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

davidthegnome

(2,983 posts)
31. Much as I despise Republican Obstructionism...
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 12:11 PM
Jul 2013

He's not wrong about the reason for the existence of the filibuster - the thing is that he and others have used it in a petty, demeaning manner in order to obstruct, impede, and damage the current administration in any way possible. My concern is that any changes in filibustering will come back to hurt us in the future, under republican administrations.

The line about Maddow and the one about Sharpton are absolutely frigging ridiculous, and I'm quite sure that Paul knows this. He's just attempting to spin it in the most outrageous way possible to get dittoheads and tea party nitwits raging and thumping their chests.

That having been said, let's flip the coin for a sec... imagine what sort of people someone like Dick Cheney would nominate. This is part of the reason why we need the filibuster to remain a strong tool. Read the Audacity of Hope - we came close to losing it under the Bush administration, and the consequences would have been disastrous.

Recommendations

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

Stop listening to the squirrel that lives on your head, Rand. maxsolomon Jul 2013 #1
Filibuster prevents ‘extremist' skin head/neo-confederate Rand Paul from being Supreme Court Justice Dawson Leery Jul 2013 #2
And if it wasn't for the filibuster, radical corporation lover John Roberts wouldn't have......... thelordofhell Jul 2013 #3
Yes, the guy who hates the Civil Rights Act and thinks the Confederacy had a point Adenoid_Hynkel Jul 2013 #4
Sounds like Rand needs another history lesson shawn703 Jul 2013 #5
I know, right? reusrename Jul 2013 #12
This message was self-deleted by its author tofuandbeer Jul 2013 #21
What a strange person n2doc Jul 2013 #6
Middle Dearth ctsnowman Jul 2013 #23
Rand (Kim Jong)Paul The Wizard Jul 2013 #7
Al Sharpton as Attorney General of and for the United States of America. Half-Century Man Jul 2013 #8
Lame argument. While he might have a point that the filibuster could be used to prevent rhett o rick Jul 2013 #9
This ^^^^ ctsnowman Jul 2013 #24
She's in the company of MLK, who called himself an extremist in the company of Jesus, as well. ancianita Jul 2013 #10
What the actual f* ck? Triana Jul 2013 #11
Rachel Maddow under consideration for the SCOTUS? Brigid Jul 2013 #13
If I were Maddow davidpdx Jul 2013 #15
Bingo ... and then she ads, "... and I have a better chance of becoming a Supreme Court JoePhilly Jul 2013 #27
Why do they worry so much about Rachel Maddow? DWinNJ Jul 2013 #16
she's GOOD, that's why, she does her research & can't be caught in a "gotcha" moment wordpix Jul 2013 #35
She scares the hell out of them, because she calls their bullshit. ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jul 2013 #42
She doesn't need a law degree. DWinNJ Jul 2013 #17
I love and support Rachel Maddow....... Paladin Jul 2013 #22
News to me. bitchkitty Jul 2013 #26
A little info from wiki... hughee99 Jul 2013 #38
Thanks - very interesting! n/t bitchkitty Jul 2013 #39
And five of them are sitting justices jmowreader Jul 2013 #43
The Constitution does not require a member of SCOTUS be a lawyer dflprincess Jul 2013 #45
Rand Paul. Kind of Smart, but not Really Wolf Frankula Jul 2013 #14
She has and Ph.D. in Political Science from Cambridge egold2604 Jul 2013 #18
and DWinNJ Jul 2013 #19
I would be proud to have Al Sharpton as AG & Rachel as SCOTUS justice wordpix Jul 2013 #20
Yea, without the filibuster bitchkitty Jul 2013 #25
He's gluing it down with silicone caulk jmowreader Jul 2013 #44
I am looking forward to hearing Rachel Maddows' comments on this. irisblue Jul 2013 #28
More nonsense from a delusional fool. Not worth the press on point Jul 2013 #29
methinks Maddow will make a fabulous supreme court judge srican69 Jul 2013 #30
Much as I despise Republican Obstructionism... davidthegnome Jul 2013 #31
Totally woo-woo eom Maeve Jul 2013 #32
Maddow's got a law background, doesn't she? Arkana Jul 2013 #33
nothing in the Constitution says a SCOTUS justice must be a lawyer or judge wordpix Jul 2013 #36
he never got over his interview wilt the stilt Jul 2013 #34
You don't get a show on MSNBC by being an "extremist" SHRED Jul 2013 #37
Rand Paul is just bizarre Joe Hyperion Jul 2013 #40
Another embarassment for the DU Rand Foundation ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jul 2013 #41
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Rand Paul: Filibuster pre...»Reply #31