This is how you get things done - Page 21

Admin - I'm an equal opportunity critic of subversive government, without allegiance to either the GOP or the Democrats.  You are correct, this has been going on for some time, and it isn't a partisan problem.  I am, and have always been equally as critical of "Dubya", for example, in regard to those WMD's I am still waiting to see. "Obstructionist" is a buzz word crafted in realm of progressive politics.  It presupposes that at any given time, contested legislation that has been proposed to address a "problem" (typically a problem which is very real, usual one that is emotionally galvanizing) should be passed regardless of all of idealogical implication.  You could take each problem one by one (and they do), and question when something is so pressing that the argument should suspended in favor of "progress".  Unfortunately, only hindsight is 20/20.  Taking this approach under either a liberal or conservative regime would amount to the silence of the minority party, a terrible evil in the realm of civil governement.  That was why the end-around pulled by the Senate majority recently (establishes strict majority) was seen as such a terrible precedent to set for future sessions, regardless of the majority's affilialition.  I will say that I am on record here, extensively so, as having heavily criticized the unwillingness of the GOP last year to compromise with liberals on the budget plan.  I call it like I see it, and am more a champion for a viable, ethical, and representative process than I am for any particular party or ideology.
 

The Senate decision was way past due and will work for both parties over time.

Do you know why this rule was changed?


 

The Senate decision was way past due and will work for both parties over time.

Do you know why this rule was changed?

Filibuster.

I think that the minority voice within congress is too important to silence in any way, shape, or form.  That is the reason why such a change has not been initiated for as long the option has been available.  Sadly, the system, its corruption, and its highly paid criminals masquerading as public "servants" has been hijacked to the point where instead of representing your voice and mine, they answer to their special interests, forwarding their own agendas at any expense.  That, IMO, constitutes a large part of the reason why many congressmen will not cross the aisle.

The Senate isn't for the people - the fathers made it the way it is to ensure the States were equally represented. “The Senate would represent the states, not the people,” as it was put to me by Richard Baker, the former Senate historian and co-author of a new book, “The American Senate: An Insider’s History.”

"Of 128 filibusters of nominees in the history of the Senate, half had occurred during the Obama administration."

So, in the history of the Senate before Obama there had been only 64 filibusters to block nominations. This comes out to about one every 3 years but in 6 years there were 64 filibusters to block nominations which is about 10 a year. So, our lovely obstructionists ruined something that had been in place for years and not abused. Not rocket science to see the problem and pattern here.

Lol.  The Senate has not represented the states in some years.

You're also assuming that the political landscape over the past six years would not have produced a similar result with a GOP controlled Senate and Executive. That's quite a leap. 

Maybe you should check and see what both Bushs, Reagan and Clinton had in the Senate before you laugh out loud. Political landscape??????????????????????? What a black President?

"Lol.  The Senate has not represented the states in some years."
Well it is their intended purpose and when push comes to shove (abortion and others) they generally side with how the state votes on these matters. But hey lol all you want.

 

"Lol.  The Senate has not represented the states in some years."
Well it is their intended purpose and when push comes to shove (abortion and others) they generally side with how the state votes on these matters. But hey lol all you want.

It's called the 17th Amendment.

You'd do well to take off those blue blinders, because I can assure you that those who now hold your fate and well-being in their hands are wearing only green ones.

I know what amendment it is and believe me I have no blinders on. It is the intended purpose of the Senate to be a level paying field between the states populations and representation.

lol, my fate and well being have never been held by anyone but me. I have never to my knowledge held my breath waiting for someone else to ensure my well being and fate. Strange you would use those words. I actually find it a bit offensive.

I am moving on, you blame Obama but then say you blame all but I didn't see the blame to the other side in your original post, I guess I am not good at reading your mind.

Strange you would use those words. I actually find it a bit offensive.

My mistake. Next time I'll provide a disclaimer that the commentary should be recieved in terms of the context of the subject matter -civil government. Like it or not, decisions being made have a profound affect on us all.
 

I am moving on, you blame Obama but then say you blame all but I didn't see the blame to the other side in your original post, I guess I am not good at reading your mind.

I copied an article by a respected PhD who indicted this administration, and rightly so, because the indictment is properly substantiated.  Not surprisingly, you did not engage the issue as such, rather spoke of previous regimes, and I humored you. I made no allusion to what had or had not been transgressed by Clinton, Bush, Reagan, or anyone else, because at this point its not relevant.  I'll do a better job of keeping you on track next time if you wish.  You're moving on because you're out of your depth.