Author Topic: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politics  (Read 1866186 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Mandark

  • Icon
I'm saying what they should do, not what's gonna end up happening.  It's either:

1)  Find a Republican Senator that cares more about controlling long-run health costs more than they do making Obama a failure,

2)  Ping-pong it and settle for the Senate bill,

or

3)  Let the progressive caucus and blue dogs create a circular firing squad and tank the bill so that we get nothing out of all these months of negotiation.



The first one ain't realistic and the third ain't productive.  Brown isn't Joseph Cao, and he's going to follow GOP dogma on economic issues.

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
nope
010

Mandark

  • Icon
McCain's plan was to get rid of the tax exemption for health care benefits, and replace them with individual vouchers which would grow at the rate of inflation.

The idea was that once consumers had some SKIN IN THE GAME (a great drinking game candidate during the three debates), they would realize how much money they were spending on healthcare and stop having so many damn illnesses.

Decoupling health insurance from employers isn't actually a bad idea, but if you did that with no new mechanism for risk pooling and no new regulations on insurance companies, they would cherry-pick young and healthy customers.  The individual insurance market for the middle-aged and sick is brutal, and those people would be on their own.



The real problem here is that every Republican legislator is primarily interested in stopping Obama's agenda, regardless of its content.  The lesson they learned from Clinton's first two years is that a minority party in the US can stop anything it wants to as long as it stays united, and that the public will blame the governing party for gridlock.

Their main excuses are shamelessly obvious lies.  They wring their hands about the deficit after voting for unfunded wars, tax cuts, and drug benefits under Bush.  They turn around and promise to never allow any cuts to Medicare, which is the biggest long-term liability on America's books.  This after telling us we have to be weddy, weddy concerned about Social Security.

Sometimes it boggles my mind that a system like this can exist, or that so many people could rise to such powerful positions with almost no concern for the well being of the country they serve.

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
Something I've been wondering for a while. Isn't the idea of a super majority in congress a totally flawed idea to begin with? In order to get anything done, either party needs 60 votes to accomplish. But by having such a rule, doesn't this kinda make sure that nearly nothing does get done since one would imagine there wouldn't always be 60 or more senators of the same party at one time?


Yeah, I know there's still reconcilliation, but that can't pass everything.

Gruco

  • Junior Member
Re: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politi
« Reply #7324 on: January 20, 2010, 04:38:13 AM »
Trying to decide between googling job opportunities is Sweden, crying myself to sleep, and finding a way to blame this on Jay Leno.
 

Human Snorenado

  • Stay out of Malibu, Lebowski
  • Icon
Polish media are calling it "disastrous lose for Obama".

I think GOP has it in the bag now for 2012 elections :smug

What do you care, Polack?  Or are you still broken up about not getting a free missile shield.
yar

Olivia Wilde Homo

  • Proud Kinkshamer
  • Senior Member
Re: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politi
« Reply #7326 on: January 20, 2010, 07:18:17 AM »
Trying to decide between googling job opportunities is Sweden, crying myself to sleep, and finding a way to blame this on Jay Leno.
 

Interestingly enough, had people been as pissed off about the limp dick Senate health care reform bill like they are about Jay Leno taking back The Tonight Show, this country would be in a lot better place.

The huge cult of celebrity worship going on right now is a telling sign that the country has very fucked priorities and won't be changing anytime soon.  Where people would rather get worked up over celebrity bullshit than y'know, the future of the country?
🍆🍆

Ganhyun

  • Used to worship Muckhole. Now worships Robo.
  • Senior Member
People who believe strongly in things react loudly and harshly to things they dont like/want. That goes both ways. I recall Liberals who disagreed with Bush/Republican policies (such as the Irag war)camping out at his ranch in Texas protesting. Or kicking the military out of their city.

Surely you could have used a better example than the Iraq war protestors? Might I suggest truthers?

Truthers would probably be a good example as well, yes.


Also:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0110/Van_Hollen_Blame_Bush.html?showall

I guess Blaming Bush for everything, including Brown's win in Massachusetts, is still the go-to answer?

I think Howard Dean also blamed Bush as well on NBC.

Really, I'd blame the candidate's lack of campaigning (even though she had a huge lead not too long ago) and arrogance for assuming because she was a Democrat she would get the election automatically. *


*Though the Fenway thing and the Shilling is a Yankees fan thing probably killed her too.
XDF

Green Shinobi

  • Member
How could anyone who has ever lived in Massachusetts call Schilling a Yankees fan?

Even non-baseball fans know about the bloody sock. Was Coakley living in a fucking bunker for the last six years?

Green Shinobi

  • Member
I've been hearing that while the proposed health care package was deficit neutral for the first ten years, after ten years new programs were set to kick in that would add to the deficit, such as the Disability Insurance Program. Anyone know if this is true?

Edit: after doing more research, it seems that the problem is that benefits would start to exceed premiums in the Disability Insurance Program over the next decade. Is there any counter to this?
« Last Edit: January 20, 2010, 09:43:08 AM by Green Shinobi »

tiesto

  • ルカルカ★ナイトフィーバー
  • Senior Member
All the republicans, libertardians, and anti-UHC people on my facebook are having a field day with the Mass election - acting like their favorite sports team won  :-\
^_^

Human Snorenado

  • Stay out of Malibu, Lebowski
  • Icon
All the republicans, libertardians, and anti-UHC people on my facebook are having a field day with the Mass election - acting like their favorite sports team won  :-\

Congratulate them on their new 41-59 majority.
yar

brawndolicious

  • Nylonhilist
  • Senior Member
Didn't Brown claim during his campaign that he was going to vote for UHC?  How likely is he to block the bill?

Van Cruncheon

  • live mas or die trying
  • Banned
given the behavior of lieberman and the blue dogs, the conservatard alliance might actually HAVE a majority
duc

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
If democrats drop health care as Barney Frank and others are suggesting, I'm not voting in November.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/01/demoralized_democrats.html
010

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/obama-senate-will-not-vote-on-health-care-before-brown-is-seated.php?ref=fpa

guess we'll have to look for leadership from somewhere else. not coming from the WH/Obama
010

Mandark

  • Icon
http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/obama-senate-will-not-vote-on-health-care-before-brown-is-seated.php?ref=fpa

guess we'll have to look for leadership from somewhere else. not coming from the WH/Obama

:derisivejerkingoffmotion

People demanding "leadership" from Obama are mostly asking for big, public displays of emotion.  It's the equivalent of sports radio callers on Monday yelling "Did you see the coach?  He was just standing there with this clipboard!"


Quote from: Professor Prole
given the behavior of lieberman and the blue dogs, the conservatard alliance might actually HAVE a majority

The dirty secret of US politics is that no matter who's in charge, there's almost always a cross-party majority for protecting the status quo (with minor tweaks for certain interest groups).  I was slightly amazed that they got every Dem in line for the cloture vote.

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Quote
Generally speaking, do you think Democrats in Washington, DC are fighting hard enough to challenge the Republican policies of the Bush years, aren’t fighting hard enough to change those policies, or are fighting about right?

Obama/Brown Voters
NOT ENOUGH / TOO HARD / ABOUT RIGHT / NOT SURE
37% / 15% / 21% / 27%

37% of Brown's supporters thought the health care bill doesn't go far enough. Wow
http://pol.moveon.org/brownpoll/
010

Mandark

  • Icon
That's actually 37% of voters who voted for Obama in 2008 and Brown this time.  Hence "Obama/Brown" voters.

That's still a big chunk.  I read that Brown actually won a majority of voters with a favorable impression of Obama.  Makes no sense, but not surprising.  McCain's signature issue during the primaries was the surge, and he consistently did better among Republicans who opposed the Iraq war.

Democracy!

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Whoops, meant Obama/Brown voters.

annd dem talking points
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/dem-talking-points-were-screwed.php

 :-\
010

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
People demanding "leadership" from Obama are mostly asking for big, public displays of emotion.  It's the equivalent of sports radio callers on Monday yelling "Did you see the coach?  He was just standing there with this clipboard!"

This.


I've mainly avoided the political thread here and on GAF but I can only imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth that is going on over there among internet politico types as reality has come crashing down on them.

Human Snorenado

  • Stay out of Malibu, Lebowski
  • Icon
[youtube=560,345]c4aQCiRjvZY[/youtube]

:lol :lol :lol

"Now it drags on forever, like Stalingrad!"
yar

pollo

  • Member
So, healthcare is done for?

Ganhyun

  • Used to worship Muckhole. Now worships Robo.
  • Senior Member
So, healthcare is done for?

Possibly, but if this current form dies then it will get brought back up again at some point. Not sure when though.
XDF

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/obama-senate-will-not-vote-on-health-care-before-brown-is-seated.php?ref=fpa

guess we'll have to look for leadership from somewhere else. not coming from the WH/Obama

:derisivejerkingoffmotion

People demanding "leadership" from Obama are mostly asking for big, public displays of emotion.  It's the equivalent of sports radio callers on Monday yelling "Did you see the coach?  He was just standing there with this clipboard!"

then how come bush was able to get all his policies through if you're so smart hmmm :smug

Olivia Wilde Homo

  • Proud Kinkshamer
  • Senior Member
I suspect they'll pinch out an even more half assed, watered down bill later this year.
🍆🍆

Gruco

  • Junior Member
Re: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politi
« Reply #7346 on: January 20, 2010, 07:05:43 PM »
So what's the over/under on Brown hitting Lieberman approvals by 2012?

Brehvolution

  • Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.
  • Senior Member
So, healthcare is done for?

Possibly, but if this current form dies then it will get brought back up again at some point. Not sure when though.
It's only been 15 years or so since the last try at it.
©ZH

Human Snorenado

  • Stay out of Malibu, Lebowski
  • Icon
Re: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politi
« Reply #7348 on: January 20, 2010, 10:31:51 PM »
So what's the over/under on Brown hitting Lieberman approvals by 2012?

After Mass. voters realize that they elected a Mitch McConnell lap dog, he's gonna go down hill pretty damn quick.
yar

M3wThr33

  • Member
Bush promised, Obama broke it :maf
And Russia would have fucked it up. They just assume everything the USA does it a plot against them.

given the behavior of lieberman and the blue dogs, the conservatard alliance might actually HAVE a majority
It's a Superminority! Somehow 2/5 control = total control.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2010, 01:03:50 AM by M3wThr33 »

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Sounds like things are calming down a bit, and the house will hopefully pass the senate bill in exchange for a separate bill passed through reconciliation. It's ironic that house progressives have been forced to "compromise" time and time again over the last half year, now they control whether health care lives or dies. I hope they demand a medicare buy-in through reconciliation, and maybe an expansion of medicaid.

Hell, maybe they should demand a public option. There were 51 votes for it in the senate back when the opt-out was the new kid at school (before Lieberman stole the lunch money)
010

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Quote
WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama on Thursday is expected to propose new limits on the size and risk taken by the country's biggest banks, marking the administration's latest assault on Wall Street in what could mark a return, at least in spirit, to some of the curbs on finance put in place during the Great Depression, according to congressional sources and administration officials.

The past decade saw widespread consolidation among large financial institutions to create huge banking titans. If Congress approves the proposal, the White House plan could permanently impose government constraints on the size and nature of banking.

Mr. Obama's proposal is expected to include new scale restrictions on the size of the country's largest financial institutions. The goal would be to deter banks from becoming so large they put the broader economy at risk and to also prevent banks from becoming so large they distort normal competitive forces. It couldn't be learned what precise limits the White House will endorse, or whether Mr. Obama will spell out the exact limits on Thursday.

Mr. Obama is also expected to endorse, for the first time publicly, measures pushed by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, which would place restrictions on the proprietary trading done by commercial banks, essentially limiting the way banks bet with their own capital. Administration officials say they want to place "firewalls" between different divisions of financial companies to ensure banks don't indirectly subsidize "speculative" trading through other subsidiaries that hold federally insured deposits.

The proposal could have the biggest effect on Bank of America Corp., Wells Fargo & Co., and J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., which control a large amount of U.S. deposits, as well as Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and Citigroup Inc., which have a large presence on Wall Street.

If the proposal took effect, big banks could be forced to wall off certain activities in their investing banking units—which trade and underwrite securities and make their own bets on markets—from their traditional businesses, which make loans and take deposits.

The investing banking units have grown dramatically in recent years, were far more profitable than the banking operations and were at the heart of the financial crisis.

The industry has undergone a major consolidation during the financial crisis, leaving the top four banks with an unprecedented market share in businesses such as deposit taking, credit cards and mortgages.

The rules could also keep banks out of the business of running hedge funds, investing in real estate or private equity, all businesses that have become important, profitable parts of these banks. The collapse of two highly leveraged hedge funds began the process that led to the collapse of Bear Stearns.

If investors believe the new rules could take effect, they could sell off the shares of most of the big financial stocks in the belief these companies would be facing years of turmoil and potentially lower profits.

Messrs. Obama and Volcker are scheduled to meet tomorrow in advance of the White House announcement.

The White House's proposal, one aide said, wouldn't resurrect the exact limits put in place by the Depression-era Glass Steagall Act, which essentially walled off commercial banks from investment banks and was repealed in 1999. Instead, the White House proposal would seek to return the "spirit of Glass Steagall," meant to limit large banks from becoming too big and complex that create enormous risk.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704320104575015910344117800.html?mod=WSJ_hps_LEFTWhatsNews

wat
010

Human Snorenado

  • Stay out of Malibu, Lebowski
  • Icon
yar

Brehvolution

  • Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.
  • Senior Member
Fuck you conservative activist judges!
©ZH

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politi
« Reply #7354 on: January 21, 2010, 02:19:53 PM »
so obama is letting health care die so he can get some fat checkz :smug
010

Eric P

  • I DESERVE the gold. I will GET the gold!
  • Icon
Elections are even more fucked now. :'(

now now, this is just guaranteeing free speech to our fellow citizens

Tonya

Rman

  • Senior Member
Democracy had a good run.

Re: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politi
« Reply #7357 on: January 21, 2010, 03:38:56 PM »
Well, at least corporations will be able to enjoy their rights in perpetuity unlike us mortal suckers.  Won't be able to shut-em up, just like most old people.  Hopefully, their "speech" isn't as chintzy as that $5 cheque grandma sent for my birthday.  Not that I'm, umm, ungrateful.

So, what'll be the first corporation to run for president?  I'm hoping for the Carlyle Group or Monsanto.  Maybe Genentech; not sure on that one.  Will it vote for itself?  Might need Diebold for help with that one.  Perhaps it'll buy a few luxury boxes at the Electoral College.  Or, I guess it could purchase the naming rights.  They already sponsor legislation, so it seems a natural extension for the brand.

Brehvolution

  • Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.
  • Senior Member
"Liberals drink Coke!"

This message brought to you buy Pepsi Co.
©ZH

brawndolicious

  • Nylonhilist
  • Senior Member
Re: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politi
« Reply #7359 on: January 21, 2010, 03:54:29 PM »
So, what'll be the first corporation to run for president?  I'm hoping for the Carlyle Group or Monsanto.  Maybe Genentech; not sure on that one.  Will it vote for itself?  Might need Diebold for help with that one.  Perhaps it'll buy a few luxury boxes at the Electoral College.  Or, I guess it could purchase the naming rights.  They already sponsor legislation, so it seems a natural extension for the brand.
I could vote for a biotech company to be perfectly honest.  It's the bankers that keep me up at night.

Mandark

  • Icon
Matt Taibbi is a dumb, too.
« Reply #7360 on: January 21, 2010, 04:26:07 PM »
Here's the most frustrating thing:

If democrats drop health care as Barney Frank and others are suggesting, I'm not voting in November.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/01/demoralized_democrats.html

This is exactly the right sentiment.

Only the people who should be saying this have instead spent the last few months lobbying against the bill.  The Glenn Greenwald/Jane Hamsher wing of the party is getting increasingly dishonest and self-destructive to the point where I expect to see people sporting "Vote for Nader" buttons.  Tell us how great that worked out last time, dudes.

Human Snorenado

  • Stay out of Malibu, Lebowski
  • Icon
My congresscritter (Mike McIntyre) is a blue dog, so I'll be supporting whoever is hopefully primarying him.  If no one is or if he wins (highly likely) I'll honestly go ahead and vote for a Republican for national office for the first time ever.  No point in sending these idiots to Washington to keep selling out every chance they get; I *know* that's what I'll get in a Republican, so I'll just take that instead.  I'd stay home in November but I want to vote for whoever is running against Burr.
yar

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politi
« Reply #7362 on: January 21, 2010, 04:40:58 PM »
I wonder what independents think when they see liberals demanding the bill be killed/is harmful/etc


http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/01/can_democrats_govern.html
I don't want to see republicans take over the house or senate, but at the same time I don't want to enable democrats to run around with their tails between their legs. Now, if democrats went all out and somehow failed to pass the bill, that would be somewhat understandable. But dropping it all together would be ridiculous, especially now that a better bill passing is a possibility (medicare buy-in or something else through reconciliation). Hell, they probably still have 51 votes for a public option.
010

The Fake Shemp

  • Ebola Carrier
Re: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politi
« Reply #7363 on: January 21, 2010, 04:46:11 PM »
I just want to take a head count on who is finally jumping on my bandwagon after I said Obama will be a one-term President.
PSP

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politi
« Reply #7364 on: January 21, 2010, 04:49:22 PM »
Romney Gingrich 2012 :bow
010

Rman

  • Senior Member

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
010

The Fake Shemp

  • Ebola Carrier
Re: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politi
« Reply #7367 on: January 21, 2010, 04:54:45 PM »
I don't necessarily agree with that, it's just that the Democrats currently in power don't have the stomach to pass sweeping social reforms and lose a lot of clout when their response to the banking crisis is, "Are you sorry for nearly collapsing the world economy? You are? Here, have some taxpayer money with no strings attached. Also, we won't be enacting any measures to prevent similar calamities from occurring."

P.S. Thank you Supreme Court for adding to the pain by repealing McCain-Feingold. Smart move. Really. I agree with it. It's not like giant corporations and banking institutions weren't ALREADY in charge of the country, now there's just transparency.
PSP

Rman

  • Senior Member
I think the biggest mistake the democrats made was deciding that the proper response to the banking crisis that almost brought down the world economy was to try and enact healthcare reform.
Definitely, especially since Obama was elected due to the whole economic collapse.  McCain's poll numbers never recovered after the events of last summer.  

PD.  Romney's too cookie cutter and he vacillates on issues way too much to gain any traction.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2010, 05:00:18 PM by Rman »

Howard Alan Treesong

  • キング・メタル・ドラゴン
  • Icon
I think the biggest mistake the democrats made was deciding that the proper response to the banking crisis that almost brought down the world economy was to try and enact healthcare reform.

Yeah, given everything going on Health Care Reform was kind of a stupid thing to stake the presidency on.
乱学者

Howard Alan Treesong

  • キング・メタル・ドラゴン
  • Icon
What MegaCorp are you going to ally yourself with? I'm joining ConAltria, myself. They've got the microwave popcorn market nailed down.
乱学者

Eric P

  • I DESERVE the gold. I will GET the gold!
  • Icon
What MegaCorp are you going to ally yourself with? I'm joining ConAltria, myself. They've got the microwave popcorn market nailed down.

Shineheart Wig Company
Tonya

Van Cruncheon

  • live mas or die trying
  • Banned
i am totally going ocp. i am hoping i can convince the holy chaplain-executive -- or whoever the guy who administers the civil protocols for my fief is -- that i would be a good candidate for robocopping. ah, the sweet sweet simplicity of inviolable binary inputs. i imagine it must be like being a libertarian.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2010, 05:28:29 PM by Professor Prole »
duc

HyperZoneWasAwesome

  • HastilyChosenUsername
  • Senior Member
NPR is reporting that Air America Radio is going silent, today, as in, within the hour.  Not in protest of the Democratic pussery, but out of financial collapse.

Ironic timing, but still, a sad loss.

Olivia Wilde Homo

  • Proud Kinkshamer
  • Senior Member
Obama will still win 2012 but this is pretty much the end of him doing anything useful.

A shame that he squandered his window of opportunity by puttering around, offering lackluster support to issues he successfully campaigned on, and appointing the wrong people when push came to shove.  Meanwhile the Democrats will run around like chickens with their heads cut off, making up for lost time they had last year.  Blue Dogs will keep flirting with the GOP and Sarah Palin will continue to successfully reinvent herself.  Then the same Democrats who shat the bed will be writing op-eds wondering what happened to their influence and their majority, trying to re-frame that it wasn't their fault.
🍆🍆

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
NPR is reporting that Air America Radio is going silent, today, as in, within the hour.  Not in protest of the Democratic pussery, but out of financial collapse.

Ironic timing, but still, a sad loss.

What the fuck? I thought it was odd when I put on Ron Reagan only to realize it was a repeat.

Human Snorenado

  • Stay out of Malibu, Lebowski
  • Icon
I apologize for my ignorance on this matter, but can you primary a sitting president? Because I'd kinda like to see that happen with Obama.

Sure, that's why Johnson decided not to run in 1968- he was getting primaried and was gonna lose.

I'd say that that's a horrible idea, but after Mr. Harvard Law Review fucked around for a year kissing Republicans' asses in the vain attempt to get them to responsibly govern in lieu of screaming "SOCIALISM" at the top of their lungs and voting no all the time, I'd love to see Howard Dean get in there and spit some fiyah.
yar

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
meh, nothing has happened that suggests he's going to lose in 2012. My problem is with the chickenshit, limp wrist way he seems to run things.

I guess taking on the banks is doable; McCain proposed a similar bill with a dem senator some time ago, iirc. So McCain could be the 60th vote for this, OR he can pull support and claim Obama is going too far, or not listening to teh poor republicans, or whatever. Same thing Gregg did recently with the deficit commission; Gregg's idea, but when Obama ok'd it guess who came out in opposition smh.
010

Brehvolution

  • Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.
  • Senior Member
Ain't no black man gonna tell me what to do is pretty much the repug mantra so what do you think?
©ZH

Human Snorenado

  • Stay out of Malibu, Lebowski
  • Icon
So the Repubs will basically filibuster EVERYTHING? Every bill will require 60 votes in the future?

Here's the way that the Dems can get around this but undoubtedly won't:

After the 2010 elections a new Congress will be seated.  Dems will undoubtedly lose seats in both houses but will retain the majority in both.  The thing with the filibuster is, there's no law about it.  It's just a traditional Senate rule, and the rules are agreed upon and voted in a simple majority vote at the beginning of each two year term of Congress.  So in theory, the Dems could scuttle the filibuster, or at the very least do what some people have been proposing- require 60 votes the first time, then after two weeks have another vote where you only require 57, then two weeks later another vote where you only require 54, then another vote where you only need a simple majority to end debate.

Of course, the Dems will never do this.
yar