cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: Romeny the coward

You said 'A fillibustering Senate'.  How can you call the Senate, a 'fillibustering' Senate, when they fillibustered nothing?

 

Empty threats, from politicians, mean next to nothing.   If there was something the majority party in the Senate wanted done, why didn't htey bring it to the floor, and call their bluff?  Is the mere threat that someone may stand in front of a microphone, and read pages out of a dictionary, so frightening, that they couldn't bring up one single thing, that they might object to?

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: Romeny the coward

I think it had to be subsidized, in order to get the plants built, that were required to make enough ethanol to cover the governmnet mandate.

What kind of mess would there be, had there been a mandate for a certain amount of ethanol, but no way to produce it?

I'm not saying the subsidies were a 'good' thing, but considering the mandate, they were a 'necessary' thing.  Either that, or change the mandate.

 

Now that the plants are up and running, the best thing to do, is drop any subsidies they get, and let them sink or swim.

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: Romeny the coward

How about mandating something we don't even have the technology to do on a massive scale like cellulosic ethanol?  They have to continually change the cellulose mandate. 

Highlighted
Advisor

Re: Romeny the coward

You are a real sharp, articulate and insightful person and I enjoy reading your posts but I'm a bit amazed by this response.

 

It's not like you to be crafty or disingenious so I've got to assume that you simply don't understand how the whole thing workds.  How a bill gets to the floor and the cloture process.  No, they don;t filibuster for hours ordays on end like they used to.  But the net result is exactly the same.  Some would argue considerably worse.  Cloture acts as a circuit breaker and keeps the dialogue from taking place.

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: Romeny the coward

Ever heard of the 60 rule 

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: Romeny the coward

What I am trying to say, is they didn't even try. I am not saying that they could have ended a filibuster, I'm saying that they didn't even try.  It is like they were playing poker, and the Dems had 3 aces.  The GOP then 'threatened' that they had a full house, and the dems folded, without ever making them show their hand.  For all we know, they only held a pair of threes.


How do we know they were going to filibuster, if no one ever pushed them to it?  How do we know it wasn't all a bluff?  How do we know, that the American citizens, would have not saw the GOP fillibuster popular legislation, and written to them, to stop it, or better yet, voted them out come the next election?
We will never know, because the Dems caved in to a filibuster, that never happened.

 

I say, let them filibuster, and then the whole world could see exactly WHO was holding up legislation, and what they were fighting against.  Expose them for the idiots they are.  Show some backbone, and stand up to the bullies.  Instead, they caved, and got nothing done.  I personally think, it would have been better, had they at least stood up for their principals, while getting nothing done.  At least then, they could have gone home, and said they tried.

Highlighted
Advisor

Re: Romeny the coward

Watching too many re-runs of Mr. Smith Goes to Washinington my friend.  Doesn't work like you want it to. Committee chairs, individual member holds and cloture votes,   Nobody just walks in from out in the hallway and starts spoutinig about an issue dear to them. 

Highlighted
Advisor

P.S. Harry Reid

.If Romney wins, Harry becomes the most powerful person in the nation.

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: Romeny the coward

So, are you trying to tell me, that if the majority wants to bring up a bill for discussion, they cannot do it?  If I am not mistaken, any member of the Senate can request to introduce a bill to the floor, and can do so, after being recognized by the presiding officer.  It would seem that whoever was the chairman, had the ability to recognize a Senator wishing to introduce legislation for debate.

That is all I ask.  If you believe in something, bring it up, and let them filibuster it, if that is what they wish to do.  At least you tried.  To give up, because someone threatens a filibuster, to me seems the easy way out. 
I almost think it was all politics on both sides.  The Dems got to say 'Golly, I'd have solved all the world's problems, but the GOP threatened to filibuster, so I dared not even try.  Send me more campaign money, and maybe next time, I can actually bring something forward for a vote.'

Then, on the other side, the GOP got to say 'The Dems wanted to push through their evil agenda, but we stood fast, and threatened to block the progress of their evilness, by threatening a filibuster.  Send us more campaign money, so we can keep thwarting their plans.'

And then, nothing gets done, they both make thier core backers sort of happy, their campaign coffers get filled up, and the average American gets the shaft.  What are they so afraid of, that debate may cut into their recess time?

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: P.S. Harry Reid

I would disagree with that.  Maybe the most powerful 'naysayer', after the President, in that when he says 'no' it will be difficult to get around him, but not the most powerful in the whole nation.

Personally, I'd like to see bills brought forward, debated, and then passed, killed, or filibustered.  At least that stuff is done on the floor of the Senate, UNDER PUBLIC SCRUTINY, instead of behind closed door, with under the table dealings.

I don't know if I am making my point very well, but I realize that the bill probably would have no more chance of passing, if it was brought forward, and then filibustered, but get it out in the open, so the public can at least see who stands for what.  There is too much 'behind closed doors' stuff going on, and I wish they would do something to reverse the trend.