Thom Hartmann is calling for the "nuclear option" if we don't make 60 in the Senate.

[onehandle]

Hell Yeah!

[kestrel91316]

1. Hell, they threatened US with it enough!! We need to turn the tables and USE IT

on them.

But can somebody refresh my memory as to exactly what the "nuclear option" entails? LOL Something related to filibusters or lack thereof???

[Dennis Donovan]

2. Hang it over their heads like they did to us...

[ixion]

3. I didn't believe in such a thing then, nor do I now

what they should do is pass legislation to eliminate the possibility of such a ridiculous tactic.

[End_the_Oiligarchy]

6. No Nuke!

I agree the nuclear option doesn't make sense whether Republicans or Democrats are in control.

[Omnibus]

11. No nukes--cherry pick instead!

Obama wants a bipartisan cabinet--what better way to get one than to appoint republican senators from states with democratic governors? Very few senators would turn down a chance at a Cabinet post, and their replacements would be Democrats.

I've heard Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins from Maine mentioned. Charles Grassley from here in IA would be another good one.

McCain would be a bad choice for this strategy, because AZ state law requires the appointed Senator to be of the same party as the outgoing one.

[Cleita]

4. Unfortunately, much of the good sense ideas that Thom Hartmann

suggests have gone ignored by the Democratic Party. Hopefully if we get a larger majority in Congress it might help. Thom who is a great fan of Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine often puts out ideas written about by these revolutionary Americans but Washington has governed from a different direction from them for far too long.

[bridgit]

5. republicans are free falling, it's time for dems to push them over

[Robbien]

7. I still don't understand why we need 60. Bush won't be there to veto everything

so why is not 51 enough?

[End_the_Oiligarchy]

8. Rethug Filibusters

The Republicans filibustered more legislation in this congress than has ever been filibustered before! That's why the 60 Senators are needed.

[Robbien]

10. The GOP didn't filibuster anything really, did they

All they had to do is just sit there laughing while Reid killed everything which didn't have 60 votes.

[End_the_Oiligarchy]

12. Yes

Well yes, but they were filibusters in the sense, that they worked the same way filibusters do, by stopping legislation.

[Omnibus]

9. Filibuster.

By Senate rules, it takes a vote of 60 Senators to end debate on a bill and call for a vote. So if 41 Senators want to keep a bill from being voted on indefinitely, they can.