Is it really a filibuster?

NPR Morning Edition had an item this morning about the failed cloture vote on Bolton (I'm assuming it was a cloture vote). But it was framed as "Senate unable to end filibuster on the Bolton Nomination".

My understanding is that the nomination is held up on a request for information from the WH, and that until the WH releases that info (or a cloture vote succeeds), the nomination proceedings are in limbo. This doesn't fit my definition of filibuster, but I admit I only have a shallow understanding of parlimentary procedures.

My cynical side says that this was an attempt by the "liberal media" :eyes: to smear the Dems by accusing them of filibustering, heating up the rhetoric back towards the nuke option.

So, is it really a filibuster?

Yes, Walrus, you were being BS'd. A filibuster is a constant, open-ended debate which ties up all other proceedings until either time has run out or the other side gives up. This is no such thing. They ARE stopping to vote to end the "filibuster," but there really isn't one, technically speaking. The right simply cannot muster enough members of their own party to support Bolton, and rather than admit a defeat for Bush, they're framing it as obstructionist democrats. In reality, it is the six republicans who are stopping Bolton, not the democrats.

But do you know who the 6 are?

:hangover:

There's no assurance that if and when Democrats get the docs they wouldn't be continuing debate, and they are, in fact, holding up a vote by open-ended debate. That's a filibuster.

they refuse to end the debate and allow a vote unless bushco releases the documents they asked for.

cloture is a vote to end debate, a fillibuster is just a prolonged debate and the failure of the cloture vote.

a fillibuster doesnt have to be long and it isnt open ended. it ends with either a cloture vote passing or moving on to other business.

But it's the administration that's filibustering its own nominee by refusing to provide his full record to the Senate. The White House apparently doesn't think much of the Senate's constitutional duties, and is trying to hold itself and its nominations above the law by not complying with reasonable requests for information.

There's our counterargument in two sentences: Read 'em and memorize 'em.