Back in 2005:
Meeting with reporters after the Democratic policy luncheon Tuesday, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), the leader of filibusters against 10 of President Bush’s judicial nominees, read Isakson’s statement aloud and added that Isakson "went on to praise Iraq for basing their government on American democracy and using the filibuster as the way they would ensure that the majority never overran the minority. So that's what they're saying in Iraq."Now...not so much:
"Is this a publicity stunt? Yes," a senior Democratic aide told FOX News. "This is the only way we know to highlight their complete ignorance of the will of the people!"Yep, TVs all across the country will be glued to CSpan-2 tonight.
Extra - Don Surber: "Reid to hold himself hostage"
More - The rule of the quorum call may end this charade. For all I know, it already has because (at 11:30pm EST), neither CSpan nor any of the cable news networks are showing the well of the Senate.
5 comments:
What an obstructionist! What a pathetic record of non-achievement for the 110th Congress! Why can't they get things moving... they've had MONTHS! Just because George W. Bush has already publicly promised to veto another eighteen House bills, or more than half of those pending, is no reason not to decry the LOGJAM of these DO-NOTHING legislators!
And now, the Defeatocrats resort to a cheap midnight stunt. Hasn't anybody told these embarrassments that Terri Schiavo is dead?
Hmmmmm. So after making grandiose promises in the run-up to the 2006 election, the wussie Dems are now crying because Bush threatens that horrible veto? Wouldn't passing law after law and forcing Bush to veto them *show* that the Dems were *serious* when they promised all those great things to be accomplished post haste?
Oh. Right. Dems. Promises.
Nevermind.
Take off the red goggles, Davey. They already have. More vetoes in six months than in six years. And plenty more to come.
Remember that snazzy "slow bleed" catch phrase the Republicans tried to float for a news cycle or two? Nobody bought it for Democratic Iraq legislation, so it went away. But you're sure going to enjoy the return of the "slow bleed," with the series of 53-47 votes and cloture showdowns and subpoenas and "political stunts" that you're gonna eat for the next year and a half.
But have no fear. Surely all the vetoed bills and blocked measures are going to highlight just how weepy the wussie Dems are, and will totally cripple their chances in 2008. (Especially after the surge turns Iraq around!)
Has anyone counted up all those "how low can Bush go?" stories we've seen so far? What's the over/under on how many MORE of those headlines we're going to see?
What's the over/under on how many MORE of those headlines we're going to see?
In the immortal words of the B-52's, Bush's support will go "DOWN! DOWN! DOWN"!
It's not Iraq! It's Iraq Lobster!
More - The rule of the quorum call may end this charade.
Oooh, so sorry. Lovely thought, though.
"The way out of a quorum call is to wait for the clerk to get to the last name, Wyden, and turn to the chair and say that a quorum is not present. It is then that the Majority Leader may make a motion to instruct the Sergeant at Arms to Request the Presence of Absent Senators on which there is a roll call vote. Members do not like to miss votes so they show up and vote, and then we start this all over again."
Sen. Trent Lott (R-MS): "[Filibustering] is wrong. It’s not supportable under the Constitution. And if they insist on persisting with these filibusters, I’m perfectly prepared to blow the place up."
Post a Comment