Make them filibuster the auto bill, you lame jack-asses

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

Thank heavens we're all post-partisan. I guess it's just a coincidence the auto bill was scuttled by a bunch of senators who just happen to be republicans.

Make them filibuster it, you fucking weaklings.

After the market drops tomorrow the spectacle of Shelby and DeMint on c-span reading the phone-book into the congressional record might not be too popular.

[SeattleGirl]

1. I completely agree.

If someone from EITHER side wants to filibuster something, then they'd damned well better do it, a la James Stewart in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.

No more free rides.

No more just SAYING they're going to filibuster.

MAKE. THEM. DO. IT!!!

Make them work for it.

God, but sometimes I hate these people!

[karynnj]

8. That's not the way the Senate rules are -

You filibuster just the way they did - by needing 60 votes for a procedural vote.

[cali]

19. why people don't get that is beyond me.

[Hokie]

31. Rule 22 may be suspended by the leadership

They have done this at least once since the Democrats took over.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

34. Because "some people" are right, and you are mistaken

The rule in question is suspend able.

(Ironically, even a cloture vote is technically a vote to suspend the rules)

[grantcart]

38. And don't let them go home for Christmas or New Year

keep their asses in the Senate. If they want to use their minority power fine, make them earn it

[farmbo]

25. Wrong... Reid could require a fillibuster if he would just grow some

From Wikopedia:

Procedural filibuster
In current practice, Senate Rule 22 permits filibusters in which actual continuous floor speeches are not required, although the Senate Majority Leader may require an actual traditional filibuster if he or she so chooses. This threat of a filibuster can therefore be as powerful as an actual filibuster. Previously, the filibustering senator(s) could delay voting only by making an endless speech. Currently, they need only indicate that they are filibustering, thereby preventing the Senate from moving on to other business until the motion is withdrawn or enough votes are gathered for cloture.

[Overseas]

39. That's what I thought. They COULD require a traditional filibuster.

That's what I want. Let Republicans read endless speeches while the US economy hangs in the balance, just because they want to fight the UAW and destroy American unions. While CSpan runs their endless speeches, Democrats can talk about the value of labor and a manufacturing base in the USA as a part of our national security.

Democrats can also talk about just how much per job in taxpayer financed incentives Shelby and his cronies are offering to foreign auto companies to locate in their states. How many billion would that all come to and when will taxpayers be paid back for those "incentives" to foreign auto makers?

Democrats can talk about national health insurance as part of our national security too.

[iceman66]

41. Reid should have been doing that since 1/07.

It's what the Repugs would be doing if roles were reversed.

[Overseas]

43. I agree. Wanted him to proceed with filibustering Alito and he waffled.

And then Republicans floated tons of filibusters through a mere head count !!
They should have forced the GOP to filibuster all the way every time-- let them be seen filibustering Veterans' benefits because they didn't want a timeline for withdrawal from Iraq.

Let them be seen by everyone now, filibustering to bust the unions. Let people see who supports working people and who supports high finance.

[wryter2000]

36. Honest question

I assumed it was something like that that had happened. Do you mean there was a straight upper-down vote and it still lost? How did that happen? Could we not get 50 votes?

[Hutzpa]

2. Its no surprise

these fools, well most of them are from the South.

Here is a trivial for everyone....guess what else is
down South? any guesses???

[Sebastian Doyle]

3. Foreign owned car factories that employ scab labor?

Just a guess :shrug:

[Renew Deal]

4. The current republican party is suicidal.

They are getting destroyed election after election all over the country and they just keep going.

[wryter2000]

37. Amazing

I keep wondering if there's something I'm missing, or are they really committing mass political suicide? I'm all in favor of that, of course.

[Jennicut]

5. When was the last time we saw a real filibuster, all the talking for hours and stuff?

I really want to see these m*fers do that.

[Ichingcarpenter]

10. Senator Gravel that stopped the Vietnam War

and he was a democrat.

[Jennicut]

30. I read old Strom Thurmond talked for 24 hours once but it was against civil rights legislation

[EffieBlack]

55. The rules have changed since then

[Egnever]

57. Reid did it not so long ago

stood on the floor and read his book cover to cover.

[AllentownJake]

6. Seriously force 80 year old Specter

with his cancer to stand up there and talk till he puts himself in the hospital. That magic bullit fuck.

[Hippo_Tron]

51. Spectere voted yes on cloture

[Born_A_Truman]

7. Hell yes!

Make them show the country who they are!

[Lerrad]

9. I'm not so sure that the bail out of the big three is a good idea....

I have mixed feelings about this.

Auto sales are down because of the economy, and also because it is harder to get new car loans.

What are we suppose to do, just bail out the big three so they can make more cars that just sit on the lot, with no buyers? That's bad business, at least in the short term.

Long term I suppose that the bail out money may help the big three retool so they can build economy cars rather than SUV's and pickup trucks, but even if they can do this...

There are still going to be massive layoffs in the auto industries in the short term. And that will not help the little guys at all. It will do nothing at all to jump start this economy.

What would make more since to me is to give a couple grand to every tax payer, so we can go by a car from the big three, which will bail them out and keep people working.

It MUST start from the bottom up, not from the top down.

(There, I have convinced myself that the bail out plan is a bad idea.)

[AllentownJake]

12. If they don't get money this month

they declare bankruptcy. Nobody buys capital assets from a bankrupt company. Therefore they go into a death sprial till they are like Bethlehem Steel and another American manufacturing industry dies with all the good union jobs it provided for the middle class.

Sweeden and Japan just bailed out their industries to allow them to survive the recession.

[Lerrad]

13. Out of the three GM will go bankrupt.

So what.

[AllentownJake]

15. GM and Chrysler will both go bankrupt

Ford will have a harder time getting capital lending because the other two just failed and may fail itself 3 months later.

[Lerrad]

17. OK, lets assume you are correct...

Let them go under.
Why does it matter?

Now Toyota and Honda can pick up the slack, and the auto workers that worked for the big three can now work for them. And I might add that they pay nearly as well as the big three. (Including the benefits)

[AllentownJake]

18. Honda and Toyota assemble cars in the South

to avoid the UAW. Plus the money goes back to Japan it doesn't stay in the US and they don't make the cars in the United States they only assemble them here.

Your essentially killing the economy of 3 states outright. Michigan, Indiana, and Ohio.

So many things wrong with your idea I can't even begin to detail it.

[TommyO]

33. So what?

Your utter contempt for the people working for GM, Ford and Chrysler is noted, fuckwad.

[Lerrad]

45. I don't appreciate being called a fuckwad TommyO.

The people working for GM, Ford and Chrysler will lose their jobs anyway.

Don't YOU people get it?

[Sebastian Doyle]

53. If you hate unions

then calling you a fuckwad would be a compliment.

[Lerrad]

58. What the fuck.

I never said anything about hating unions. I'm all for unions.

If the tax payers bail out the big three there will still be massive layoffs. Just to night on the news they showed a parts supplier in Michigan that is about to layoff all of their workers. Not because the big three are in trouble, but because NO ONE IS BUYING AUTOS.

So bailing out the big three does nothing but put money in big fat corporate posses pockets. The auto workers still get layed off.

With the bail out the little guy lose even more because the auto workers not only lose their jobs, and the rest of the working tax payers get to pay for the bail out. Maybe they should bail out some of the states like my state of Ohio, by giving us money for unemployment. It's all gone.

Not stop calling me names. I'm entitled to my opinion just as you are entitled to yours.

[we can do it]

42. So What???? Are you Really That Dumb? or Are You Only 10 Years Old?

How many people will this put out of work? What about the retirees?

[Lerrad]

44. You don't get it do you.

I'm not dumb.

If the big three are bailed out, there will still be massive layoffs with an enormous trickle down effect.

Honda just announced today that they will be cutting production and laying off workers.

No one is buying cars.
Get it?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

54. The lay-off rate would be even higher in a liquidation scenario. Get that???

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

14. At this point it is not about good business/bad business

It would be good business to lay off about a third of employed people in America right now.

The auto bailout isn't about Detroit having better business practices. It is about not dumping an extra 500,000-1,000,000 unemployed workers into a job market that cannot absorb any of them, since unemployment is going up right now.

They will go belly up at some point, but this is not the month for it. Even just as a $$$ matter the costs to government of an extra 1/2 percent of unemployment is immense.

If we can get them to carry their workers for another 6 or 9 months that can make a very big difference in our ability to avoid a depression.

[Lerrad]

16. I disagree

Those 500,000-1,000,000 will still be unemployed, because there will be no one to buy the cars that they build.
(The cars will not get built.)

The big three will keep the money, just like the frigging banks did, and the little guy gets screwed just the same.

[PATRICK]

29. Why a bailout plan?

With the super low gas prices hiding the real crisis and the term "bail out" consuming all the brain wave activity, wasn't a better issue always putting the auto industry on a war footing re-tooling for a carbon fuel free future? That would have taken care of the same issues without the divisive and untrustworthy arguments over subsidies and rescues with vague strings to weakly push them, slowly, to the needed future technology?

We are constantly missing the mark and these last frustrating weeks of the Bush mis-administration cannot provide any pretense that ANY good at all, even a common emergency, will come out of the efforts of the current government makeup.

[Waiting For Everyman]

11. Agree! Call their bluff bigtime! n/t

[ColbertWatcher]

20. Agreed. k+r, n/t

[DCBob]

21. The deal will likely go on -- Bush said he will tap Wall Street bailout money

From CCN:

"However, the Big Three could still wind up getting government funding. Bush officials warned wavering GOP senators earlier Thursday that if they didn't support the legislation, the White House will likely be forced to tap funds from the Wall Street bailout to lend them money, two Republican congressional officials told CNN. The White House has been strongly opposed to using any of the $700 billion in bank bailout funds to help the auto industry, but the Bush administration has also expressed that the Big Three must get some financial assistance soon."

http://money.cnn.com/2008/12/11/news/companies/auto_bailout_senate/index.htm?postversion=2008121206
=========

I agree with this and suspect Bush has the blessing of Obama and most Democrats to move forward with this alternative plan. The could be one of the most significant positive things this President does as he leaves office... at long last.

[ChazII]

22. Agree with you 100%. n/t

[CTLawGuy]

23. they don't have to fillibuster

thanks to Harry "lets increase the votes needed for passage of anything from 51 to 60" Reid.

[wmbrew0206]

48. Dude, learn how the Senate works before you post something that dumb

[CTLawGuy]

60. oh really

and "how does the senate work?" please educate me. I am not seeing any all-night fillibusters of these bills. All Im seeing is a leader who throws out any bill that doesn't reach 60 votes. That is nothing more than filibusters-made-easy.

I don't remember bills requiring 60 votes to pass when Bill Frist controlled the senate. Do you?

[Dinger]

24. I Agree, K & R n t

[Laelth]

26. Amen. Stand up and fight!

How can Americans trust us to fight terrorists if we're not willing to stand up and fight Republicans?

The "Democrats are wimps" meme has got to go!

The United States is a LIBERAL Country.

:dem:

-Laelth

[TexasObserver]

27. If Harry Reid had a backbone, he would, but since he doesn't ....

Once again, Harry Reid proves that is not up to the job.

[Undercurrent]

28. Yes!

But what did we get instead? The pathetic image of a limp suited, mush mouthed Harry Reid whining, and wringing his hands. Blat!

[European Socialist]

32. Exactly. Make the Repukes give up hope of ever...

winning anything in the Northeast quadrant of the USA. By the way, this strategy should have been used for the past two years for many issues--Reid and Pelosi suck.

[uponit7771]

35. EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[bvar22]

40. You don't undstand. This is the era of "Post-Partisanship".

"Pragmatic Centrists" are reaching across the aisle and working with Republicans to get "things done"! YAY!!!

[JuniperLea]

46. Exactly...

A threat isn't enough. Make them do it! Force the issue! Call their fucking bluff!

[onenote]

47. I'm trying to understand why it would make any difference.

If instead of invoking cloture and voting to shut down debate, Reid called the other side's bluff and made them hold the floor discussing the bill, would the outcome be any different? The power to call a vote to shut off the debate rests in the leadership's hand and if they don't use it, wouldn't they end up being subject to criticism for letting the other side run on and on? At some point, it is incumbent on the leadership to try to stop the debate and if they let the other side ramble on for a couple of days and then try to stop it and fail, doesn't that look like an even greater victory for the other side than if they simple have the cloture vote based on the threat of a filibuster?

[spanone]

49. you're right about fucking weaklings.....get this fucking congress gone

[Hippo_Tron]

50. The problem is that when you have 40+ people you can filibuster for a very long time

In the case of the Civil Rights Act of '64, Mansfield did actually clear the calendar and force them to stand on the floor filibustering. But there weren't even 40 (Cloture required 2/3rds back then) of them and they held the floor for 50+ days. Finally Mansfield and Dirksen agreed to water the bill down the bill to bring enough Republicans on board to get cloture.

Yes it would be gratifying to watch the Republicans stand there and read the phone book all day. But if they are determined enough they could easily ride ride it out until the end of this congress.

That is the real reason you never see a traditional filibuster anymore. If there really are 40+ people actually willing to filibuster something, they can hold the floor for months and in order to force them to keep holding the floor you have to take all other items off of the calendar and stall all other business. Arguably, no single piece of legislation is that important.

[Nipper1959]

52. I have been telling

my Senator, Russ Feingold just that for the past 20 months. I could not agree more. Make them do it over the holidays. Merry effing X Mas assholes.

[ClarkUSA]

56. Um, Democrats got what they wanted in the first place: get the $$ out of TARP.

It was BushCo that didn't want to do that, which forced a Senate GOP sideshow photo-op. Now BushCo is likely to back down
and do what Pelosi and Reid wanted from the outset. Bush II got dogged by his own Senate Republicans. Checkmate.

[Sex Pistol]

59. You can only bang your head against the wall for so long before it starts to hurt.

[chill_wind]

61. Big fat K & R. n/t