A question about Reid's all nighter tomorrow night. Wife and I where talking and kind of

wondering what the Rethugs and Bushco would do to stop attention from going to the Senate.

BUT my wife brought this up and it is making me wonder. What's to stop someone from phoning in or BUSHCO making some sort of scare of a Bomb threat or Terrorist threat that would force the Capitol to be evacuated. What happens then and How low are they to use this chance to get out of Reid's all night Filabuster?

but only to the Dems

and smores.

:rofl:

Never did one, though. Well, not one which involved studying...

:evilgrin:
rocknation

the *co trump card in situations like this.

read the whole post before posting. :blush:

That might mean going to Yale to find a tomb to....

Well, that tomb is already being used by Vitter. Sorry. Never mind. His poor wife!

with joe Lieberman. :rofl:

slumber party! I'm pretty sure Vitter will be on his own, though!

with a ten foot pole. LOL :yoiks:

By the way, an old joke:

Q: Does Bob Dole wear briefs or boxers?

A: Depends!

Or in the case if it comes from the WH whether directly or indirectly the House makes the information public or blackmails Bush?

Not sure what they could do, and I doubt that Byrd would accept any concessions, but I worry about his health.

Reid is not allowing a cloture vote. He is demanding that if they want to try and stop this bill they will actually have to filibuster it. something that hasn't happened in a long time. Usually it is just a matter of counting the votes and saying that they don't have enough to stop a filibuster so let it go at that. Now he is making them actually do the deed. Won't save the bill but will make it more uncomfortable for everyone..

I was thinking about this after hearing about it this morning on The Young Turks. It raised some questions I've been thinking about for a while. Hear me out.

I don't see why this whole night filibuster is so special. I was reading up on filibusters after I heard Randi Rhodes complain about how every Iraq bill is getting filibusters. I found out there is a "procedural filibuster" where the minority doesn't actually have to talk for forever, they can just say "we're filibustering this," and then sixty votes are required for cloture.

Therefore, I have two questions:

1) Why would the minority not do a filibuster on every single bill so that a simple majority could never pass any legislation?

2) As the majority can call out a real filibuster at any time a procedural filibuster is proposed...why wouldn't they? Example: last week Jim Webb's bill for the soldiers (one year at home for every year in combat) got filibustered by Joe-mentum Liebermann, and only 56 votes were cast in favor of ending debate - not enough for cloture. Unless the president of the Senate was confident he'd have 60 votes...why not just make Liebermann talk until he can't any more and pass the legislation the troops need?

These two things have really been sticking in my craw for a while. They seem to defy logic, so there must be some kind of rational explanation. A little help?

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

Thank you for the welcome. I don't suppose there are any Political Science majors on here that know the answer to my questions - I'm not asking them from an angry liberal perspective (although I am one); just as an inquisitive outsider.

Oh, and Monkey, I've actually been hearing a TON about it on the news. And from what I've heard, Fox is reporting on it a lot too (just as "political theater" rather than a method to get a bill passed).

how much attention will this get? A few lines in the paper, a few seconds on the news.