Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

markpkessinger

(8,908 posts)
46. My comment on Millbank's column
Fri Nov 22, 2013, 04:46 PM
Nov 2013

Here is the text of a comment I posted in response to Millbank's column in the Post:

Spare us the pearl clutching, Mr. Millbank.

To defend the filibuster as the GOP has been using it requires one to believe that the framers of the Constitution intended to permit a procedural rule of one legislative chamber, employed by a minority faction within that chamber to prevent the full body of the Senate from exercising its Constitutional role of advise and consent with respect to executive branch nominations, and thereby also effectively giving a minority faction in one chamber of the legislature the ability prevent a president from exercising his or her Constitutionally-appointed power of appointment. That is so utterly illogical as to be absurd. If it were a matter of the minority having principled objections to the nominees in quewstion, then your argument might hold water. But the fact is Republicans have been abusing the filibuster since this President took office, using it not merely in cases where they have a principled objection to a particular nominee, but to actually deny a sitting President the power of appointments provided to his office by the Constitution. They even used it to try to impede the functioning of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, by refusing to permit a vote on ANY nominee at all to head that agency. The GOP's employment of the filibuster has been an egregious abuse of the rule.

I remind you that the Constitution does not contemplate the existence of political parties, so any suggestion that there is, or should be, any requirement whatsoever to "win votes" from the minority party is sheer nonsense. The "two centuries of custom" to which you refer was already irrpeparably broken, and the constant use of it by the GOP for specious reasons had transformed it into something that bore little resemblance to the filibuster as understood 200 years ago.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

kudos for a well turned phrase cali Nov 2013 #1
Click Like if you think The Wizard Nov 2013 #54
and at the nytimes: Democracy Returns to the Senate spanone Nov 2013 #2
And it was ever thus... babylonsister Nov 2013 #3
The real question is what does MoDo think about this!!! madinmaryland Nov 2013 #4
Mebbe you'll find out this weekend, mad, elleng Nov 2013 #52
Of course. Exactly. Facts matter. But not for the corporate media. Nt Ninga Nov 2013 #5
The Cherry On Top Of a Whipped Cream Morning, Sir The Magistrate Nov 2013 #6
I don't consider this the finer part of my character, but IrishAyes Nov 2013 #13
Funny dat headline. lonestarnot Nov 2013 #7
"Power grab", this from a party that gerrymanders every district and JaneyVee Nov 2013 #8
^^^^ This is what needs to get out more ^^^^ dickthegrouch Nov 2013 #38
thank you. nt TBF Nov 2013 #44
Exactly.. butterfly77 Nov 2013 #47
Wish I could rec this X1M, Mr. Pitt; one of your finest. IrishAyes Nov 2013 #9
I'll second that. Will Pitt is a treasure. n/t reflection Nov 2013 #19
Ditto! I luv Mr. Pitt. Keep it comin', dude. trishtrash Nov 2013 #27
I hope he doesn't object to my addressing him as Mister Pitt; IrishAyes Nov 2013 #29
What fun, this schadenfreude!! DinahMoeHum Nov 2013 #10
Dinah, love the snark (below) saidsimplesimon Nov 2013 #39
oh my, the kind ladies and gentlemen of the post have the vapors... madrchsod Nov 2013 #11
They get to pretend that both parties are the same. Rex Nov 2013 #12
I remember "playing nice." lapislzi Nov 2013 #14
+1000 Blue_Tires Nov 2013 #15
GOP would end the filibuster in the first minute Nancy Waterman Nov 2013 #16
^^This. Lex Nov 2013 #25
yeah, right flamingdem Nov 2013 #17
Boohoo. HappyMe Nov 2013 #18
Delish topic headline malaise Nov 2013 #20
If the Rethugs gain the majority, they can simply change the rule back right? riderinthestorm Nov 2013 #21
K & R. n/t FSogol Nov 2013 #22
I was thinking the more they threaten, the better that make this move magical thyme Nov 2013 #23
I need to go into the violin-selling business. Laelth Nov 2013 #24
Nahhh-what is obvious here fredamae Nov 2013 #26
Requiring a supermajority in a legislative body is a bad thing. FarCenter Nov 2013 #28
Sounds like the 2naSalit Nov 2013 #30
They probably would have done the same thing as soon as they got the majority. No honor ErikJ Nov 2013 #31
Also - how fast do you think the Republicans would have Ian_rd Nov 2013 #32
Cue libodem Nov 2013 #33
A this point in time..... AlbertCat Nov 2013 #34
Considering we already have "Scalito" on the Supreme Court, yes, i agree Roland99 Nov 2013 #35
have they thought this through Skittles Nov 2013 #36
Natch rock Nov 2013 #37
And yet still not as deep as the stupid. JNelson6563 Nov 2013 #40
Tell me what the Republicans would do different?? kentuck Nov 2013 #41
We should have stopped playing nice 20 years ago DonCoquixote Nov 2013 #42
This may have saved the progressive wing of the Democratic Party? kentuck Nov 2013 #43
Milbank quit going on MSNBC when Olbermann was there because he said "it was just an echo chamber". Major Hogwash Nov 2013 #45
My comment on Millbank's column markpkessinger Nov 2013 #46
Outstanding, mpk Doctor_J Nov 2013 #49
K & R. dchill Nov 2013 #48
If it looks like the GOP will take the Senate then Reid should just reverse his latest rule on this. kelliekat44 Nov 2013 #50
Let's say the Repubes take the Senate (Zeus forbid) The Wizard Nov 2013 #56
OY indeed. elleng Nov 2013 #51
Who was it that declared the permanent Republican majority? Piedras Nov 2013 #53
Just one thing to "say." 99Forever Nov 2013 #55
Another good thing about this... moose65 Nov 2013 #57
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The bodies on the faintin...»Reply #46