Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Are you for or against the senate rule change making it easier to confirm Presidential appointees? [View all]Bolo Boffin
(23,796 posts)4. I'm for it in these circumstances.
It was the abuse of the tool that led to it being taken away. If the GOP had used it as intended, to block the most extreme of nominees, that would be one thing. But for them to block again and again? And to do this on nominees they personally supported? No.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
41 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Are you for or against the senate rule change making it easier to confirm Presidential appointees? [View all]
stevenleser
Nov 2013
OP
I'd wish they'd gone whole hog on the filibuster but this is a good start. n/t
winter is coming
Nov 2013
#5
For it, but it is a great example of what sucks about the Democratic Party "Leadership".
Egalitarian Thug
Nov 2013
#9
How not have this rule used against us is NEVER to allow a Republican majority Senate to begin with!
ancianita
Nov 2013
#16
This creates true majority rule. What we think happens when we're in civics class
Pretzel_Warrior
Nov 2013
#37
Back when Bill Frist threatened the Nuclear Option in 2003, I was against it.
Agnosticsherbet
Nov 2013
#31
I'm for it because I know they wouldn't have waited this long to do it to us as soon as they got the
Arcanetrance
Nov 2013
#38