Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

cascadiance

(19,537 posts)
1. Here's an article on how this still "doesn't have support"...
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 03:08 PM
Jan 2013

Dems need to be reminded of what party they are in!

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/278815-sen-durbin-democrats-lack-votes-to-pass-talking-filibuster-reform

And another from TPM on the status here...

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/01/harry-reid-has-51-votes-filibuster-reform.php

Perhaps Senator Reid should also be called and reminded that the dems DO NOT NEED 51 votes to pass this reform. Just 50, since supposedly Biden can vote it in in case of a 50-50 draw. And Biden supposedly is behind this reform too, is he not?

Here's an article on how this still "doesn't have support"... cascadiance Jan 2013 #1
Done Bennyboy Jan 2013 #2
thanks for the info. Contacted both Senator Boxer and Senator Leahy. Now I will continue Filibuster Harry Jan 2013 #3
Just contacted Senator Feinstein's office. I really hope our democrat senators don't Filibuster Harry Jan 2013 #4
k&r ! . . .n/t annabanana Jan 2013 #5
K&R Guy Whitey Corngood Jan 2013 #6
Conservadems.. NorthCarolina Jan 2013 #7
Thanks cascadiance! Cha Jan 2013 #8
Bumping this. CBHagman Jan 2013 #9
Called Senator Boxer and left a message asking her to support the "Talking" filibuster proposal. xxxsdesdexxx Jan 2013 #10
I bet she has lots of offices in Calif you can call. nm rhett o rick Jan 2013 #12
Done this afternoon. patrice Jan 2013 #11
But wait a minute -- what does this mean? gateley Jan 2013 #13
I heard that they would need to actually have 41 senators agree to filibuster rather than needing xxxsdesdexxx Jan 2013 #14
I wonder what the "watered down" thing means? gateley Jan 2013 #15
I think it's considered "watered down" for several reasons xxxsdesdexxx Jan 2013 #17
Thanks again -- do you know why Harry gave up the "get to talk" aspect? gateley Jan 2013 #18
K&R flamingdem Jan 2013 #16
The Anti-filibuster 7, none of them deserve to be called Democrats davidpdx Jan 2013 #19
I'm done with Carl Levin! CobaltBlue Jan 2013 #21
Glad to hear that davidpdx Jan 2013 #23
Now I wish we would have primaried Feinstein in California in 2012. xxxsdesdexxx Jan 2013 #20
Manipulation CobaltBlue Jan 2013 #22
None on this 'weasel list' have defended their stances, which is the least we could expect from them dmosh42 Jan 2013 #24
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Call Boxer's and Leahy's ...»Reply #1