Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 47

Thread: The Nuclear Option - Filibuster Ending?

  1. #1

    The Nuclear Option - Filibuster Ending?

    You want to see this country destroy itself? Watch what happens when the Senate amends the rules to allow a simple 51 vote majority for basic legislation to pass instead of the customary 60.

    Heads exploding would turn from a metaphor into a bloody reality...

    And I hope they do it!

    I hope to god McConnell changes the rules and they start SLAMMING legislation through at such a fast pace that over a hundred years of progressive statism could be brought to heel...

    But what am I thinking? It is, after all, the $#@!ING GOP we are talking about.

    They won't do it. THey don't have the balls. But Trump is right... the dems would (and WILL) do it first chance they get. If McConnell were smart, he would preempt the dems and lift the curtain on this internal cold war drama.

    This country needs a little (more) chaos.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-0...ms-would-do-it

    Trump Calls For Senate 'Nuclear Option' To Avoid Shutdown, Claims "Dems Would Do It"

    In the latest in a series of breathless tweets, President Trump tweeted on Tuesday calling for the Senate to end the filibuster and allow legislation to pass with a simple majority, saying it would allow his agenda to pass “fast and easy.”
    The U.S. Senate should switch to 51 votes, immediately, and get Healthcare and TAX CUTS approved, fast and easy. Dems would do it, no doubt!”
    There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.
    -Major General Smedley Butler, USMC,
    Two-Time Congressional Medal of Honor Winner
    Author of, War is a Racket!

    It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours.
    - Diogenes of Sinope



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    The problem is that "over a hundred years of progressive statism could be brought to heel...' isn't going to happen if they do start slamming through legislation. Trump wants to ramp up the war on drugs, make our military "great again", end Obamacare and dump even more money into healthcare.

    He wants to make progressivism? great again. The tax cuts? Well they won't mean too much after he's done devaluing the dollar at a increased rate.
    "The Patriarch"

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    The problem is that "over a hundred years of progressive statism could be brought to heel...' isn't going to happen if they do start slamming through legislation. Trump wants to ramp up the war on drugs, make our military "great again", end Obamacare and dump even more money into healthcare.

    He wants to make progressivism? great again. The tax cuts? Well they won't mean too much after he's done devaluing the dollar at a increased rate.
    My point exactly. We don't have a congress that's worth two $#@!s. But a man can dream. I just hope they do it for the leftist-head-explosion-quotient.
    There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.
    -Major General Smedley Butler, USMC,
    Two-Time Congressional Medal of Honor Winner
    Author of, War is a Racket!

    It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours.
    - Diogenes of Sinope

  5. #4
    Why can't he get 60 votes? Isn't he supposed to be a master at deal making? He should at least be able to get all the Senate GOP on board, then some red state Dems like Manchin and McCaskill.
    “I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by jllundqu View Post
    You want to see this country destroy itself? Watch what happens when the Senate amends the rules to allow a simple 51 vote majority for basic legislation to pass instead of the customary 60.

    Heads exploding would turn from a metaphor into a bloody reality...

    And I hope they do it!

    I hope to god McConnell changes the rules and they start SLAMMING legislation through at such a fast pace that over a hundred years of progressive statism could be brought to heel...

    But what am I thinking? It is, after all, the $#@!ING GOP we are talking about.

    They won't do it. THey don't have the balls. But Trump is right... the dems would (and WILL) do it first chance they get. If McConnell were smart, he would preempt the dems and lift the curtain on this internal cold war drama.

    This country needs a little (more) chaos.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-0...ms-would-do-it





    Republicans already invoked the "nuclear option" on the healthcare bill- it can be passed with only 51 votes. Still can't get the votes needed to pass it in the senate.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/30/u...ions.html?_r=0

    The tweet did show a certain ignorance about the current stalemate. Through complicated budget rules, congressional leaders have already ensured that a bill to repeal and partially replace the Affordable Care Act can pass with only 51 votes — not the 60 needed to break a filibuster. The problem is that Senate Republicans, with 52 votes, so far have not been able to assemble health care legislation that can win a simple majority.

    Republicans plan to use the same budget rules — known as reconciliation — to protect a tax cut measure from a filibuster as well. So what is known as “the nuclear option” — a unilateral change of Senate rules that would deprive the minority party of virtually all its legislative power — would be unnecessary.

    But first, they will have to pass a budget, not an easy task.

    Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader, has resisted changing the rules to eliminate the legislative filibuster, and on Tuesday, his office reaffirmed his stance, while gently reminding the president of the current dynamics.

    “Senator McConnell agrees that both health care and tax reform are essential,” said Antonia Ferrier, a McConnell spokeswoman, “and that is why Republicans in Congress are using the reconciliation process to prevent a partisan filibuster of these two critical legislative agenda items.”
    Also beware that if the Republicans are not in power, they would also lose the ability to filibuster on bills- ceding all power to Democrats should they get control of the Senate. Would they support Clinton or Obama having that power behind their policies?
    Last edited by Zippyjuan; 05-30-2017 at 01:26 PM.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by CPUd View Post
    Why can't he get 60 votes? Isn't he supposed to be a master at deal making? He should at least be able to get all the Senate GOP on board, then some red state Dems like Manchin and McCaskill.
    Well, typically the deals made to get those votes are deals that make already $#@!ty bills even runnier, stinkier, and more corn filled. So there is that...

  8. #7
    Why does he want to avoid a shutdown? I heard on here that he really wants a shutdown and there's going to be one.


    Also, ending the filibuster is a terrible idea, on par with increasing executive power. Each party somehow thinks that they can continue their reign forever, then acts dismayed when the other party uses the very same powers that they themselves legislated into effect.

    Than again... the people do the same thing. "Yeah PATRIOT act rah get them terrorists!" "Wait, what do you mean the government's listening to my phone calls? That's unconstitutional!"
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Pinochet is the model
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Liberty preserving authoritarianism.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Enforced internal open borders was one of the worst elements of the Constitution.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    Also, ending the filibuster is a terrible idea
    Too bad! It's going to end.

    Try not to cry.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Kill the filibuster then hold Senators responsible for the horrible things they vote for.
    Checks and balances keep the frog cooking slowly.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Kill the filibuster then hold Senators responsible for the horrible things they vote for.
    Checks and balances keep the frog cooking slowly.
    Filibuster is a method of checks and balances. So is the media, the courts, and supposedly elections (though with gerrymandering safe districts that power is reduced). Would you cheer the end of the filibuster if Clinton was president? Or crying about abuse of powers?
    Last edited by Zippyjuan; 05-30-2017 at 04:05 PM.

  13. #11
    Let it burn
    There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.
    -Major General Smedley Butler, USMC,
    Two-Time Congressional Medal of Honor Winner
    Author of, War is a Racket!

    It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours.
    - Diogenes of Sinope

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Filibuster is a method of checks and balances.
    Checks and balances keep the frog cooking slowly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    So is the media,
    Wrong
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Would you cheer the end of the filibuster if Clinton was president? (I hope you mean if Democrats controlled the Senate) Or crying about abuse of powers?
    I would hate it but I would be forced to support it.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Would you cheer the end of the filibuster if Clinton was president?
    You see, they do not ask themselves these kinds of soul-searching questions. They ask you. Why? Because they think they can weaken you by making you tie your own hands behind your back.

    Correction: they know they can. They've been doing it a long time.

    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    You have to admire the Left for its clarity of vision. It has identified its enemies, and it does what it can to drive them from the field. The recent fireworks in Indiana are a perfect illustration. Team blue knows that Christians are hateful homophobes, and so it goes to bat for the right of homosexuals to sue them over wedding cakes. The Right, with its characteristic acumen, mistakes this bushwhack for a principled stand. “Ah!” they say, “But if you support the right of a gay man to force a Christian to make a cake then you must support the right of the KKK to force a black baker to make a cake!” The average liberal couldn’t imagine a more irrelevant rejoinder. They aren’t making any such proposition at all. In their calculus, Christians (of the Not-fans-of-Pope-Francis type at least) are the bad guys and thus their interests are hateful and invalid and must be opposed. The KKK are bad guys and thus their actions are hateful and invalid and must be opposed. You attack bad guys. You don’t attack good guys. Whence the confusion?

    I am proposing that we on the right should have the same clarity of vision, and stop allowing sentimentality or philosophical confusion to get in our way. Let us focus on ends, not means – whether those means are abstract universalist principles, particular forms of government, or old pieces of paper. Let us say: Victory for good and defeat for evil – at any cost and by whatever means necessary – that is what we want. It is only once we do say this that the victory of good will become possible.
    At some point, you have to care about winning. Winning actually matters. Losing and winning are, it turns out, actually different!!!!! Having a filibuster vs. not having one? Not so much.

    Nothing that the Senate nor the House does matters anyway at this point in time. Seriously. Their actions do not matter at all. The underlying substrate stands unmoved and unmovable -- they are just critters running around on top of it, having no meaningful effect. We'll see over the next couple years if it might be possible to try to change that. One of the first steps will be to eliminate the filibuster. Completely and utterly eliminate and annihilate the Democrats in Congress as any kind of force capable of obstruction. Then do whatever they want. How much will they be able to do? What will they even try to do? Anything good? Anything meaningful? Remains to be seen.

    But the system right now is totally dysfunctional. Just as @jllundqu says, introducing a little bit of peaceful chaos to nudge the system out of equilibrium is the most moderate, measured, restrained, cautious course that any sane person could possibly endorse to try to fix the system. It probably won't work. To actually fix it will take much more muscular measures.

    People like our resident Illegal, Zippy, don't see the system as broken, naturally, and do not want to fix it, because they're in charge. "Fixing" it for us would mean "breaking" it for them.

  16. #14
    Ending filibuster removes any need to try to work with any members of the opposite party or to move towards the political middle or compromise to get things done to benefit everybody. They in turn have no incentive to offer any proposals of their own- no new ideas. It becomes even more dysfunctional and polarizing. The special interests run the place. It isn't part of any "fix" of the system. It makes it worse. It also makes passing bad laws easier.
    Last edited by Zippyjuan; 05-30-2017 at 05:08 PM.

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    At some point, you have to care about winning. Winning actually matters. Losing and winning are, it turns out, actually different!!!!! Having a filibuster vs. not having one? Not so much.

    Nothing that the Senate nor the House does matters anyway at this point in time. Seriously. Their actions do not matter at all. The underlying substrate stands unmoved and unmovable -- they are just critters running around on top of it, having no meaningful effect. We'll see over the next couple years if it might be possible to try to change that. One of the first steps will be to eliminate the filibuster. Completely and utterly eliminate and annihilate the Democrats in Congress as any kind of force capable of obstruction. Then do whatever they want. How much will they be able to do? What will they even try to do? Anything good? Anything meaningful? Remains to be seen.
    There aren't enough liberty-minded people in Congress for anything to come out of there that I would term winning. Rather, because I tend to see most legislation as a losing proposition, I would rather impede them with any and all roadblocks to the sorts of things that they - and you, apparently - deem to be progress.

    If there were a good way to mandate that the President be of a different party than the Congressional majorities I would support that too.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Pinochet is the model
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Liberty preserving authoritarianism.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Enforced internal open borders was one of the worst elements of the Constitution.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Ending filibuster removes any need to try to work with any members of the opposite party or to move towards the political middle or compromise to get things done to benefit everybody. They in turn have no incentive to offer any proposals of their own- no new ideas. It becomes even more dysfunctional and polarizing. The special interests run the place. It isn't part of any "fix" of the system. It makes it worse. It also makes passing bad laws easier.
    You are attempting to have discussion about fixing the system with some folks who have already given up on the system being fixed.
    “I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by CPUd View Post
    You are attempting to have discussion about fixing the system with some folks who have already given up on the system being fixed.
    If it can't be fixed, there is no hope in trying to make anything better. Just resign to accepting things as they are. Nothing matters.

  21. #18
    They won't end the filibuster, for the reason that they need an excuse for not doing the things they pretend to want to do.

    Stay tuned sportsfans.

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    There aren't enough liberty-minded people in Congress for anything to come out of there that I would term winning. Rather, because I tend to see most legislation as a losing proposition, I would rather impede them with any and all roadblocks to the sorts of things that they - and you, apparently - deem to be progress.
    You need some realpolitik. Congress is not your problem (if, indeed, you have a problem with the existing system. You probably don't, really, relative to, say, me and the rest of the forum.). Congress is not anyone's problem. Congress is not even relevant. They are figureheads, like the queen of England. The system, the real system, runs without them, impervious to them.

    Did you not, umm, notice?

    And also impervious to the President. President Trump figured that out immediately, if he didn't already know (he did). These people are all just figureheads. They are not in charge. Of anything.

    Unless, that is, one (or more) of the figureheads tries to assert himself. Then all kinds of delightful craziness is going to ensue.

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by CPUd View Post
    You are attempting to have discussion about fixing the system with some folks who have already given up on the system being fixed.
    Oh, not at all! We are the ones who do want to fix it! It ain't broke for Illegal Invaders like Juan, so there's nothing to fix, for them. And I have not given up at all!

    But to fix a thing, one must understand how it actually works.

    As in, how it is working, in real life, right now. Not how it works in Schoolhouse Rock Fantasy Lie Land.

    Once you can clearly see how the mechanism is operating, then you might be able to formulate a plan of "OK, we need to remove this unhelpful gear, we need to stick a monkey wrench right... here for now, then we can safely isolate and disassemble this apparatus,..." etc.

    The filibuster is the right gear to remove at this time. This is a good plan. And, just as I did some months ago, I predict it is going to happen.

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    You need some realpolitik.
    No thanks, I'm good.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Pinochet is the model
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Liberty preserving authoritarianism.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Enforced internal open borders was one of the worst elements of the Constitution.

  25. #22

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    The filibuster is the right gear to remove at this time.
    What specific, beneficial outcome do you expect to result from nuking the filibuster?

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    No thanks, I'm good.
    Each of us must constantly choose between reality and fantasy.

    Fantasy certainly has much to recommend it.

    Go in peace.



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    Each of us must constantly choose between reality and fantasy.

    Fantasy certainly has much to recommend it.

    Go in peace.
    Realpolitik is not reality. The method used to accomplish the goal affects the ability to accomplish the goal. You cannot tyrannize your way to freedom.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Pinochet is the model
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Liberty preserving authoritarianism.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Enforced internal open borders was one of the worst elements of the Constitution.

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    Realpolitik is not reality. The method used to accomplish the goal affects the ability to accomplish the goal. You cannot tyrannize your way to freedom.
    ORLY?

    Why not?

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    ORLY?

    Why not?
    You will create a society built upon tyranny. That tyranny will persist in the government, laws, culture, and traditions of the people and nation, and they will not let go of it easily.


    If it were possible, there would be many historical examples of tyranny leading to freedom. How many examples exist? Any?
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Pinochet is the model
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Liberty preserving authoritarianism.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Enforced internal open borders was one of the worst elements of the Constitution.

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    If it were possible, there would be many historical examples of tyranny leading to freedom. How many examples exist? Any?
    Close your eyes.

    Now open your eyes.

    Surprise!

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    Close your eyes.

    Now open your eyes.

    Surprise!
    So, none?
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Pinochet is the model
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Liberty preserving authoritarianism.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Enforced internal open borders was one of the worst elements of the Constitution.

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    So, none?
    And you give me a hard time for radical absolutism!

    OK, so your contention is that:

    No freedom exists now. "None."
    If it doesn't exist now, I guarantee it certainly didn't at any time in the past by your standards (1800? 1600? 1500? Ha, ha, and ha, respectively)
    And yet, somehow it is really important to you that we have it

    Good luck with that! Sounds very realistic! Let me know when you are able to implement that mysterious quantum called freedom!

    Or even to define it.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-06-2014, 01:42 PM
  2. (Op-Ed) NUCLEAR OPTION DESTROYS THE SENATE
    By SpreadOfLiberty in forum Rand Paul Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-01-2013, 04:34 PM
  3. Rand Paul: Deterring the nuclear option
    By Brett85 in forum Rand Paul Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-15-2012, 05:40 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-16-2011, 04:59 AM
  5. Jack Conway survey from Daily Kos answers/ Ending filibuster:
    By BamaFanNKy in forum Rand Paul Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 06-04-2010, 12:23 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •