|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 02:39 PM Original message |
Senate Democrats: You can repeal DADT with just 51 votes so do it! No more excuses for inaction. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Renew Deal (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 02:41 PM Response to Original message |
1. Please explain how that is possible |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spanone (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 02:43 PM Response to Original message |
2. after the pentagon report, there is no excuse. period. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 02:47 PM Response to Original message |
3. No problem. This was done when Democrats forced a real Republican filibuster last March |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karynnj (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 02:58 PM Response to Reply #3 |
4. The "real" filibuster was different - |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 03:00 PM Response to Reply #4 |
5. The Senate has the right to change their rules at anytime under the Constitution. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
alfredo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 03:02 PM Response to Reply #5 |
7. Only at the beginning of a new congress. What if the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 03:09 PM Response to Reply #7 |
8. That's not correct. The Senate has the right to change their rules at anytime, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ozymanithrax (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 03:50 PM Response to Reply #8 |
12. It is not according to the Constitution, but it is in the Senate rules... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:01 PM Response to Reply #12 |
14. And what do you think is preventing the Senate from changing its rules at anytime they want? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
alfredo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:12 PM Response to Reply #8 |
16. Can the Reps filibuster that or put a hold on it? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:25 PM Response to Reply #16 |
18. No. Not if the President of the Senate rules against them. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
alfredo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:39 PM Response to Reply #18 |
22. We need to make it a rule that the minority leader needs to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 03:23 PM Response to Reply #7 |
9. The Republicans will stop Democratic "procedural" filibusters if they win a Senate majority in 2012 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karynnj (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 03:56 PM Response to Reply #5 |
13. Other than before a Congress - ie soon, you need 67 votes to change rules |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Renew Deal (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 03:35 PM Response to Reply #3 |
11. I guess something more needed to be said. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:42 PM Response to Reply #3 |
24. Jim Bunning was ONE SENATOR who refused to accede to unanimous consent. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
alfredo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 03:00 PM Response to Original message |
6. McConnell has just threatened to stop all votes unless they |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 03:27 PM Response to Reply #6 |
10. Really! Well break out the cots, don't break for Christmas and make the rats filibuster! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
alfredo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:09 PM Response to Reply #10 |
15. I think they ought to change the filibuster rules so that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:23 PM Response to Reply #15 |
17. At least you acknowledge that the rules have to be changed to force them to do it old school. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:30 PM Response to Reply #17 |
19. That's not correct. Senate rules were not changed to force a real Republican filibuster in March |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:33 PM Response to Reply #19 |
20. That was not a filibuster. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:45 PM Response to Reply #20 |
25. Senate Democrats say they forced a Republican filibuster. But they are wrong and you are right? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:47 PM Response to Reply #25 |
26. They can force one senator to deny unanimous consent requests. If you want to call that a filibuster |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
alfredo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:38 PM Response to Reply #17 |
21. Now a threat of a filibuster seems enough. Call them on it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:40 PM Response to Original message |
23. No, they can't. You really should stop pushing this nonsense. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:47 PM Response to Reply #23 |
27. +1 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:48 PM Response to Reply #23 |
28. I suggest you present some credible arguments and facts proving your point. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:50 PM Response to Reply #28 |
30. It's actually quite simple. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:55 PM Response to Reply #30 |
31. All the Democrats have to do is change the rules. And Democrats can force |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:56 PM Response to Reply #31 |
32. It takes 67 votes to change the rules. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 05:07 PM Response to Reply #32 |
35. That point has already been refuted numerous times with hard, documented facts. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LostInAnomie (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 04:50 PM Response to Original message |
29. How? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 05:00 PM Response to Reply #29 |
33. Read posts 3, 5, 8, 14, 18 and 19 and you shall know the answer. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 05:06 PM Response to Reply #33 |
34. Indeed. Read each of those posts and take the opposite conclusion, and you'll be on the right track. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
donco6 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #34 |
36. Hey! BzaDem! Glad I ran into you. I made this for you: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cherokeeprogressive (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 05:16 PM Response to Reply #36 |
37. LOL! n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 05:19 PM Response to Original message |
38. Senate Democrats have several options to pass the repeal of DADT in this session of Congress |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-01-10 09:35 PM Response to Reply #38 |
39. In view of their legislative screw-ups with the Food Safety and Health Insurance bills perhaps |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Thu Apr 18th 2024, 04:10 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC