Liberals Irate As Senate Passes Watered-Down Filibuster Reform

[Purveyor]

The Senate enacted modest reforms to its filibuster rules with votes that kept bipartisan relations intact but left disappointed liberal groups fuming.

The reforms are the biggest changes to the Senate’s filibuster rules in decades but fell well short of drastic reforms demanded by labor unions and liberal-leaning advocacy groups.

The deal negotiated between Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) provoked an outcry from liberal groups.

Passage of the deal sets to rest Reid’s threat, which he had wielded for months, to use the so-called "nuclear option" to change the Senate’s filibuster rules through a simple majority vote.

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/279237-liberals-irate-as-senate-passes-watered-down-filibuster-reform#ixzz2Iwu6LLu6

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

1. Why aren't we going after Barbara Boxer and Jack Reid? Liberals opposed to filibuster reform.

[Purveyor]

2. My Senator, Carl Levin is going to feel it and I hope the hell the Senator does the right thing

and retires before the 2014 elections so we can have a decent Dem primary here in Michigan.

This state is trending repuke and this time around won't be so easy for the Dems...I fear.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

3. Which is probably why Reid did what he did. The Dems are likely to lose the Senate in 2014.

[cascadiance]

8. The right thing whether Dems have a majority OR a minority is the talking filibuster!!!

... that is if the Democrat senators are truly about representing people and not corrupt lobbyist interests!

Because a talking filibuster prevents Republicans from silently squashing what would be done for the people by forcing them to explain their obstructionism to them. And it would EMPOWER Democrats were they to become the minority in 2014 to take their case to the American people IF that is who they are representing when the Republicans try to ram something through that doesn't represent what the people want (which they WILL do as a majority). By having in place a talking filibuster, they would have a hard time getting rid of it in 2014 if they wanted to preserve the filibuster at all then. I'd much rather the Dems as a minority VISIBLY filibuster instead of silently abuse it in the interests of those who aren't the American people at large.

Bernie Sanders has done his own talking filibusters on his own when he didn't have to to precisely do just what is the proper way of telling the American people when an issue is being voted on in the wrong direction for the American public's interests.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

9. I agree. So let's get busy and call these senators. Demand answers for why they caved.

[JEB]

4. Why not just take a wire brush to me?

I'm done being a Democrat. It stands for nothing but excuses and selling out.

[Ilsa]

5. Democrats need to elect majority leaders that

are not from conservative districts or conservative states. I'm tired of seeing leaders cave because they are worried about their competition in two or four years.

I'm assuming thats one reason Reid did this.

What joke. All that bluster about the nuclear option and instead we get fizzle.

[blkmusclmachine]

6. Uh oh. 4 More Years Of The Last 4 Years.

The DEMs roll over again, right on cue.

[ChangeUp106]

7. Next Time

Just some advice Democrats: next time you pick a leader, pick somebody who talks loud enough that I don't have to turn up my damn TV to hear him every time.

[Filibuster Harry]

10. This is an insult to us all. Need to find out why 1) harry did not even bring it to a vote and 2)

start calling offices and demanding answers and 3) start finding primary candidates. Lastly can we start some sort of petition demanding removal of harry as senate leader. Need to come up with a strong replacement.