Less ability to filibuster helps the Progressive agenda more than the Conservative!

Turtle is a dead man walking and doesn't care anymore. He will call for the rule change, jam the idiot through (assuming all the Rs are okay with breaking that long-standing tradition) and then go home to enjoy a couple shots of good Kentucky bourbon, neat.

Forsucks is as crooked as the rest of the gop, he is one of theirs. Any repub, who wants to keep their cushy job, should remember who put them into office. The dems. are taking over, especially in Illinois, you know "The Land of Lincoln"!!

If a filibuster is never used then there's no point keeping it

But at least we stood our ground and forced their hand.

The rest is just fallout.

(I think that was Rep. Adam Schiff....)

the filibuster.

However, when the time comes that the Democrats regain the majority, the republicans will NOT be given an opportunity to filibuster anything. There will be blow back. In fact, as adam schiff said the republicans already removed the filibuster by refusing to give a hearing to Garland. This is just a formality

They WILL regret this

for judicial nominees other than the SC, was because the republicans were blocking all of President Obama's judicial appointments in 2012.

When the republicans regained the majority in the Senate in 2014, that was when the republicans were able to refuse to give Garland a hearing, and that in effect was the dismantling of the filibuster for the SC. As Adam Schiff said, all this does is formalize it.

I think there is a good chance the republicans are going to try to remove the filibuster for legislative issues so they can get their draconian agenda through before 2018. Whether that is successful or not, we will see

The removal of the filibuster for bills is next in my view.

Here is an analysis which I think tends to reflect your view:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/05/us/politics/filibuster-gorsuch-nomination-republicans.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

Good riddance to bad procedure, if it does go away.

and can keep threatening it to keep us from using it.

Win-win for them, but let's be on record opposing Gorsuck and letting it be a historical note that Repubs had to change the rules to confirm him.

Pretty sure he doesn't have McCain. Throw in McCain's brother from another mother Graham and if Dems stick together, just need 1 more NON Idiot GOP Senator.

then we are all set (assuming no Ds vote to change the rule).

Have been trying to rifle through some of the GOP Senate vets. Hatch got all teabaggy when Mike Lee threw his colleague Bennett out, but he might be a wild card.

Graham said at a recent townhall he will support changing the rule because some nonsense about Dems getting their way all the time. He was roundly booed by the large crowd.

that turtle will force the nuke option if he isn't certain he has the votes ahead of time, which I'm sure he already knows. Stupid has it's limits. Except for SC nominees, the 60 vote rule to end debate in the senate was eliminated in I think 2013. This btw would not end the senate filibuster, it would only change the number of votes to end debate from 60 to 51 so a filibuster is still possible.

Is there one?

McCain doesn’t think the nuclear option is a good idea for the Senate, and wasn’t pulling any punches against those who think it would be a good move. “Whoever says that is a stupid idiot,” McCain told MSNBC.

Earlier on Tuesday, McCain said in a CNN interview that despite his concerns, he believes Senate Republicans will use the nuclear option to confirm Gorsuch, but he worries about the ramifications it could have should Democrats take control of the Senate in the future.

from:
http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/whoever-says-that-is-a-stupid-idiot-john-mccain-has-harsh-words-for-gop-supreme-court-nuclear-option/

when the Senate control shifts the Democrats like myself will remember the Repugnants actions and then its time for payback.

They have been talking about how they could do better for years and now that they have the means they don't have shit in their shoots but excuses and whining. So, yea, go right ahead and bulldog that sociopath into that seat. When the Democrats retake congress because the Republicans have done less than zero for the country. We'll remember this and deal with you accordingly.

Like the youngest, spoiled brat in the family they'll blow it up but when the older more mature child tries to the same thing they'll run to mommy and daddy screaming about unfair it is.

Bill Maher really nailed this syndrome (if you haven't seen it, please watch it)

how is Kentucky doing....shit head....

(IOW, "go f--- yourself.&quot

We're waiting.

[

the opposition from making an appointment. Might have been a Republican whose goal was blocking Obama from making a recess appointment.

Does this ring any bells with anyone?

Sam

Blocking recess appointments of Cordray for CFPB and NLRB members.

"Over what would have traditionally been the 2011–12 winter recess of the 112th Congress, the House of Representatives did not assent to recess, specifically to block Richard Cordray's appointment as Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.[7] As therefore required by the Constitution, both the House and Senate held pro forma sessions.[8] Regardless, on January 4, 2012, President Obama claimed authority to appoint Richard Cordray and others under the Recess Appointments Clause. White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler asserted that the appointments were valid, because the pro forma sessions were designed to, "through form, render a constitutional power of the executive obsolete" and that the Senate was for all intents and purposes recessed.[9] Republicans in the Senate disputed the appointments, with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell stating that Obama had "arrogantly circumvented the American people" with the appointments. It was expected that there would be a legal challenge to the appointments.[10] The first such challenge was announced in April 2012, disputing a National Labor Relations Board ruling made following the Obama appointments.[11][12] "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recess_appointment

Turtle man had someone show up, once in every 3 days, then declare the Senate 'open', then adjourn after a few seconds.

He was minority leader, but the repugs had a House Majority.

"... Noel Canning presents a classic conflict between the President and the Senate. The Senate attempted to block recess appointments by holding pro forma sessions in December 2011 and January 2012, and the President disregarded the Senate’s wishes when he appointed four officials on January 4, 2012.

Here is the problem with that view: It is uncontroversial that the Senate majority has generally supported the President’s nominees, and the most plausible inference is that the majority also supported his recess appointments. The belief that the Senate is in conflict with the President appears to stem from the belief that the Senate minority filibustered the majority’s attempt to take a recess, thereby placing the Senate, as a body, in conflict with the President’s actions. But Senate rules do not permit filibusters of motions to adjourn and, in fact, it was the Speaker of the House of Representatives who claimed authority to block the Senate from taking a recess.5 "

http://harvardlawreview.org/2013/10/the-senate-and-the-recess-appointments/

The Supreme Court found that Obama's recess appointments for the NLRB were unconstitutional. It's worth noting that little bush made 171 recess appointments, and Obama made a few dozen, despite massive repug party obstruction . Here's a MoJo article on the defeat of Obama's NLRB recess picks, good and easy reading:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/supreme-court-recess-appointments-obama-noel-canning

He'd have to be reconfirmed, but could do a lot of damage in the meantime.

Call the D.C. Police, theft in progress

He does not get to pick the judges. Totally sick.

Under russian manipulation, Republicans are selling out America and American democracy.

They don't. There are no sensible Republicans. They don't give a rat's ass about anything but holding power.

There is a lot of talk on DU and in other Democratic circles that reason will prevail. I defy ANYONE to show a scintilla of evidence that is true in the Republican party. They are marching lockstep against reason and thoughtfulness. Republicans are systematically destroying the environment. They are destroying civil rights. They are destroying worker rights. They are actively suppressing voting rights.

If you believe a republican is anything other than an enemy of good you are wrong.

Hard to fathom how so many could be so willfully destructive to everyone including themselves.

no matter which way this goes down. The Senate has to stop with this "decorum" nonsense and call it what it is, a Right Wing Coup!

Been assholes for decades and don't give one bloody damn about rules, procedures or law.

Because what goes around comes around. 2018 and 2020....

He lied about his "only book", refused a direct question to answer who his backers are, the SC said one of his written judgments was incorrect.

The man hasn't been vetted enough, interviewed enough, checked enough in 2 weeks! to even qualify for a lifetime position on the SC.

Republicans ignored Garland for a fucking year! wouldn't even interview him and Garland has a lifetime of MAJOR court decisions, books he wrote himself!, many, many backers who are PROUD to stand with him.

Don't care. He's either bluffing, or will go nuclear. If Democrats fold, he's just going to do it the next time. There's no grand strategy decisions to be made here.

The choices are either
1. stand against their horrible picks, in which case he might get what he wants every time with the nuclear option.
2.Give up and gaurantee he will get what he wants every time.