The Landover Baptist Church Forum - Time to end the filibuster

The Landover Baptist Church Forum (https://www.landoverbaptist.net/forumindex.php)

- Godly Politics (https://www.landoverbaptist.net/forumdisplay.php?f=17)

- - Time to end the filibuster (https://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?t=110668)

Time to end the filibuster

I've always said the filibuster is unconstitutional and needs to be abolished. It doesn't make any sense for the minority party to hold power over the entire apparatus and function of the US government. Effectively holding the country to ransom like a bunch of terrorists. It just DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. It makes me so ANGRY to think about it. I'M MAD ABOUT THIS. RIGHT. NOW.

We need to head off the honeyed-words of the Democrats and the whiny, snivelling Republican cowards who refused to support Trump.

Quote:

"Their technique won't be to turn on him," Gingrich said. "Their technique will be to say ‘Oh, be reasonable. Don’t push too hard. Don’t force the issue. Find a compromise with Democrats. Maybe he shouldn’t name one of the [Supreme Court] justices who are conservative who’s on his list. Maybe he should find a nice moderate acceptable to the Democrats.'

"Down that road is a disaster," Gingrich continued. "And then, so we have to be aware that the danger is not that they’re going to actively fight. The danger is that they’re going to opt for honeyed words of subversion that undermines the entire movement to make America great again..."

Gingrich dismissed never-Trump Republicans as "whiny, snivelling, negative cowards" who should "drift off into the ashbin of history while we go ahead and work with Donald Trump and with the House and Senate Republicans to create a dramatically new future."

Re: Time to end the filibuster

Here here. I have had it UP TO HERE with obstruction! I am SICK AND TIRED of presidential derangement syndrome, this ritual where every 4 years half the country threatens to move to Canada. And can we just give up on this "checks and balances" and "limiting the imperial presidency" and "preventing executive overreach" another excuses for gridlock? ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

Re: Time to end the filibuster

I just can't believe that its going to take another two months to get that negro and his family out of the rent free public housing that he has had for 8 years.

Phil

Re: Time to end the filibuster

...And just as scheduled, the phoney calls for bipartisanship!

And I am sick of voters being FORCED not to vote presidents for a 3rd term!

Why force Donald Trump to step down after just 2 terms? We either have majority rule or we don't, and if some bit of red tape is saying "screw you voters, you can't have the guy you twice proved you prefer" then we don't have majority rule.

Re: Time to end the filibuster

It's often been said that God works in mysterious ways, and the "filibuster" in the Senate is no exception. In 2013 the Democrats (led by the living corpse Harry Reid) exercised the "nuclear" option by changing the Senate rules in order to get Obama's agenda passed - thus paving the way for Republicans to exercise the same measures by the precedent set by the DEMONcrats.

Quote:

Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.

- Romans 12:19

Praise the Holy Name of the Sweet Baby Jesus - it's just that the word "schadenfreude" was not around in Biblical times.

Quote:

Reid, Democrats trigger ‘nuclear’ option; eliminate most filibusters on nominees
By Paul Kane November 21, 2013

Senate Democrats took the dramatic step Thursday of eliminating filibusters for most nominations by presidents, a power play they said was necessary to fix a broken system but one that Republicans said will only rupture it further.

Democrats used a rare parliamentary move to change the rules so that federal judicial nominees and executive-office appointments can advance to confirmation votes by a simple majority of senators, rather than the 60-vote supermajority that has been the standard for nearly four decades.

The immediate rationale for the move was to allow the confirmation of three picks by President Obama to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit — the most recent examples of what Democrats have long considered unreasonably partisan obstruction by Republicans.

In the long term, the rule change represents a substantial power shift in a chamber that for more than two centuries has prided itself on affording more rights to the minority party than any other legislative body in the world. Now, a president whose party holds the majority in the Senate is virtually assured of having his nominees approved, with far less opportunity for political obstruction.

. . .

Reid said the chamber “must evolve” beyond parliamentary roadblocks. “The American people believe the Senate is broken, and I believe the American people are right,” he said, adding: “It’s time to get the Senate working again.”

McConnell linked the rule change to the methods used to approve Obama’s health-care law solely with Democratic votes.

. . .

After the vote, Obama told reporters at the White House that Republicans had turned nomination fights into a “reckless and relentless tool” to grind the gears of government to a halt and noted that “neither party has been blameless for these tactics.” However, he said, “today’s pattern of obstruction . . . just isn’t normal; it’s not what our founders envisioned.”

. . .

Republicans vowed to reciprocate if they reclaim the majority.

“Democrats won’t be in power in perpetuity,” said Sen. Richard C. Shelby (Ala.), a 27-year member. “This is a mistake — a big one for the long run. Maybe not for the short run. Short-term gains, but I think it changes the Senate tremendously in a bad way.”

. . .

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...67c_story.html