Can anyone offer an explanation..or does an explanation exist?.WHY DON'T THE DEMS LET THE REPUKES

[BrklynLiberal]

FILIBUSTER the unemployment bill..and any other bill they want to reject? Let the people see who and what the repukes really are?? What is the point of not forcing them to filibuster???

[Jackpine Radical]

1. I have been wondering that exact thing for eons now.

[DJ13]

2. Both sides have the same masters

The poor Congress people might not get their goodies if they actually made the "opposition" have to work for a living.

[phasma ex machina]

12. +1 Going along to get along. The powers-that-be want no one rocking the boat or upsetting the apple

cart with upcoming elections. Just one big happy dysfunctional family putting its best face on for the voters.

:rofl:

[BrklynLiberal]

18. But it sure seems that it is always the repukes who come out looking like they won.

Brings to mind a bit from "Man of La Mancha" when Sancho Panza is asked why he does not fight back with his wife.. He says, "Well, it does not matter whether the rock hits the pitcher, or the pitcher hits the rock...it is always the pitcher that suffers."

It seems that the Dems are playing the role of the pitcher, and the repukes are the rock.

[golddigger]

3. To put it bluntly...

because Congress is one stinking pile of elephant shit

[BrklynLiberal]

6. day-um. I am so saddened by the realization that you and DJ13 are probably right

[ScarletFyre]

4. I agree...

They need to do this. And then the DNC needs to plaster America with ads showing the Republicans' complete disregard of the suffering of working-class, unemployed Americans.

[Oregone]

5. Because the Republicans will not successfully do it for a substantial period of time

And then the legislation will pass.

[BrklynLiberal]

7. Wouldn't that be an argument for the Dems to allow the filibuster to go on?

[Oregone]

9. Depends if you want the legislation to pass or not

Though your opinion is irrelevant, insofar as your vote is secured.

[BrklynLiberal]

10. So, you think that the Dems are no more in favor of the bill than the repukes?

[Oregone]

15. I can only guess, which I will decline to do

I do know they are in favor of being perceived as in favor of the bill

Dragging out Republican obstruction is also not without value, politically speaking (whether or not that is willful intent)

[BrklynLiberal]

19. hmmmmmmm Food for thought.

[BeFree]

8. Use force?

Do you really understand the Dem platform?

As far as I understand it, it is to not make waves.
Be afraid of what the press might say about us.

And keep the powder dry. Yep. Keep that gallon of powder dry.

The only thing they fear is the small people rising up and crushing their political dreams.
It was worth $20 billion to BP to put a damper on the uprising, and we see how well that worked.

And as long as some company counts all the small votes, they have no fear about getting elected, except that the bribery might get too expensive.

[BrklynLiberal]

13. But wouldn't it be the repukes making the waves with their filibuster?

I guess it is obvious that I would not do well in DC

[BeFree]

17. Do well in DC?

Not in the present day bunch of scaredy cats.

What we need is about 10,000 of you in DC everyday, day in and day out.

As it is, the elite few are there to protect the elite's interests.

[asdjrocky]

11. They don't even filibuster, they just threaten to filibuster.

It's like letting the bully take your lunch money without even having to punch you in the nose.

That says to me they are either in collusion, or they are just big sissies. Either way, it's not good for most of the Dems.

[sandnsea]

14. They ARE filibustering

Why doesn't the media TELL YOU.

[Oregone]

16. We want to see Vitter's buddies in diapers too, standing around reading out of phone books for hours

[Kablooie]

20. No they dont' have to. They just threaten and the Dems pull the bill.

[sandnsea]

22. No. They had a VOTE, which is the filibuster n/t

[annabanana]

29. The media can't "tell". .It can only SHOW.. If someone stood there

for days and talked and talked and never stopped talking, THEN they'd have something to SHOW the American people....

[Lorien]

21. Good cop/ bad cop

They both serve the same corporate masters. The worst thing that happened to the Dems in 2008 was winning it all; at least they had the excuse of the All Powerful Blue Dogs to keep them from serving the people. BushCo could bully a Dem majority into submission, but the current White House feels the need to appease the minority, for whatever* reason.


*We all know but dare not say.

[BrklynLiberal]

23. A very, very sad truth, indeed....

[notadmblnd]

24. Because to these people, fucking with the lives of others is nothing but a game

the lives of the people are not important. Why would they stay in DC and do the people's business when they can be out there making legislative deals with greedy corporations in exchange for $$s to get them re elected (it costs money to rig an election these days). The people don't matter at all. We're not even needed at election time anymore.

It's why no one is responding to the situation in the gulf as the emergency it is. They don't need the little people. So what if the water we drink is poisoned and the air we breath is polluted? They don't drink the same water or breath the same air as we small people. All they need is enough proles to service their golden piss pots and raise their heathen spawn for them while they go off to play "see how much more worthless shit I have than you" with each other. The rest of us are only a burden for them to bear. We get in the way of their shallow pretentious lives. To them, the sooner the herd is thinned, the better.

[treestar]

25. What if the Democrats did not have it during Republican Senates?

Are you claiming they never use it?

[BrklynLiberal]

27. The Rise Of Cloture: How GOP Filibuster Threats Have Changed The Senate

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/the-rise-of-cloture-how-gop-filibuster-threats-have-changed-the-senate.php

It's true that there has been a decades-long uptick in the use of cloture filings -- often to overcome filibuster threats -- by whichever party is in the majority, but the best measurement of that trend shows an explosion since Republicans were consigned to minority status after the 2006 election.

Check this out:



These are the numbers on cloture over the last several decades. Often, but not always, cloture is employed by senate majority leaders in response to filibuster threats from the minority. Cloture isn't always necessarily correlated with filibusters, but broadly speaking, the two often go hand in hand.

What's particularly striking here is the GOP's use of filibuster threats, and the correlated increase in Democratic cloture motions. Take, for instance, the huge spike in cloture motions filed from the Republican-led 109th Congress in 2005-2006 to the Democratic-majority 110th in 2007-2008.

"It is the most striking in history," American Enterprise Institute resident scholar Norm Ornstein told TPM.

What happened, Ornstein says, is that during the last two years of President George W. Bush's second term, Republicans offered "no initiatives to speak of."
<snip>
Things heated up about 35 years ago, when the Senate voted to change its cloture rules, lowering the filibuster-ending requirement from 67 votes to 60.

At the same time, the Senate was becoming more partisan than it had ever been, Ritchie said. Before the cloture change, strict party-line votes were relatively rare. But in the years that followed, the ideological spectrum of each party began to shrink, leading up to today, when, as Ritchie put it, "we have much more party discipline right now than we've ever had."

With senators closely toeing the party line in a way that Ritchie said they rarely had before, senate majority leaders of both parties have in recent decades begun filing for cloture more and more frequently -- largely as a way to gauge whether they have 60 votes for a bill before they expend time and effort on it on the Senate floor.

While Ritchie went to great pains in our discussion Monday to paint the rise of cloture as a bipartisan phenomenon, it's not entirely clear that's true. For instance, the two largest spikes in cloture filings in the last 20 years seem to be motivated, at least in part, by Republican obstructionism.

When Republicans were a Senate minority in 1991-1992, there were 59 cloture filings. When President Clinton took office, with Republicans remaining the minority in the Senate, that number shot up to 80 in 1993-1994.

When Democrats reclaimed the Senate majority in the 2006 midterm elections, cloture filings shot up from 68 in 2005-2006 to a record 139 in 2007-2008.
<snip>

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/cloture_motions/clotureCounts.htm



Senate Action on Cloture Motions
CongressYears Motions Filed Votes on Cloture Cloture Invoked
111 2009-2010 102 60 49
110 2007-2008 139 112 61
109 2005-2006 68 54 34
108 2003-2004 62 49 12
107 2001-2002 72 61 34
106 1999-2000 71 58 28
105 1997-1998 69 53 18
104 1995-1996 82 50 9
103 1993-1994 80 46 14
102 1991-1992 59 47 22
101 1989-1990 37 24 11
100 1987-1988 53 43 12
99 1985-1986 40 23 10
98 1983-1984 41 19 11
97 1981-1982 31 30 10
96 1979-1980 30 20 11
95 1977-1978 23 13 3
94 1975-1976 39 27 17
93 1973-1974 44 31 9
92 1971-1972 23 20 4
91 1969-1970 7 6 0
90 1967-1968 6 6 1
89 1965-1966 7 7 1
88 1963-1964 4 3 1
87 1961-1962 4 4 1
86 1959-1960 1 1 0
85 1957-1958 0 0 0
84 1955-1956 0 0 0
83 1953-1954 1 1 0
82 1951-1952 0 0 0
81 1949-1950 2 2 0
80 1947-1948 0 0 0
79 1945-1946 6 4 0
78 1943-1944 1 1 0
77 1941-1942 1 1 0
76 1939-1940 0 0 0
75 1937-1938 2 2 0
74 1935-1936 0 0 0
73 1933-1934 0 0 0
72 1931-1932 2 1 0
71 1929-1930 1 0 0
70 1927-1928 1 0 0
69 1925-1926 7 7 3
68 1923-1924 0 0 0
67 1921-1922 1 1 0
66 1919-1920 2 2 1
Total 1220 889 387

[treestar]

28. More Partisan

That makes it more of an obstacle. And of course that applies even more so to Republicans, who are now really towing the party line.

[Llewlladdwr]

26. Because they would have to do an actual filibuster themselves in the future.

And who the hell wants to hang out in the Senate's chamber all night when they could be sipping cocktails in the lounge?

[IOKIYAL]

30. Here's A Great Explanation From A Political Scientist

Read the whole thing AND the comments section:


http://plainblogaboutpolitics.blogspot.com/2010/01/live-filibuster-one-more-time.html