We don't have enough lipstick for this pig.

[Atticus]

I've read numerous efforts here to justify or excuse the Senate's failure to reform the filibuster in any meaningful way. Those of us who feel outraged and betrayed are being told, essentially, that we just "don't understand" how politics works; that Harry Reid just had no choice; that only those who just fell off the turnip truck thought there was a chance that we'd restore the talking filibuster.

We were told, in no uncertain tems, that reform would happen. "Damn betcha"---Harry Reid.
It not only didn't happen: he didn't try to make it happen. While he was assuring us in folksy terms (see just above) that the Merkley reforms would be implemented, he did not want the Merkley reforms. Or so he now says.

When the other side does that---and it's getting difficult to tell just who is on the "other side", lately---we call them lying sons of bitches. (Obvious next line self-censored) McConnell, by the way, is already raising funds claiming to have "defeated the liberals" on the filibuster.

I'm sorry, but corporate blue dog Democrats aren't Democrats, in my view. If saying that means I'm on the wrong forum, the Admins can let me know.

[Isoldeblue]

1. I agree! My thoughts exactly.

[DJ13]

2. My favorite excuse is "we need the current rules when we're the minority"

It never dawns on the person repeating that excuse that the GOP would obviously eliminate the fillibuster next time they're in the majority after the way they've demonstrated how to abuse it.

[mindwalker_i]

6. If we're the minority and was to filibuster

then we should have to talk too! None of this anonymous, silent, wimpy-ass stuff.

[corkhead]

25. it is a defeatist attitude. If Dems implemented a truly progressive agenda, there would be no worry

about losing the Senate. Having a Senate that passed progressive reforms would put much more pressure on the House to do the same. Letting things stay the same with a 60 vote tyranny of the minority provides cover to make sure nothing for us, the people who are supposed to be represented by these people, gets done on our behalf.

I am becoming convinced that the Senate & House Democrats are complicit co-conspirators in defeating any kind of liberal agenda.

[truebluegreen]

28. +100

Reminds me of what happened recently in New York state legislature--and Andrew Cuomo's complicity in that.

I think "complicit co-conspirators" is right on target.

[Ian Iam]

33. Of course!

If the Republicans were to gain control of the senate, the filibuster would be gone on the day they're sworn in.

[MrSlayer]

3. Don't be afraid to say what we all know.

There are very few people that are not compromised in Washington. Very, very few. The only people that give a shit about the People up there are in the progressive caucus and a handful of senators led by Bernie Sanders. None of whom have any real power.

All of the others are beholden to their Wall Street and business owners. and that's never going to change. The jig is up, the game is rigged and we can never win.

I'm feeling particularly cynical lately.

[bvar22]

13. Carlin was right.

"It is a BIG Club,
and YOU & ME ain't in it."

They've even stopped spending much time and money on the Kabuki Theater to make it appear that we have a chance or a choice.
The Kabuki for this latest fraud wasn't even entertaining.
Not even old Harry could put his heart in it.

Remember the year long Kabuki about the Public Option?
Now THAT one was nicely done!
They actually had me believing that we had a chance.

Now, they don't even seem to care how transparent the SCAM is anymore,
because there is NOTHING we can do.

Elect more Progressive Democrats?
"They" openly ridiculed us for our efforts in the Arkansas Democratic Primary, 2010.
Our biggest opposition wasn't the Republicans.
It was the White House.







You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their rhetoric, promises, or excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[zeemike]

18. +1

I have seen that bit of his at least 10 times now...and saw it on HBO when he did it...and every time I see it again I marvel at just how right he really was.

But no longer have to care if it is obvious...if you say anything about it you are a conspiracy theorist and immediately dismissed.
It is a simple game when you look at it.

[woo me with science]

37. This is the correct answer.

It is a systemic problem. Reid is only a symptom.

We absolutely have the power to change it, but it will take stepping outside the propaganda that we are marinated in every single day by our corporate Masters.

We have to start focusing on the real problem, the corporate oligarchs purchasing our government and our representation, instead of constantly falling for the game of partisan politics that they have set up to distract us. We have to stop circling the wagons and excusing the inexcusable from our side just because of party label. We have to stand up together regardless of party to oppose what is wrong.

The corporatists in both parties keep winning because they keep us divided, focused on and hating each other, instead of realizing that they are quietly colluding together on an agenda that is predatory toward all of us.

We have to make explicit for the average person on the street how they are working together against all of us. We have to tear down the illusion they have created of two parties so at odds that they cannot stand to be in the same room together. The truth is that corporatists live in both parties now, and they are working together on the same predatory goals. The direction of policy no longer changes from administration to administration, no matter which party is in power.

We have to reveal the game, make it explicit, so that people understand what is happening. People will tolerate enormous pain and privation as long as they think they still have representatives working hard on their behalf against terrible circumstances. That is the illusion that the oligarchs spend trillions trying to preserve. That is why Marr's post (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022260267) was so on target in juxtaposing Obama's progressive speech with our corporate Democrats' purposeful destruction of filibuster reform. It exposes the game. It exposes the deliberate creation of circumstances that will allow corporate Democrats to continue to *claim* to represent us, while simultaneously ensuring that the voting conditions will prevent any real change in that direction.

The truth is that corporate Republicans lie to their constituents as much as corporate Democrats lie to us. Traditional Republicans are as frustrated at their party's empty claims to stand for "small government" or "individual liberty" as traditional Democrats are frustrated at our corporate Democrats' empty claims of standing for the poor and middle class, or military restraint, or public education, or environmental protection.

The truth is that representation has been stolen from ALL of us by the one percent who now control our government and most of both parties. They are impoverishing and stealing the civil rights of Republicans, too. We deserve a good fight with Republicans in the country over ideas, but we are not even permitted that anymore. Our electoral system has been purchased, and we are given the choice of two corporate candidates who will implement virtually the same corporate (economic, war, and police state) agenda, with the exception of some wedge issues used to sustain the illusion that we still have choice and two warring parties. Republicans are miserable, and we are miserable. Only the oligarchs are content. That should be proof enough that something has gone desperately wrong.

We are ALL losing our country. We have lost our representation.

We can take it back. There are more of us than there are of them. But we have to name what is really going on here, shake ourselves out of the corporate illusions and knee-jerk loyalties and hatreds we have been fed to divide us...and get angry enough about it that we stand up *together* to get the corporate money and power out of Washington and take back our representation.

[forestpath]

4. K&R

[unblock]

5. 2 comments: first, we did get something. not much, but how many previous attempts yielded nada?

second, the votes just weren't there in the democratic caucus. some good liberals tried and just couldn't get there.

those holdouts are the people to be upset with. was reid one of them? or was he just reflecting the whip count? i don't know.
did he try behind the scenes? i don't know.
did he want it but realized the votes weren't there and so decided to not spend his political capital on a losing battle? i don't know.

did we get reform? YES. that's exactly what we got.
we didn't get a wholesale restructuring of the filibuster, we didn't get a complete removal of it either.
we got a small REFORM.

will it have an impact? that remains to be seen.
perhaps it will help with judicial appointments and little else.
perhaps we'll see more floor votes but still ultimately have filibustered bills.

remains to be seen.

i wish we achieved more, but i'm glad we got SOMEthing.

[jeff47]

7. Nope, he had the votes. Or so he said.

He didn't have the votes for all of Udall/Markley. Such as the talking filibuster.

He had votes for much stronger rules, such as 41 votes to sustain a filibuster instead of 60 to break it. And actually writing the fucking rules down instead of relying on another handshake agreement.

I wanna play poker against Reid. I'd win all his money, his house and his seat. With a 6-high.

[unblock]

9. all the fuss is just about the difference between 41 to stop vs. 60 to go? really?

let's say he did formally change the rules, and let's say he did make it 41 to stop vs. 60 to go.
would the reaction be any different? i seriously doubt it.

virtually everyone thinks there are a whole host of minor reforms that you pretty much have to be inside-the-beltway to remotely appreciate the difference, and then there's the talking filibuster, which everyone thinks they understand thanks to jimmy stewart.

any reforms short of the talking filibuster and people would have been dumping on reid the same way.

[jeff47]

32. No, it's also about relying on McConnell's word. Again.

We did that two years ago. How'd that work out?

let's say he did formally change the rules, and let's say he did make it 41 to stop vs. 60 to go.
would the reaction be any different? i seriously doubt it.

Yeah, because it's not like it's what we were cheering about three days ago. Clearly it would make no fucking difference because our opinions would change 180 degrees.

Seriously? The argument you're making here is pathetic.

virtually everyone thinks there are a whole host of minor reforms that you pretty much have to be inside-the-beltway to remotely appreciate the difference, and then there's the talking filibuster, which everyone thinks they understand thanks to jimmy stewart.

Actually no, it turns out we aren't complete and utter morons. We can even tie our shoes without help!

[HomerRamone]

10. If you get a crumb when you need a meal you'll still starve nt

[unblock]

22. you ain't getting a meal as long as the republicans control the house.

all this fuss about the filibuster is silly when republicans control the house. for passing legislation, the senate could be 100% unanimously united behind bernie sanders and we still couldn't get a damn thing passed the house.

where it still makes a difference now is senate-only matters, most notably judicial appointments, and we got something there.

you want to call it a crumb? i won't really disagree. but there ain't no meal no way no how until we regain the house as well.

THEN doing something about the 60 vote filibuster will make a difference.

[pscot]

26. Another fail, another alibi

but there'll be pie in the sky bye and bye.

[unblock]

30. another pointless whine. seriously, what gets passed if we even did away with filibuster entirely?

back when we had the house and nominally not really 60 votes in the senate, THEN filibuster elimination or dramatic reform would have made a big difference. frankly i think a lot of the complaining people are doing now is lingering resentment that it didn't happen then. obama's first couple of years would have been significantly more profound.

but today, with the republicans in control of the house, filibuster changes don't mean much in terms of legislation, only appointments (and treaties, should any come up and be controversial along party lines).

the only real change in terms of legislation is that it forces the house republicans to be the jerks all the time instead of letting the senate republicans be the jerks some of the time.

big deal.

[Old Codger]

20. We, the people

Didn't get shit reid got a handshake same as last time and eh will get the rest of the treatment the same as last time...Anyone who believes otherwise has been asleep for the last four years.

[Demo_Chris]

8. I know this is an unpopular opinion, but I have a lot of faith in Senator Reid.

I feel he has earned it. He's a whole lot smarter than a lot of people give him credit for.

[nvme]

23. I Disagree

I have watch this same man go to bat not even a month ago to fight for the presidents Fiscal Cliff bullshit. He either breaks some Democratic balls or he doesn't. I reject his claim. I reject we didnt have enough vote when we had 60 dems and the house. It was crap the same when we folded for The ACA before any votes were taken. Mitch is no friend to our party. Ried needs to act like a leader and not a cheerleader. WE Won the election so use the capital now while we can. The repukes will flail their arms and bitch whether we given in or not.

[judesedit]

11. I heard Reid was a Marine. Some Marine. Well, I guess if Mr Rogers could do it. Pretty surprising to

me. Obama did get alot of his stuff through last term.....somehow. With help like this, it makes you wonder. But, Reid had to play some part in it. So, it's only January. We don't really know what's been going on. I can't see any sane human being against outlawing AK47's in the hands of just anybody. Maybe Reid is in the NRA's pocket along with alot of other so-called "civil servants". Maybe he will be voted out next time. He's old and weak like McCain. When they become afraid of their own shadows, it's time to go.

[Canuckistanian]

12. Harry PROMISED filibuster reform

It seems as though he honoured compromise with his enemies.

I don't understand what he could have gained through this compromise.

[Coyotl]

19. And there was reform enacted, just not what everyone wanted.

There is a lot of opinion out on this, not all of it so alarmed by the result of this reform outcome.

[penndragon69]

14. But turtle man PROMISED that he would'nt abuse it again this time !

Does a turtle ever LIE ?

[SEMOVoter]

15. I've Decided this was a Pretty Shewed Move for Harry and President Obama

I know it is hard to believe, but we need to think long term. President Obama has about 6 months to get anything done. Republican overreach is unpopular, but we the people have short memories.

In addition to giving Secretary Clinton a Comedy Central worthy "Happy Trails Def Jam Roast" masquerading as a hearing, these knuckleheads are planning on gerrymandering the next presidential election.

Letting these jokers dig their own graves with every opportunity is a good move. We need to maintain the middle and let the GOP strain and stretch that rope to the right until it breaks off and smacks them about the face and neck. It won't take long. Some of the more practiced liars in the party (Bobby "My-College-Girlfreind-was-POsessed-by-Say-tan" Jindal and Big Daddy Haley Barbour) are crying about the GOP stupid already.

Huff Po at this very moment (10pm Eastern) declares John Boehner: Ending Abortion Is 'One Of Our Most Fundamental Goals This Year'.

We need to allow the GOP to annihilate themselves and move to the left, so we can move to the left. This means we need to really focus on popular items like marriage equality, education, and safety.

[AverageJoe90]

16. Makes sense to me.

Obama and co. have pulled it off before.....no reason to see why they couldn't do it again.

[Rainforestgoddess]

17. Ignorant Canadian here

I honestly don't understand why there's only 6 months to do anything? It seems to me that since Obama doesn't have to stand for re-election, that he would have 4 years of ass kicking (depending on the constraints of the other levels of gov't - I understand that much about your system)

I'd love to have this explained to me.

[SEMOVoter]

21. I've never met an ignorant Canadian...

and I doubt if you're one.

I'll try to explain. I'm Southern US, but we can get through this.

The Republican party runs on a heady mix of over-reach and persecution. When Democrats successfully implement a policy or law the GOP takes that success and distills it into persecution. Persecution is GOP jet fuel. Gun regulation, women's health, same sex marriage and daggone it science are all sources of persecution for the Republican party.

US Citizens understand this more in Jan 2013 than they did in Jan 2009. A Pew research poll from a Jan 2013 survey says that 66% of respondents expect Democrats and the GOP to bicker and fight more than usual. In Jan 2009 that result was 39%. So this means an expectation exists because people are paying attention.

About 6 months from now, the midterm election campaigns will begin gestation. When backers and a candidate love each other very much they make a campaign. I'll let you imagine the rest, because I'm a lady.

As the campaigns begin, leaders from the Republican party will begin supporting key candidates with trash talk, money and wild tales of evil liberals turning the country into the Soviet Union. (Like the Soviet Union still exists.)

In order to support Democratic candidates, it is important that President Obama and the democratic candidates up for re-election have good credibility and maintain the higher ground. That means a lot of patience and about 6 months to get things done right and make them stick.

Some of the better DU'ers might have more weighty imput on this.

[Rainforestgoddess]

34. Ignorant as to the ways of US politics, anyway.

So, it's all because of elections coming up, and the posturing that has to go with said elections...

So, here, we don't have set elections, and when an election is called, there is about 2 months of campaigning before election day. Often we kind of know when it's going to happen ie - "probably in the spring of 2015" but real campaigning doesn't happen until the election is called. Maximum term is 5 years, but most governments call elections sooner than that, unless they expect to lose.

That being said, I wish we could get rid of our conservative government, but looks unlikely to happen because the left is split right now between two parties, who refuse to cooperate.


edited to add: Thanks for enlightening me!

[pscot]

27. That's a killer fantasy life you got there, bro

The country can't afford what you're smoking.

[russspeakeasy]

24. Harry got a handshake. The rest of us got a handjob.

Harry the Weak has to go.

[ancianita]

29. Of the top twenty ranked by seniority, Barbara Mikulski or Diane Feinstein are the only two

high seniority senators I trust to take over from Harry.

[okaawhatever]

38. I was reading an article that said they didn't think Feinstein backed the filibuster reform. I guess

because she plans to be around for awhile? Don't know.

[ancianita]

39. I guess that takes me down to Mikulski. But the point is that no one wants his job.

What the hell does that say about the Democrats in the Senate.

[Dragonfli]

31. I understand how you feel

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=379317

[polynomial]

35. Who's on first?

“Corporate blue dog Democrats aren't Democrats”. Yes indeed this reminds me of the old Abbot and Costello comedy routine. Who's On First?

All the political rhetoric is like a Hollywood comedy show, plus stay tuned after the next commercial. Ladies and Gentlemen of America if we taxed the political commercials at ninety nine percent we likely would have enough revenue to double social security pay out, cover all medical expenses, and be able to allocate a trillion dollars for new jobs that could pay a minimum wage of twenty dollars an hour.

[UCmeNdc]

36. Harry Reid is a foolish old man that just got taken to the cleaners by the GOP