Go Home

Search

Search results

181 documents found in 0.001 seconds.

Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (1123)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (1838)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

David Shuster talks to Sen. Bernie Sanders about his demand that the Democrats in the Senate commit to stopping a filibuster on health care reform. Sanders reiterated his earlier statements as reported by Sam Stein at the HuffPo:

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), called on the White House and Democratic leadership in Congress to ensure that party members agree unanimously to support cloture on legislation that would revamp the nation's health care system. Democratic senators on the fence, he added, could still oppose the bill. But at the very least they should be required to let the legislation come to an up-or-down vote.

"I think that with Al Franken coming on board, you have effectively 60 Democrats in the caucus, 58 and two Independents," Sanders said in an interview with the Huffington Post. "I think the strategy should be to say, it doesn't take 60 votes to pass a piece of legislation. It takes 60 votes to stop a filibuster. I think the strategy should be that every Democrat, no matter whether or not they ultimately end up voting for the final bill, is to say we are going to vote together to stop a Republican filibuster. And if somebody who votes for that ends up saying, 'I'm not gonna vote for this bill, it's too radical, blah, blah, blah, that's fine.'"

"I think the idea of going to conservative Republicans, who are essentially representing the insurance companies and the drug companies, and watering down this bill substantially, rather than demanding we get 60 votes to stop the filibuster, I think that is a very wrong political strategy," Sanders added.

If we only had a few more Bernie Sanders in the Senate, the United States would be a better place to live in. I hope he keeps the pressure on the Democrats to do the right thing.



DOWNLOAD (82)
WMV QuickTime
PLAY (239)
WMV QuickTime

You Tube

Rachel talks to Barbara Boxer about the stimulus bill and the need to get Republicans on board with their votes. Why any of these Democratic Senators all continue to cave any time the Republicans say they want to filibuster and don't actually make them filibuster and break out the cots and diapers is beyond me and her explanation here didn't cut it for me for the most part.

I can understand on this particular bill and them wanting to get it through quickly why they chose not to do it this time, but if the Democrats don't start showing that their spine has not been completely removed and make the GOP have a real filibuster on issues they really care about, they are hopeless and determined to lose at a game the other party cares more about winning than the future of this country and whether we get out of this economic crisis or not without another depression. Harry Reid has made it a way too regular event to give every time the Repulicans sneeze and threaten to filibuster anything and it needs to stop.

Barbara Boxer in her describing to Rachel how the Senate works just confirms my notions that it's an elite club where all of them think a little too highly of themselves and of each other and not enough of the jobs they were sent there to do and the people they're supposed to represent. I like Barbara Boxer and still do for the most part as far as her policy positions go, but when she went all out for Joe Lieberman when he was running against Ned Lamont she lost every ounce of respect I used to have for her.

I'd just say to Sen. Boxer that if Dick Cheney and the Republicans were willing to blow up the Senate rules for what they wanted passed, the Democrats ought to think about threatening it if the screaming banshees on the other side don't want to calm down a bit. They were ready for it with Cheney as their deciding vote. I say turn around is fair play.



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (154)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (904)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Fox News host Sean Hannity on Thursday congratulated Republicans for successfully using a filibuster to temporarily block a president's nominee for secretary of defense -- former Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) -- for the first time in the history of the U.S. Senate.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on Wednesday said Republicans should feel "shame" for the unprecedented obstruction, but Hannity called the outcome a "major win for the GOP."

"Republicans say it is premature to close the debate over the nominee and say that before that any confirmation vote will take place, they want answers from Hagel and the White House about what exactly President Obama was doing the night of the Benghazi terror attack that killed a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans," Hannity noted on Thursday.

"It's the first time a filibuster of a cabinet nominee has been used," he added. "And needless to say, this marks a major win for the GOP, and pretty embarrassing defeat for the president."

Fox News political analyst Juan Williams pointed out that Hannity "must have missed the news" that "Republicans have basically said that in a week they will vote to end the cloture, end the filibuster and approve Chuck Hagel."

"So, nobody in this town thinks there's any chance that Chuck Hagel, one, is either going to resign or, two, is going to be denied the office of secretary of defense," Williams explained. "What we're really seeing here is a political game."



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (1402)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (1621)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Well, it looks at though we're in for a weekend of political theater. As Lawrence O'Donnell noted when talking to Sen. Kent Conrad about the latest coming out of the Senate tonight, it appears Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is not done pulling political stunts. Apparently McConnell just told Leader Reid that he will not negotiate directly with him, and will only negotiate with President Obama.

McConnell also told Reid that he would not allow Reid's bill to pass with a simple majority vote, so in other words, he's going to allow the Senate to filibuster. This means that the Senate would not be allowed to vote on Reid's bill until Sunday at 1am and in the mean time, the House would be voting on Reid's bill sometime tomorrow.

If McConnell wants to filibuster Reid's bill, I say it's time for them to break out the cots, but it doesn't look like that's going to happen since the Senate already adjourned tonight. It would be nice to see a clean bill pass that simply raises the debt ceiling instead of these bills they've been negotiating passing. I guess we'll find out shortly if that's too much to hope for or not. In the mean time, they're taking this dangerous game of chicken with our economy right up to the wire with more stalling from Republicans.

UPDATE: Here's more on the latest from The Hill -- Reid alters debt plan to attract GOP support:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has revised his plan to raise the debt limit in a last-ditch bid to attract Republican support.

The biggest change is that Reid would give the president almost unilateral power to raise the debt limit, borrowing an idea introduced by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

Reid would have President Obama request a $2.4 trillion debt-limit increase in two installments of $1.2 trillion each. The requests would be subject to congressional resolutions of disapproval, but these would do little to restrict the president.

Obama could override any resolution of disapproval, and it would take a two-thirds vote in both chambers of Congress to override him.

According to a Senate Democratic aide, Reid also increased the total level of spending cuts from $2.2 trillion to $2.4 trillion, in part by using the January baseline -- a budget maneuver House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) used on a previous version of his debt-limit plan. The January budget baseline does not count cuts Congress implemented in legislation passed this spring to avert a government shutdown.

So far Reid has had trouble attracting Republicans to his bill. Moderate Republican Sen. Scott Brown (Mass.) said he would vote for it, but otherwise it has received scant bipartisan support.

Reid filed a motion on Friday evening to end a GOP filibuster of his plan, setting up a vote for early Sunday morning. Reid would need 60 votes and support from at least seven Republicans to advance his proposal.

Reid accused McConnell of filibustering at the "worst possible time" by not allowing a simple majority vote, while McConnell said Republicans would support an immediate vote with a 60-vote threshold. Read on...



From Media Matters new project, Political Correction -- Sen. Alexander's Deeply Dishonest Filibuster Reform Speech:

At a Heritage Foundation event yesterday, Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) gave a speech decrying Democratic attempts to change the filibuster rules. The speech was shot through with falsehoods, such as the claim that Democrats are trying to eliminate minority rights in the Senate because they lost an election. In fact, the reform proposals preserve the filibuster, but require obstructionists to actually hold the floor continuously to prevent a bill's consideration. Similarly, Alexander claimed that Democrats have invented the simple majority vote for rules changes out of thin air, but the practice is based in the Constitution and was used as early as 1917 — and Republicans argued for the procedure in 2005. Later, Alexander disingenuously quoted the late Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV). Byrd condemned GOP filibusters, but Alexander simply skipped that part of Byrd's speech. Most egregious among Alexander's falsehoods, he claimed that Democrats are "the real party of no," despite the fact that filibusters have doubled since Republicans lost control of the Senate.

Lots more fact checking there on a very long speech that was too large for our servers if you've got the desire to watch any of it, so go read the rest. I caught part of it and am just glad we've got our friends over at Media Matters who have got the time to wade through this stuff.

h/t Steve Benen



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (955)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (1520)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

There not yet a vacancy on the Supreme Court but the second-ranking Republican in the Senate is already planning a strategy of opposing a President Barack Obama's potential nominee. Jon Kyl told Fox News' Chris Wallace that Republicans were prepared a nominee that was "overly ideological."

When Republicans were in the majority Kyl had decried use of the filibuster. "It's never been the case of until the last two years that a minority could dictate to the majority what they could do," Kyl said in 2005.

Since Democrats were the first party in decades to use the filibuster to block a judicial nominee, Republicans are within their rights to continue to use it, according to Kyl. Democrats blocked George W. Bush's nominee, Miguel Estrada in 2001.

"It is wrong and it shouldn't be done but I think you would agree if only one side is permitted to do it -- the Democrats and not the Republicans -- you have a very unfair system," Kyl said Sunday.

Justice John Paul Stevens told two newspapers that he would soon make his decision on whether or not he will retire this year. At least one Democratic Senator thinks the justice should wait.

"I think the gridlock in the Senate might well produce a filibuster which would tie up the Senate on a Supreme Court nominee. I think if a year passes there's is a better chance we could come to a consensus," said Specter.

Both Kyl and Specter appeared on Fox News Sunday.



Franken: A Perversion of the Filibuster

From the Senate Democrats Sen. Franken speaks out on the GOP's continued abuse of the filibuster:

Freshmen and sophomore Democratic Senators today went to the Senate floor as a group to highlight the Republican obstructionism on nominations. As of this morning, there are 88 nominees on the Senate calendar, including posts at the National Labor Relations Board, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Treasury and the Army. "This is a perversion of the filibuster and a perversion of the role of the Senate," said Sen. Al Franken. "It used to be that the filibuster was reserved for matters of great principle. Today it has become a way to play out the clock."



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (381)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (4350)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell drew the ire of The Daily Show's Jon Stewart this Thursday evening after he decided to briefly join Sen. Rand Paul's thirteen hour filibuster of John Brennan's nomination to head the CIA. As Stewart rightfully pointed out, any of these members of Congress who sat silent during the Bush years pretty well forfeited their right to feign concern over the civil liberties of Americans now.

STEWART: Those other senators are recent additions to the Senate, so I don't mind them jumping into Paul's filibuster, but you don't get to jump in on the concern the executive branch might be trampling the Constitution train. If I remember correctly during the Bush torture, suspended habeas corpus, see if you can get the Attorney General to sign off wireless wiretapping while he's in a coma years, I believe your response to that was... yeah.



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (157)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (934)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Fox News host Chris Wallace on Sunday made the false claim that the Democratic Party had a 60-vote majority for two years after President Barack Obama took office.

During an interview with Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Wallace pointed out that Obama had not accomplished "major entitlement reform" in his first four years in office.

"Every time he tries to work with [Republicans], they listen to [House Minority Leader Mitch] McConnell," Villaraigosa noted. "What does Sen. McConnell say? His number one issue is to block the president, is to stop him."

"But in fairness, the first two years, he had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate and a big majority in the House," Wallace argued.

"And the first two years, he was dealing with the biggest recession, the worst hemorrhaging of jobs since the Great [Depression]," the Los Angeles mayor replied.

As Talking Points Memo observed, Sen. Ted Kennedy's (D-MA) temporary replacement wasn't sworn in until Sept. 24 of 2009, giving Democrats a filibuster-proof majority for four months and one week until Republican Scott Brown filled Kennedy's seat after a special election.

"The claim that Obama ruled like a monarch over Congress for two years — endlessly intoned as a talking point by Republicans — is more than just a misremembering of recent history or excited overstatement," the Chicago Tribune's Eric Zorn wrote. "It's a lie."

"It's meant to represent that Obama's had his chance to try out his ideas, and to obscure and deny the relentless GOP obstructionism and Democratic factionalism he's encountered since Day One," he explained. "They seem to figure if they repeat this often enough, you'll believe it."



Bernie Sanders Doesn't Rule Out Filibuster of GOP Tax Deal

Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (322)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (1648)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Vermont Independent Senator Bernie Sanders appeared on the Ed Schultz Show and would not rule out a filibuster of the deal just reached between President Obama and Republicans on the extension of the Bush tax cuts. I don't see him necessarily following through on the threat, but he may very well be able to force some more concessions from the Republicans. He manged to get some improvements made to the health care bill by holding out on his support. I imagine we might see a similar scenario take place here.

SCHULTZ: Joining me now is the firebrand Independent, Senator Bernie Sanders. Senator, sketchy details on what they have agreed to. You heard what I said. Is this a deal with the devil financially? What do you think?

SANDERS: I think it is an absolute disaster and an insult to the vast majority of the American people to be talking about giving huge tax breaks to the wealthiest people in this country, driving up our deficit, and increasing the growing gap between the very rich and everybody else. Millionaires and billionaires do not need huge tax deductions. That`s the simple truth.

And the fact of the matter is, despite Republican rhetoric, if we`re serious about creating jobs in this country, which should be our main priority, that`s one of the worst ways to do it. Much better to take that money, invest in our roads, bridges, railroad systems, infrastructure. You create jobs doing that.

SCHULTZ: Senator, how do you feel about the unemployed in this country being held hostage in these negotiations? Because that`s exactly what it was. We`ve got to call it for what it is. It was a bargaining chip on the table after Americans have played into unemployment insurance.

SANDERS: Ed, this is the issue -- our Republican friends have got to be held accountable. This issue is the insult, the outrage that they want tax breaks for billionaires, but they can`t in their heart come up with extending unemployment compensation so that millions of families in this country will have a modicum of security. That`s an outrage.

I believe politically we can rally the American people around that cause. We`re right. We`re talking about social justice. They`re talking about more tax breaks for billionaires who don`t need it.

SCHULTZ: This is against the will of the American people. All the polling that`s out there, this is against the majority votes in the House, this is against the majority of votes in the Senate. There were 53 votes on the Senate floor on Saturday.

Is President Obama playing with the future of his presidency, in your opinion?

SANDERS: Not only is this bad public policy, driving up the deficit, increasing the growing gap between the rich and everybody else, I think it is bad politics. It`s bad politics in the sense of who is going to believe the president or anybody who votes for this in the future when you campaign for years against Bush`s economic policy and then you say, oh, by the way, that`s what I`m voting for? I`m voting for tax breaks for the rich.

And, by the way, if it turns out in this deal to be two years, you can bet that that`s just the beginning. It will be extended beyond that.

So I think for a Democratic president, Democratic House, Democratic Senate to be following the Bush economic philosophy of tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires is absolutely wrong public policy, absolutely wrong politically. And I have got to tell you, I will do whatever I can to see that 60 votes are not acquired to pass this piece of legislation.

SCHULTZ: Will you filibuster this?

SANDERS: I will do whatever I can on this. This is a very, very bad agreement.

SCHULTZ: So the two-year extension of the Bush tax cuts, the 13 months of unemployment, that`s the reported meat of the deal. You`re telling us tonight that you will do everything you can to stop this deal?

SANDERS: I will.

SCHULTZ: And this, of course, would push it into the next session of the Congress and we would go back to the old right. That`s what you would take right now, Senator?

SANDERS: I believe, Ed, that we have the vast majority of the American people on our side. I think we`ve got to hold tough on this, hold firm on this, and not concede to Republicans, who, as you indicated, have absolutely no inclination for compromise. They want it all for their rich friends.

SCHULTZ: Senator, good to have you with us tonight. Thanks for speaking up.

SANDERS: Thank you.