let the Eloi live in a country where Dems run against Liberals and the Morlocks run a country where the Republicans run against Libertarians.

(There's probably one other choice: break the two-party stranglehold and let a hundred parties bloom. If you do that you probably also have to get rid of the presidency and just have a prime minister. That to me is even more radical and less likely than a clean Czech/Slovak split.)

True. Just as long as we all admit that the train really didn't get going until Obama became President. Bush II was able to actually execute an agenda, hire who he wanted to work, and Nancy Pelosi passed many bills that were signed. As soon as Obama took office then the party of "NO" came alive. And they're still saying "NO" even though they're in power. There is a special place in hell for the Bone Man and Itch, of that I have no doubt.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Well, I can only speak for myself. I'm not just addressing your argument, I'm broadening it. To repeat: I understand what you're saying and it's true -- Reid used it so if he now complains he's a hypocrite. But ALSO: Mitch bleated about it so if he now embraces it he's a hypocrite. We have both parties switching their rhetoric just based on where they stand at the trough, so both are hypocritical.

I personally think the filibuster and super-majority cloture and blue slips and anonymous holds should all be thrown in the dustbin of history. The way they are used isn't protecting minority rights, they allow a recalcitrant minority with no desire or plan to compromise AT ALL to gridlock the government completely. This is particular attractive to a small, radicalized group who believe the more they gum up the works the more their donors can get away with, so they attractive attempt to sabotage the rule of law; but even were that not so, you have to have a system where eventually a majority can govern.

When parties were cross-matrixed with ideologies the system worked, but that's no longer the case because ideologies are now completely nationalized -- locality no longer matters.

Perhaps it's a good reason to keep it around, though. Today in Congress, you have a number of prideful individuals whose practically only mission to get into history books, and they feel that the only way to do that is to do something. We have had more legislation jammed through in the last couple of decades than in a very long time. It fits with Mr. Day's warnings about how the NWO will be using "change" as a method of pushing their agenda.

To your point, we have also seen a broadening of federalism, and we have many federal statutes that are clear tenth amendment violations, but are pushed through funding loopholes, such as the 16th amendment and federal highways. Centralization causes failure when scope is broadened. It's exactly what happened to both the Roman Empire and the USSR. This is not to say, however, that we should make the same mistakes we made when the Articles of Confederation were in place. What would help this country the most is a greater push towards state autonomy.