Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Even if Obama gets nothing else done, he needs to win to flip the Supreme Court.

Of course, many conservatives already consider the Supreme Court flipped after the Fall Of John Glover Roberts Junior, Aged 57.

But it had a built in limit - a person's willpower. They could slow something, thy could make it more difficult, but they could not stop it.

In theory you could stop something with an old filibuster if you had multiple supporters. Hold the floor and trade places every once in a while until the Senate starts to starve or ends the session.

[GlyphGryph]

I believe there were limits on whether or not someone would be allowed up to speak, though, right? So the only guaranteed way to hold was not to switch?

I forget some of the details, admittedly. Did that ever actually happen?

[lemon10]

The filibuster was originally a delaying tactic. It could buy you time and apply pressure - nothing more. It gave individual legislators the opportunity to prevent rushing terrible bills through the legal system. It gave them a chance to build public support, to draw things out into the open, to make people actually stop and think, hopefully, or at the very least to give someone a chance to change minds.

But it had a built in limit - a person's willpower. They could slow something, thy could make it more difficult, but they could not stop it.

This "new" filibuster is nothing like that. It's a solid, impossible to overcome clampdown.

You can just pass it along to the next person in line. I am not saying its easy, but assuming you have 30 willing filibusters (and 15 senators stopping the filibuster from being stopped), you can just pass it between them in 2 hour intervals, with the same speaker talking every sixty hours. It would be a pain in the butt to extend it until the session ended, but not impossible if none of them decide to change their mind.

Even if Obama gets nothing else done, he needs to win to flip the Supreme Court.

Of course, many conservatives already consider the Supreme Court flipped after the Fall Of John Glover Roberts Junior, Aged 57.

But it had a built in limit - a person's willpower. They could slow something, thy could make it more difficult, but they could not stop it.

In theory you could stop something with an old filibuster if you had multiple supporters. Hold the floor and trade places every once in a while until the Senate starts to starve or ends the session.

I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure they could just use a aid to get food.

But yeah, much easier then stopping the current stupid filibuster rules, which I am sure will be ended eventually when a issue gets big enough to force it.

EDIT:

Senate rules permit a senator, or a series of senators, to speak for as long as they wish and on any topic they choose, unless "three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn"[43] (usually 60 out of 100 senators) brings debate to a close by invoking cloture under Senate Rule XXII.

Yup, any combination of senators can delay as long as they want.

[GlyphGryph]

Are they allowed to repeat?

[lemon10]

Yes.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

There isn't any rule against it, but I don't recall anyone ever trying either.

[Reelya]

Apparently Texas is having a shit because there will be UN election observers. Threatening criminal prosecution if any observers come within 100 feet of the entrance. Hell, if any other country barred observers, you can be sure it'd be taken as a sign of corruption.

[MonkeyHead]

Heh, arent you guys a shining beacon of democrcy who should be showcasing just how its done to the observers?

[/irony]

[Leafsnail]

THE UN IS GOING TO INVADE US is a pretty common conspiracy theory, it seems.  I can't find the guy who was claiming there were secret codes hidden on the back of road signs, unfortunately, but I did see plenty of THE UN INVASION IS IMMINENT posts dating back to 1997.

[Darvi]

Pfff, if we were interested we'd just have our mindslave Obama give it to us.

[mainiac]

I think the democrats should throw the election. Consider; the next four years are going to see more stagnant economy, increasing gas prices, and the us leaving the middle east in humiliating defeat.

The past 4 years have had a weak economy as households and businesses have been deleveraging.  Spending will rebound because that's already happened.  Add on that the Federal Reserve is opening up the floodgates in a big way and that will start kicking in a few months into the next presidents term.  Yeah gas prices will go up but how important are gas prices compared to an economic rebound?  I don't get why you think the US is on course for humiliation in the middle east.  It seems to me like the spate of revolutions that we didn't directly involve ourselves in is like a best case scenario?

I think the stakes are so high in this election because the next four years are probably going to be much, much better for the US.  If Obama wins he gets vindication because we stayed the course and things got better.  If Romney wins he gets vindication because as soon as he got into office things got better.  As a bonus to the winner Europe is probably not going to recover well so depending on who get's the bully pulpit America was smart to either avoid European austerity or avoid European welfare states.  I expect that whatever party wins in two weeks is going to win again in 4 years.

[Reelya]

I heard an Australian reporter on TV talking about the ~1969 independence vote of West Papua from Indonesia. The US and UK wanted it to stay as part of Indonesia, this was back when Indonesia had the murderous dictator Suharto.

The reporter said he was there at a polling place, and there was a British election observer inside the polling place. Outside people were trying to get in to vote, but the Indonesian army was threatening them at gunpoint, beating people, herding those who protested into trucks and disappearing them somewhere. There were hand-picking people who were allowed to vote in the referendum, but these people were scared witless what would happen if they didn't "vote right".

The reporter went into the polling place, and told the "observer" what was happening outside. The observer calmly said "my job is to observe what happens in here, not out there!".

[Mephansteras]

THE UN IS GOING TO INVADE US is a pretty common conspiracy theory, it seems.  I can't find the guy who was claiming there were secret codes hidden on the back of road signs, unfortunately, but I did see plenty of THE UN INVASION IS IMMINENT posts dating back to 1997.

Heh. Typical conspiracy nonsense. They tend to have a strange underlying assumption that large, horrible inefficient/incompetent organizations are really faking it and actually secretly hyper-competent. In reality, I doubt the UN could successfully invade the Galapagos islands, let alone the US.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

It is kind of difficult to invade without an army.

[Mephansteras]

It is kind of difficult to invade without an army.

And that's just the start of the problems the UN would have.