So, what do you Republicans have to say about...

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:votes on cloture often have nothing to do with filibusters anymore. just a routine procedure. & the whole recent filibuster shit started with Dems blocking Bush's judicial appointees. Do you have any idea of what you are talking about?

You are avoiding my point. I contend that the unprecedented use of the filibuster by Republicans prevented Obama from having "two years of unfettered discretion". I have provided facts to support that contention. It doesn't matter who started the "filibuster shit." That is a different discussion and one about which I am sure I would disagree with you.

So, yes, I have an idea about what I am talking. Do you want to join that discussion or simply make irrelevant and unrelated statements?

no you don't have any idea. there were more true threats of filibusters with a Dem congress. you are mistakenly focusing on the cloture votes - hence you are an idiot.

How do you define "true threats of filibusters"?

You called me an idiot. Yet you made this statement: "[T]here were more true threats of filibusters with a Dem congress." This provokes the following obvious questions:

1) Do you even know what a filibuster is? It is an action by a minority to prevent the majority from voting on legislation;
2) If the Democrats controlled the Congress, they would have a majority. Therefore, that majority would win votes. There would be no reason to engage in a filibuster to prevent the vote;
3) What do you believe the purpose of a cloture vote to be? What purpose does such a vote have outside the contest of a filibuster?

You and I agree. There were more true threats of filibusters with a Democratic Congress. That is exactly my point. Thank you for your agreement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:votes on cloture often have nothing to do with filibusters anymore. just a routine procedure. & the whole recent filibuster shit started with Dems blocking Bush's judicial appointees. Do you have any idea of what you are talking about?

You are avoiding my point. I contend that the unprecedented use of the filibuster by Republicans prevented Obama from having "two years of unfettered discretion". I have provided facts to support that contention. It doesn't matter who started the "filibuster shit." That is a different discussion and one about which I am sure I would disagree with you.

So, yes, I have an idea about what I am talking. Do you want to join that discussion or simply make irrelevant and unrelated statements?

no you don't have any idea. there were more true threats of filibusters with a Dem congress. you are mistakenly focusing on the cloture votes - hence you are an idiot.

If you understand - at all - what a cloture vote/filibuster is, and how they are used in the modern legislative process, this statement makes no sense.

[Anonymous]

And now I see that Jeff already addressed that point.