The filibustering would go away (or severely diminish)

if they had to get up on the floor and talk in order to maintain a filibuster. I'm o.k. with a filibuster provided that it isn't allowed to hold things up indefinitely. I sort of like proposals that make it so that it becomes harder and harder to sustain over a period of time- so that people have to do a little work to sustain one. This would allow the minority to slow down the process and potentially rally people to their side but would also (eventually) allow for a vote.

Can we stop calling the US Senate a "deliberative body"

considering that it's they aren't allowed to DELIBERATE about much of anything?

Seriously, I get that Republicans don't want to do most of the things that the Democrats in the Senate want to do but if they are so convinced of the superiority of their ideas and beliefs, why can't they have the fortitude to stand up for them in an actual DEBATE? If they were truly on the right side of an issue, they shouldn't have too much difficulty convincing 51 people of the rightness of their position, right? I don't understand why the people who support the legislation shouldn't have the right to argue for it and have an equal chance to convince a majority of the Senate to adopt the bill?

It seems like Republicans either get what they want, Democrats attempt to gather up SIXTY votes for just a freakin' debate/vote, or the Republicans just get to shut everything down. I understand the need to preserve the voice of the minority but "reasonable" left the train station years ago..........

I have mixed feelings on the DP

Usually on a case by case basis. I can understand why people feel so strongly about the DP on both sides. The idea of calculated state sanctioned killing of people seems somewhat disconcerting but I also understand the emotional side of people whose lives have been touched by a remorseless killer.

Unfortunately

I am worried that incidents like this will only lead to more calls for more "humane" solutions.......like firing squads. Aren't there some states actively considering bringing them back anyway as part of their "what's old is new again" program of de-evolution?

Delusional much?

I never hear anybody talk about it IRL

Granted, most of my close friends and family members are not wingnut crackpots (even among the Republicans in my family) but still, if it wasn't a strike against President Obama back in 2012 right before the election and nobody has found any new evidence to suggest that President Obama and his Administration are so evil and callous as to prevent our military from attempting a rescue of Ambassador Stevens and the other victims and then attempt to cover it up, it's fair to say that it is a dead issue. I don't expect the wingnuts and most Republicans in Congress to stop talking about it, particularly if and when Hillary decides to run for POTUS. I'm not certain people will care much about it then, though. We lost lots of people in Embassy attacks during the George W. Bush (mis-)administration but I never recall the kind of outrage and conspiracy theories from John McCain or Lindsey Graham about any of them that we're seeing with #BENGHAZI!!!

Looks like he is trying to reach a pre-determined conclusion:

his own- and we all know what THAT is.

Nice ideas

But none of those things are going to happen overnight. There is already some movement in those directions but its not going to go anywhere as long as the Republicans keep ahold of the keys to the House (and possibly the Senate)

Don't forget the younger Paul as well

He is trying hard to make himself look "hip" enough for young people to vote for him.

Maybe it is time for some "fresh blood"

But the Democrats ARE supporting things that will help people-health care, jobs, minimum wage increase. There is a distinct difference between not having the legislative power to do things and the lack of will to do things when possible.