February 06, 2007

Live By The Cloture Vote, Die By The Cloture Vote

It was supposedly a way of defending institutional integrity when Democrats used their ability to block cloture votes when the GOP had a Senate majority. Now the Republicans are using the tactic to prevent the passage of a cut-and-run resolution on Iraq, and the Democrats are howling.

A long-awaited Senate showdown on the war in Iraq was shut down before it even started yesterday, when nearly all Republicans voted to stop the Senate from considering a resolution opposing President Bush's plan to send 21,500 additional combat troops into battle.

A day of posturing, finger-pointing and backroom wrangling came to nothing when Democratic and Republican leaders could not reach agreement on which nonbinding resolutions would be debated and allowed to come to a vote. The Senate's 49 to 47 vote last night to proceed to debate on Bush's new war policy fell 11 votes short of the 60 needed to break the logjam. Just two Republicans, Norm Coleman (Minn.) and Susan Collins (Maine), voted with the Democrats to proceed with the debate. Both are considered among the most vulnerable senators standing for reelection in 2008.

Republicans insisted that the impasse will soon be broken. But the leaders of the two parties appeared to be far from a compromise last night, and the White House has worked hard to block action on a resolution disapproving of the president's decision to boost troop levels.

"What you just saw was Republicans giving the president the green light to escalate in Iraq," Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said after the vote. Reid contended that Republicans "are trying to avoid a debate on this matter."

Republicans said they have no desire to avoid a debate, asserting that they simply want a fair hearing on their proposals.

"We are ready and anxious to have this debate this week," said Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.).

Hey, harry, didn't you folks like to use this very method to stop legislation you opposed as recently as last year? How, then, can you object to its use today, now that you are in the majority?

Oh, that's right -- the shoe is on the other foot, and you don't like having to play by the rules you established when you obstructed Senate business while in the minority.

And frankly, I want to see the GOP prevent any vote on any measure that will undercut the troops and their mission by giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

|| Greg, 05:20 AM || Permalink || Comments (11) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

Trackback Information for Live By The Cloture Vote, Die By The Cloture Vote

TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'Live By The Cloture Vote, Die By The Cloture Vote'.

Comments on Live By The Cloture Vote, Die By The Cloture Vote

Who's saying the Republicans shouldn't be able to use it?  I've not seen anybody whining about that.  I've seen a few complain that they are choosing to use it, but nobody complaining about the propriety of using it.

Actually, I love seeing the Republicans desperately trying to avoid discussion of their optional war.  It's kind of funny, especially since they are aligning themselves against the vast majority of Americans who have lost faith in this administration's judgment and abilities.

I'm seeing a much larger Democratic majority in 2008.  Senator Bond's seat, once thought to be safe, may switch to the Democrats, in light of his vote to ABOLISH the minimum wage.

|| Posted by Dan, February 6, 2007 07:29 AM ||

Gee, Dan, would you care to cite a vote for the abolition of the minimum wage? 

Not that the abolition of such illegitimate government interference with the free market isn't a bad idea.

|| Posted by Jacob, February 6, 2007 10:04 AM ||

Here you go, Jake.  If you're a Texan, you have one of your own who opposes the vast majority of the nation, too.

|| Posted by Dan, February 7, 2007 06:23 AM ||

I applaud those 39 Senators for speaking truth to power and opposing the unwise interference of the federal government in the free market.

|| Posted by Jacob, February 7, 2007 12:56 PM ||

Though I will note that you are lying about the measure in question, which does not abolish the minimum wage, but rather allows it to be different in different places depending upon the economic realities of each state.

|| Posted by Jacob, February 7, 2007 12:57 PM ||

It would abolish the federal minimum wage.  Don't be unusually dense Jacob.  Federal Senators voting to abolish the federal minimum wage.  You asked for proof, and I provided it.

Funny to have you applauding the Senators for speaking truth to power, when the power is the vast majority of Americans.  Republicans are fighting a rearguard action against the American people on Iraq and on the minimum wage.

They'll be defeated again in 2008.

|| Posted by Dan, February 7, 2007 09:27 PM ||

Dan, I'm with Jacob here -- that isn't what the bill did at all, no matter how you try to spin it.

Instead, the bill recognizes that the cost of living is different in every part of the country, and allows the minimum wage to be adjusted accordingly -- just like the salaries of federal employees.

|| Posted by Rhymes With Right, February 7, 2007 10:17 PM ||

Of course you side with Jacob - no surprise there. But a bill abolishing the federal minimum wage is a bill to abolish "the" minimum wage, exactly as I said. The possibility that states would enact reasonable minimum wage doesn't change that fact.

States have always been able to set their own minimum wagesm and many have. The federal wage, you may not know, doesn't apply to everyone. The state wages generally do.

You're falling for the spin and ignoring the substance. A federal senator voting to abolish the federal minimum wage is voting against the VAST majority of American voters - that's the fact and substance. And acting like he's doing it because of some states rights is simply spin.

Given that Jacob didn't even know it happened, it doesn't surprise me that he fell for the spin.

|| Posted by Dan, February 8, 2007 06:31 AM ||

Having read the amendment, I agree with Jacob.

|| Posted by Rhymes With Right, February 8, 2007 06:48 AM ||


|| Posted by Dan, February 8, 2007 10:22 PM ||

Yes, your misrepresentation of the amendment in question was rather shocking.

|| Posted by Rhymes With Right, February 9, 2007 05:27 AM ||
Post a comment

Remember personal info?




Winner - 2014 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards
Winner - 2014 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2013 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2012 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2011 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2010 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2009 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Posts by Category

Announcements (posts: 13)
Blogging (posts: 187)
Border Issues & Immigration (posts: 421)
deferred (posts: 4)
Education (posts: 685)
Entertainment & Sports (posts: 483)
Guns & Gun Control (posts: 65)
History (posts: 329)
Humor (posts: 88)
Israel/Middle East (posts: 44)
Medical News (posts: 54)
Military (posts: 273)
News (posts: 1570)
Paid Advertising (posts: 234)
Personal (posts: 108)
Politics (posts: 5261)
Race & Racism (posts: 281)
Religion (posts: 819)
Terrorism (posts: 884)
Texas GOP Platform Reform Project (posts: 4)
The Courts (posts: 310)
Watcher's Council (posts: 482)
World Affairs (posts: 345)


January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
December 0000



Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Powered By

Powered by
Movable Type 2.64

Administrative Stuff

Email Me
Syndicate this site (XML)

Advertising Disclosure


About Me

NAME: Greg
AGE: 50-ish
SEX: Male
OCCUPATION: Social Studies Teacher
LOCATION: Seabrook, TX
DISCLAIMER: All posts reflect my views alone, and not the view of my wife, my dogs, my employer, or anyone else. All comments reflect the view of the commenter, and permitting a comment to remain on this site in no way indicates my support for the ideas expressed in the comment.

Search This Site

Support This Site

Recent Entries

Who Is Regan Theiler And Why Was She Allowed To Spend Public Funds On A Sole Source Contract For Her Part-Time Employer?
Not My Idea Of A Stimulating Evening
About Trump's Liberty University Speech
Do Not Place The Secessionist "Texas Independence" Measure On The 2016 Republican Primary Ballot
Conservatives Vs. Liberal On Those Engaged In Violent Political Activity
Tom Mechler Makes His Case Against Moving The 2016 RPT Convention
Jared Woodfill Makes His Case For Moving The 2016 RPT Convention
Questions About Moving The 2016 RPT Convention
Reject The Call To Move 2016 Republican Party Of Texas Convention
It Is Too Bad That Political Parties Cannot Reject Voters Who Seek To Join, Stop Would-Be Candidates Who Want To Run


Watchers Council
  • Ask Marion
  • Bookworm Room
  • The Colossus of Rhodey
  • The Glittering Eye
  • GrEaT sAtAn"S gIrLfRiEnD
  • The Independent Sentinel
  • JoshuaPundit
  • Liberty's Spirit
  • New Zeal
  • Nice Deb
  • The Noisy Room
  • The Razor
  • Rhymes With Right
  • The Right Planet
  • Simply Jews
  • Virginia Right!
  • Watcher Of Weasels

  • Political & Religious Blogs