Why we must force a filibuster vote even if we can't guarantee success

Too many Americans feel like the Democratic Party does not stand for anything, and the filibuster should be a foundation brick in the wall of rebuttal that we should be building every day between now and November '06.

We stand for the Constitution!

We stand for checks and balances!

We stand for one-man-one-vote!

We stand for fairness for women!

We stand for fairness for workers!

We stand for the rule of law!

We stand against Alito!

If we lose, the Roberts-Alito court will rape the Constitution, and for every insult the Bill of Rights suffers at their hands, we should make God damn sure the American people know that Alito was appointed over our strongest objections and staunchest efforts.

That is really beautifully put, Czolgosz. That sums it up.
:toast:

And how does one force it?

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster>

I've just never heard of forcing a filibuster vote.

ONE EDIT: As far as I know, there will be a cloture vote no matter what, and one can vote for or against cloture.

Where is your confusion?

vote regardless of what your "pre-vote head count" indicates.

ON EDIT: There's a vote before cloture?

There's no vote before cloture (unless it's some type of internal, informal vote like a vote among the "gang of 14").

If you have been on the "internets" today, you may have heard about Senators "counting votes" to decide whether to filibuster. I think they should force that vote regardless of this "head count."

and who served as a regional coordinator for Lawyers For Kerry. It's entirely possible that you are correct about this and I am mistaken, but I don't think so.

Look, we're on the same side here. This is not something to be disagreeable about while we have more pressing issues to concern us. If you want, I'll be glad to refer you to other cites which discuss the rules of the Senate, but the wikipedia article is about as straightforward and simple as any other article I know of.

Lot of times there is unanimous constent on these types of votes and so you don't get individual "yays and nays" from the Senators.

Did he simply call up all the regional coordinators and tell them to shut up and sit down? Were there really thousands of lawyers standing by? How did they feel about standing down? Betrayed?

file a challenge (we were ready for a Gore v. Bush-type challenge). We also raised a ton of money for Kerry. We stood ready to challenge the election in certain states with irregularities, but the Kerry campaign instructed us not to challenge. That was a huge disappointment to all of us. I assure you many of us advocated passionately for a challenge in Ohio (and some urged a challenge in Florida and New Hampshire, too). If you remember the important and heartbreaking work that Truth Is All and many, many others did and posted here, I assure you that it was passed along to the Kerry campaign with pleas for a challenge.

I for one had concluded that "Lawyers For Kerry" was something he made up as a bluff. I can only imagine how upset you must have been, given that I was at a major rock-bottom. I had put many hours into campaign work, largely motivated by Kerry's promise to "count every vote." When I ran across TruthIsAll on google, and he led me here, I began to have hope. It was all for naught though. Most of our "leaders" are not members of the reality-based community.

Republicans of one of the 60 STOP votes that they must have). We can probably convince 41 to vote For the filibuster ("no" on cloture) or at least to abstain.
There might be some Republicans who are willing to abstain on the cloture vote and vote no on nuking!

Democrats stand for...

THE RULE OF LAW
THE U.S. CONSTITUTION/BILL OF RIGHTS

It's a simple message that we MUST get out there!

peace.

If most Americans were really given the information about what this is all about, most would be at least nervous about the prospect of Alito. Most Americans (with thge exception of right wing nutballs) are not in favor of being governed by authoiritarians.

If they aren't concerned now, they may be the next time they may have a complaint against their employers, polluters, unwanted development in their backyard, product liability problem, a run in with the authorities, etc. Next time they find that Playboy has been banned.....All the wonderful things that come along with right wing authoritarian government mixed with the perverted form of oligarchical "free markets" that favor wealth over the majority.

So maybe the apathetic and misguided will remember this once they realize the consequences.

Ken Salazar of Colorado (1-888-355-3588 PRESS 2 or 202-224-5852)

Ben Nelson of Nebraska (202-224-6551)

Bill Nelson of Florida (202-224-5274) need your phone calls.

Evan Bayh is also on the fence on voting for Alito and the filibuster! CALL: (202) 224-5623

Robert Byrd - 202-224-3954 or 304-343-7144 or 304-342-5855 or http://byrd.senate.gov/byrd_email.html

JOE LIEBERMAN* - (800) 225-5605 OR FAX (860) 549-8478

Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) (202) 224-2921

Joe Biden. 202-224-5042

KENT CONRAD of ND - Phone: (202) 224-2043

Frank Lautenburg (D-NJ) - (202) 224-3224 - http://lautenberg.senate.gov/webform.html

Robert Menendez (D-NJ) - (202) 224-4744

Mary Landrieu - (202) 224-5824

Tim Johnson (ND) - (202) 224-5842

Barack Obama (IL) - (202) 224-2854

Republican Lamar Alexander (R-TN) - moderate, possibly could be moved. TRY. (202) 224-4944

Ben Nelson (NE) originally stated he would vote Yes for Alito. But it looks like he is putting his finger in the wind. He is now taking calls and tallies as well: 202-224-6551 .

on this list?

I ask because I am from NJ.

work, I've been OUT of the LOOP ALL DAY!

So cut me some slack and let me know what's going on with the names on the list.

http://www.democrats.com/alito-48?from=150&comments_per_page=50

This page is constantly being updated.

FWIW, I'm beginning to specifically look for your posts. Nice work. :thumbsup:

I have a feeling at this point that cloture won't get UC.

edit: typo (as usual)

by a vote where each Senator will have to accountable for his or her vote to end the on-going debate over Alito. I'm also saying, if necessary, we must further call Frist's bluff on the nuclear option, and if he's not bluffing, so be it -- let's have that fight here and now and not over some hypothetical issue in the future for which we've been "keeping our powder dry." Finally, I'm saying stop the nonsense trying to decide what course of action to take based on the supposed head count of how Senators say they will vote on cloture and, instead, let's just push ahead full steam no matter whether the Republicans supposedly have 60 votes for cloture or not.

No matter whether we think Chaffee, or Snowe, or Specter, or Byrd, or whoever will vote with us or against us, let's make them vote on the record so they face the consequence for their betrayal of our Constitution. Let's let America see exactly who stood with them and who stood against their constitutional rights.

Do not let the Republicans get away with their blatant effort to rewrite congressional history regarding the filibuster of judicial nominees and the Supreme Court. In 1965, the Senate easily confirmed Judge Abe Fortas to the Supreme Court. Just three years later, when President Lyndon Johnson nominated Fortas to serve as Chief Justice, there was obviously no question about his qualifications because Fortas was already serving on the Supreme Court. Based only on Fortas's judicial views, however, the Senate Republicans launched a successful four-day filibuster of Fortas's nomination in September of 1968. Whenever you hear some Senator saying that there is no history of filibustering a Supreme Court nomination based on his out-of-the-mainstream judicial views, ask them to look up the front page of the Washington Post from September 26, 1968: "A full-dress Republican-led filibuster broke out in the Senate yesterday against a motion to call up the nomination of Justice Abe Fortas for Chief Justice." The New York Times ran as similar story that day, and many news outlets around ran the story later that week.

Don't buy the Republican bullshit about the filibuster has never been used on judicial nominees!

"This fight is no longer about if Reid can get the 41 votes or not. This could be the fight for the soul of the party. It could be a fight to see who will control the future of the party. The traditional party structure can't deliver... but maybe we can.


From a pragmatic point of view the chances of stopping Alito are in fact slim .... But

If enough pressure from the grassroots could be put on those wavering Senators to stand up, who (besides the American people) would be the big winner.... Markos."

<http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/1/28/02059/1098>
<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x262424>

:yourock: