Here's a novel idea: LET THEM FILIBUSTER!

[Blue-Jay]

In fact, make them filibuster. The Senate doesn't require 60 votes to pass legislation. If the RWers want to filibuster, make them do it. In fact, use the footage of them reading out of phonebooks as commercials in their home districts when they're up for re-election. Maybe we could also use footage of many of those RW douchebags threatening the "nuclear option" back in the old days of 2005.

They've already committed themselves to voting NO on everything. Make them work for that "no" vote, and force them to filibuster. Why is that a bad idea?

[PeaceNikki]

1. Ayup.

:thumbsup:

[CrownPrinceBandar]

2. I agree. Let them show themselves as the obstructionists they are.

Do like Byrd did and make them stay in-chamber while they filibuster. Don't let them off easy.

[glinda]

11. Let them "show it loud and clear" too in the media. 'Bout time they actually did their job.

[JDPriestly]

3. Especially on a jobs bill. That would be great footage for campaign ads.

These guys are wasting the people's time in D.C. Show how much they rack in for donations during the time they are filibustering. That is the real story here.

The more the Republicans block the people's business, the more the lobbyists pay them off. The correlation between blocking tactics and lobbyist payments should be tracked and used against these guys when they are up for re-election.

The Republicans are not earning their paychecks from the people. They are focusing on their second job -- working for lobbyists. Goes for a few Democrats too.

[Jamastiene]

4. Yup. Make them read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights while they are at it.

I don't think Republicans have ever really read either. It might serve as a chance to educate those idiots. :thumbsup:

[aquart]

5. That's what I keep saying.

Who's afraid of the big bad filibuster?

A senator threatens to filibuster, hand him a copy of War and Peace with some good chapters marked. Send a telephone book to his office, and thirteen volumes of the Encyclopedia Britannica. Suggest that the Budget is good reading material.

And give him a coupon for diapers.

[Berry Cool]

22. I was actually going to say--on the contrary, nearby store shelves should be emptied of all

Depend and Poise undergarments and anything similar (Serenity, etc.). Make 'em do without.

But do offer them plenty of water in case all that phone book reading makes them thirsty.

[grantcart]

6. agreed and here are the rules that 'govern' filibusters - you don't have to have 60 to break one.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x170401

[no_hypocrisy]

7. They'll probably be reduced to reading transcripts from Rush's show.

[TexasObserver]

8. I agree. Most of these guys couldn't stand IN LINE an hour.

[alp227]

9. A slogan: Vote not for no

Hell, we could juxtapose these images with toddlers screaming "NO NO NO!" That would be so frickin' hilarious. :rofl:

In 1994, Peter Jennings caught a bit of flak for comparing Republican voters with stubborn toddlers.

[glinda]

12. or "Republicans, Party of NO, Dough, Show & Woe.

[alp227]

13. A campaign slogan against David Vitter would escalate into locker-room language

if it includes "no" plus a word to describe the DC Madam.

[glinda]

20. ahhhh go ahead and say it! LOL!

[TheCowsCameHome]

10. 36 straight hours of reading the NYC phone book ought to cure them.

[unblock]

14. the kind of "filibuster" you're describing was made obsolete by a rule change in 1975

before that, you had to seize the floor and refuse to relinquish it in order to force a cloture vote to end debate.
now, senators can simply ask for a cloture vote without needing to remain on the floor.

so technically, they are filibustering everything in sight, but the particular form of filibuster involving long speeches doesn't exist anymore.

the only way to force them to do that would be to use the "nuclear option" ourselves and rewrite the senate rules to once again require filibusters to take that form.

that may or may not be a good idea, as making that sort of rules change would itself give the republicans some rhetorical ammo. besides, the senate did away with that form of filibusters for certain reasons, and those reasons are probably still valid.



if we're going to go to the trouble of using the nuclear option to amend the rules, we might as well make it so that filibustering is difficult enough to do so that even these republicans can't do it very often.

[Better Believe It]

28. That's not correct. They can be forced to filibuster on the Senate floor under Senate Rule 22.

The problem is most Senate Democrats seem to favor current Senate procedures that permit a Republican to leave the Senate chamber and on the way out tell Senator Reid that they are filibustering while they head off to some fancy 5 star hotel room with a corporate paid for hooker!

"Today, the minority just advises the majority leader that the filibuster is on. All debate on the bill is stopped until cloture is voted by three-fifths (now 60 votes) of the Senate. Some modern Senate critics have called for a return to the old dramatic endurance contest but that would inconvenience all senators who would have to stay in session 24/7 until the filibuster is broken."

"In current practice, Senate Rule 22 permits filibusters in which actual continuous floor speeches are not required, although the Senate Majority Leader may require an actual traditional filibuster if he or she so chooses."

These are the "phantom" Republican filibusters we've read about. So let's stop calling them filibusters!

Senate Democrats can at anytime end the "two track" procedure on Senate debates.

"Tracking allows the majority leader - with unanimous consent or the agreement by the minority leader - to have more than one bill pending on the floor as unfinished business. Before the introduction of tracking, a filibuster would stop the Senate from moving on to any other legislative activity. With a two-track system, the Senate simply puts aside the filibustered measure and moves on to other legislation."

And Senate Democrats can at anytime use the "Constitutional Option" to stop any bogus "filibusters" dead in its tracks.

Quotes are taken from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster

[Blue-Jay]

15. Addendum: Here's another idea.

Since the senate operates under it's own rules, I'd like to see a change in the filibuster rules.

Talk as long as you want, provided that it's on-topic. Think about that for a minute. If you want to address the legislation at hand, go for it. Talk until you drop, until you veer off-topic. Don't waste the peoples' time (and it is OUR time, not theirs) reading from the phone book or your favorite novel. Talk about the bill in question as long as you want, but as soon as you start spouting unrelated bullshit, it's time to sit your stupid sorry ass down and let the process work as outlined in the constitution.

What a perfect world we live in....

[iceman66]

16. I've been saying that for months!

[Blue-Jay]

19. And you've been correct for months.

It doesn't require 60 votes to pass legislation in the senate. Who thought up that silly idea?

Go ahead and filibuster your pasty white asses off. Then deal with the consequences when your partisan game-playing idiocy is revealed to your constituents.

Now, who is the "bad guy" in all of this ridiculousness? The spineless Democrats, that's who. Even the threat of a filibuster makes them piss in their collective pants.

Guess what, Dems? Show some courage and tell Joe and Ben and Mary and anyone else to go take a flying fuck at a rolling donut.

We only need 51 votes. (or 50 plus a tie-breaker, if we're being precise.) The rest should be DARED to filibuster until they drop dead of exhaustion.

[Demoiselle]

17. Bingo. (nt)

[suede1]

18. Would love to see it!

[MindandSoul]

21. Yes! I think they should be MADE to say NAY to every little bit. . .

Including job programs stimulus, health care reform, DADT, and every detail of every bill. . . . let's keep a thorough record that will follow them for evermore!

[PuraVidaDreamin]

23. Do It!

Pretty please!

[Faryn Balyncd]

24. We'll buy the catheters for them.

K and R



:hi:



:kick:

[HughMoran]

25. I wish this would happen

I'm not sure when the Senate became a place where you hug a fellow Senator who is indeed stabbing you in the back.

[AlinPA]

26. Filibusters. It's not like "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" anymore.

(From Wikipedia)
In the modern filibuster, the senators trying to block a vote do not have to hold the floor and continue to speak as long as there is a quorum. In the past, when one senator became exhausted, another would need to take over to continue the filibuster. Ultimately, the filibuster could be exhausted by a majority who would even sleep in cots outside the Senate Chamber to exhaust the filibusterers.

Today, the minority just advises the majority leader that the filibuster is on. All debate on the bill is stopped until either cloture is voted by three-fifths (now 60 votes) of the Senate. Some modern Senate critics have called for a return to the old dramatic endurance contest but that would inconvenience all senators who would have to stay in session 24/7 until the filibuster is broken.

[Better Believe It]

29. It can be. Just force the Republicans to engage in a real filibuster.

Don't agree to any more "procedural" phamton filibusters.

[AlinPA]

31. Is that possible within the rules now?

[Faryn Balyncd]

27. We should not continue to SHIELD obstructionists from the risk of PUBLIC SHAME.

The current roles allow obstructionism to APPEAR to be business as usual. In fact, it is only because of these current rules that silent, unseen filibusters HAVE BECOME business as usual.

We need to bring back the old rules.....and re-inject the risk that those who filibuster will expose themselves to public shame when they are viewed as having abused it for purposes not benefiting the public good.

[Better Believe It]

30. Read the Nation editorial

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7653163