Filibuster Compromise

[BPSCG]

BP does have a point,


...snip...


Amazing. Once again, JOCKO MAKES IT ALL UP.

This time BP helps him out.

That's 'cuz I'm his sock puppet.

Or is he mine? I forget. It's so hard to keep all my alter egos and doppelgangern straight. Would you believe I once found myself writing, "You stupid troll" before I realized I was addressing it to one of my socks?

 

[Rob Lister]

Yet more political nonsense.

A filibuster seems as much a compromise as the agreement not to filibuster. Why shouldn't a particular party be able to filibuster over any particular candidate if it feels necessary?

Good question. Who decides? And how many of them does it take to make the agreement stick?

Careful how you answer.

 

[jj]

That's 'cuz I'm his sock puppet.

Or is he mine? I forget. It's so hard to keep all my alter egos and doppelgangern straight. Would you believe I once found myself writing, "You stupid troll" before I realized I was addressing it to one of my socks?

Well, you probably need more Guinness, then, unless, of course, you shouldn't be drinking.

 

[Rob Lister]

Well, you probably need more Guinness, then, unless, of course, you shouldn't be drinking.

??? I'm amazed that you would write that, in seemingly honest and jovial debate.

Take a morality break and re-examine your motives.

 

[shecky]

I dunno. It all sounds pretty jovial to me.

 

[Rob Lister]

I dunno. It all sounds pretty jovial to me.

JJ knows it wasn't so.

Not that Luke T. would mind. It'll roll of his back like rain off a duck.

But JJ should be ashamed. That he will not be goes to his character, I guess.

 

[Jocko]

Cease and desist, vilifying stalker.

Do you accuse people walking ahead of following you?

If not, why do you label people whose posts you enter by responding to stalkers?

More to the point, what will it take to get on your ignore list so you can be spared such... er, confusing situations in the future?

 

[BPSCG]

JJ knows it wasn't so.

Not that Luke T. would mind. It'll roll of his back like rain off a duck.

??? When did Luke T. get in here?

 

[jj]

JJ knows it wasn't so.

Not that Luke T. would mind. It'll roll of his back like rain off a duck.

But JJ should be ashamed. That he will not be goes to his character, I guess.

You see, Shecky, Rob Lister likes to harrass, insult, insinuate, and otherwise attack people who won't accept whatever he has to say uncritically. He's a whole lot like Jocko in that regard.

 

[RandFan]

??? When did Luke T. get in here?

That's what I've been trying to figure out. I only drink on the weekends so I assume others do likewise. Rob's probably Irish.

 

[Jocko]

You see, Shecky, Rob Lister likes to harrass, insult, insinuate, and otherwise attack people who won't accept whatever he has to say uncritically.

Ah, like suggesting I am an assassin and BPSCG is an alcoholic?

He's a whole lot like Jocko in that regard.

I don't know if he sees that as a compliment, but I know I do.

 

[BPSCG]

Ah, like suggesting I am an assassin and BPSCG is an alcoholic?

Oh, is that what that Guiness remark was about? Truth be told, I didn't see it as an alcoholic crack, but as a native New Yorker, I generally don't take offense at wisecracks unless you're backing your car over me at the same time.

 

[jj]

Oh, is that what that Guiness remark was about? Truth be told, I didn't see it as an alcoholic crack, but as a native New Yorker, I generally don't take offense at wisecracks unless you're backing your car over me at the same time.

It was no such thing, as usual, the bully-right makes things up ex-nihilo. Hence your failure to take offense is perfectly understandable.

Just another example of Jocko spouting off?

It is interesting, though, that Jocko answers what Lister started, isn't it? Since not a soul on the planet would have thought of that bizzare interpretation of what I said without some help, in my estimation, this does seem somewhat, err, odd, now, doesn't it? What does that mean? Who knows? I don't.

 

[BPSCG]

It was no such thing, as usual, the bully-right makes things up ex-nihilo. Hence your failure to take offense is perfectly understandable.

But I'm a card-carrying member of the bully-right.* I should have taken offense.

I get so confused sometimes.

*Okay, TragicMonkey doesn't think so, but what do you expect from someone with such a grotesque fascination with monkey poo?

 

[jj]

But I'm a card-carrying member of the bully-right.* I should have taken offense.

I get so confused sometimes.

No need to be confused, you're not acting like it right now, after all. Even if you did back up Jocko on his change of context.

Having read through it again, I do agree that it's possible that I'm the one misreading the context (there is no debate about the actual presence of the words), but of course since Jocko is involved, I'm inclined to assume that the hostility, as usual, was intentional.

 

[SezMe]

Never seen a thread stay so religiously on topic.....


Cutting the sarcasm, the derail is unfortunate because I think the "compromise" is an important issue and I'd like to see some serious pro and con discussion of it because I, for one, am not sure if I approve or not. I know most you you jabbing at each other have sound thinking skills and political acumen...and, at times, a pissy attitude.

So junk the crap and tell why this compromise is wise or foolish.

Thanks...seriously

 

[BPSCG]

Never seen a thread stay so religiously on topic.....

Oh, you noticed?

 

[jj]

Oh, you noticed?

Oh, yes, I noticed the OP, and the capitulation of the Moderates to the extreme right in the Senate.

What else is to say?

 

[BPSCG]

...and, at times, a pissy attitude.

Hehhehheh... he said "pissy."

So junk the crap

Hehhehheh... he said "crap."

Best analysis I've seen of the thing is that it gets the GOP most of the judges they want and allows the Dems the figleaf that they didn't back down on the filibuster. The figleaf is contained in the words "extraordinary circumstances."

Filibusters under "extraordinary circumstances", as I explained before, won't apply to radioactive judges because they'll go down to defeat anyway.

It also won't apply to future qualified but conservative appeals court judges because the GOP will then point back to this episode and claim, "You said Owens was dangerously out of the mainstream but went ahead and allowed a vote to confirm her; so you either violated your principles by allowing a vote on a dangerous judge or you were just playing politics. Now you're saying the same thing about Judge Flazzbazz and he's just as qualified as Owens. Have you no principles?"

And it won't apply to Supreme Court nominees because a Supreme Court nomination is so well-publicized that if the Dems do it, they might as well pour gasoline all over themselves and start lighting up cigars.

So the "extraordinary circumstances" out just lets the Dems back down while not giving up the right to filibuster. But they won't do it again on judicial nominees.

They'll find something else.

Ain't politics fun?

 

[SezMe]

They'll find something else.

Bolton, maybe?