Bill Clinton, President for Eight Years, Still Not Totally Familiar With Filibuster

[Pirate Smile]

Bill Clinton, President for Eight Years, Still Not Totally Familiar With Filibuster

In his new book, Bill Clinton writes, as Politico puts it, that he was "mystified that Democrats last year would have agreed to Republican demands to extend the Bush era tax cuts without insisting on a simultaneous increase in the federal debt limit." That Obama — what an amateur! But yesterday, Clinton recanted his criticism, telling an audience at the New York Historical Society, "I was wrong."

Clinton — being interviewed by his daughter Chelsea Clinton — said he recently received a clarifying email from Obama economic adviser Gene Sperling, who also worked in the Clinton White House. Sperling, Clinton recounted, assured him that, “Oh, we tried.” The Democrats’ efforts, according to Clinton’s account of what Sperling told him, were thwarted by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky), who threatened to filibuster the entire package if an increase in the debt limit was included. Clinton said he incorrectly believed that Senate rules would not have allowed a filibuster of this type of fiscal measure.

Usually this is something you would try to find out before penning a criticism of a fellow Democratic president. Bill, you're worth a bazillion dollars — maybe spring for a research assistant next time. (Or just Google it.)

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/11/bill-clinton-not-informed-on-filibuster.html?mid=twitter_DailyIntel

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

3. Do you think it was foolish to repeal Glass-Steagall? n/t

[rug]

9. I wasn't aware Obama had anything to do with it.

Do tell.

[ProSense]

7. This is a

"Unrec, actually I think Bill is trying to lessen what was originally valid criticism of Obama"

...perfect example of that old double standard. If this was about an Obama statement it would have been "lying" to cover up the original "lie."

Because it's Clinton, it's he's doing Obama a favor. Clinton can't possibly be wrong.

[Cali_Democrat]

8. "Clinton can't possibly be wrong"

Who said that?

[rug]

12. I think she did.

It's not polite to interrupt a conversation, even if it involves only one person.

[ProSense]

Obviously

"I think she did."

...you're too brilliant to be here.

[rug]

23. Why, thank you.

[ProSense]

17. Hint:

"Who said that?"

Me, it was a conclusion based on my assessment of the comment.

Clear?

[AtomicKitten]

18. Oh my, lookie here: Accusation of bashing the former president while bashing the current one.

... in the same sentence!

...unrec for Clinton bashing in favor of the fool currently occupying the WH.

[dionysus]

49. !!! well done!

:rofl:

[Wait Wut]

53. Now that...

...is just full of all sorts of awesome.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

20. A lesson the many on DU have yet to learn! RECOMMENDED!!! n/t

[rug]

2. Barack Obama, President for Three Years, Still Not Totally Familiar With Difference Between Threat

of Filibuster and Actual Filibuster

"The Democrats’ efforts, according to Clinton’s account of what Sperling told him, were thwarted by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky), who threatened to filibuster the entire package if an increase in the debt limit was included."

Why filibuster why all you have to do is threaten it?

[ProSense]

4. Actually

"Barack Obama, President for Three Years, Still Not Totally Familiar With Difference Between Threat. The Democrats’ efforts, according to Clinton’s account of what Sperling told him, were thwarted by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky), who threatened to filibuster the entire package if an increase in the debt limit was included."

...there were more and real filibusters.

What does it take to believe that Republicans aren't serious about obstruction?

[rug]

10. Cloture is not filibuster.

How many actual filibusters occurred in this and the previous Senate?

[ProSense]

13. Hmmmm?

"Cloture is not filibuster. How many actual filibusters occurred in this and the previous Senate?"

Semantics and imaginary processes aren't reality. A cloture vote fails = no vote on the Senate floor = reality.

[rug]

16. Hmmmmm? (I win, i have 5 m's.)

So your answer then is none.

[Major Hogwash]

26. You don't know the difference between a vote for cloture and a vote for the bill.

The Republicans "filibustered" the cloture votes to even discuss the bills on the floor of the Senate.
So, there was no discussion of those bills at all.
Because the Senate rules allow for a recorded vote to be taken to start discussion of the bill, and the rules require that 60 votes are needed to break cloture.
In previous Congresses, cloture was taken as an unanimous voice vote to start discussion of the bill.

Not after Obama won the 2008 election.

This was all explained on the Rachel Maddow program last year.

[rug]

32. Ah, I see. Filibustered is now "Filibustered".

Thank you.

[Major Hogwash]

36. Rachel Maddow explained this on her program . . . last year.

And she's about 10 X squared smarter than you, so I'll take her word for it.

[rug]

38. It takes two to learn. Only one is the smart teacher.

[Lord Helmet]

43. what's your angle? are you obtuse just to be obnoxious?

[AtomicKitten]

37. Rachel Maddow Explains It All (now with links)

Rachel Maddow Explains How Republicans Broke the Senate:
http://www.politicususa.com/en/maddow-broken-senate

Cenk gives Rachel a high-five:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VagjBaWZsSE

[rug]

44. The only leverage the Democrats have is to keep the Senate in session on Christmas?

Her argument is republicans will stall until they want to go home for Christmas. Why not just make them take the floor and filibuster. Let them vote against cloture and take the floor again. How long do you think that will last? Maybe they should try it in January instead of December.

[AtomicKitten]

46. The GOP are being total dicks. They are also blocking any and all recess appointments.

I certainly support any maneuver employed to get around their obstructionism, but we have to be reasonable about what is possible and what is not.

[frazzled]

5. Republican threat of filibuster and Republican filibuster are coterminous

Where have you been the last three years?

They've filibustered everything, even to spite their own noses. They've compromised on nothing. When McConnell says they'll filibuster, he means it.

[rug]

14. When was there an actual filibuster in the last three years?

A blue link will be appreciated.

[Number23]

29. Since you asked so nicely (though I don't understand why you couldn't do this yourself)

"In the 110th Congress of 2007-2008, with Republicans in the minority, there were a record 112 cloture votes. In the current session of Congress – the 111th – for all of 2009 and the first two months of 2010 the number already exceeds 40. The most the filibuster has been used when Democrats were in the minority was 58 times in the 106th Congress of 1999-2000."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/01/gop-filibuster-record-rep_n_480722.html

Also see: http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/main/2010/10/more-bills-to-make-your-life-better-blocked-by-republican-filibusters.html#tp
http://newsjunkiepost.com/2010/03/02/republican-obstruction-at-work-record-number-of-filibusters/
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/cloture_motions/clotureCounts.htm
http://www.thenation.com/blog/163926/senate-votes-obama-jobs-bill-gop-filibusters-it

And before you start hollering about the differences between "cloture" and filibuster, please realize that there is precious little daylight between the two terms.

filibuster - Informal term for any attempt to block or delay Senate action on a bill or other matter by debating it at length, by offering numerous procedural motions, or by any other delaying or obstructive actions. http://www.senate.gov/reference/glossary_term/filibuster.htm

cloture - The only procedure by which the Senate can vote to place a time limit on consideration of a bill or other matter, and thereby overcome a filibuster. http://www.senate.gov/reference/glossary_term/cloture.htm

There. Lots of pretty "blue links" for you. :)

Edit: In four seconds of searching, found even more evidence of Repub filibustering.

[rug]

33. Ok. So it's a threat to threaten a cloture vote which would threaten to maintain a filibuster which

never happened.

Got it.

[Number23]

35. Judging by this post as well as others from you

You don't got it. And it looks as though you never will...

[rug]

40. That's persuasive.

[Number23]

45. If facts, Senate material and articles can't "persuade" you, why should anyone else bother?

[phleshdef]

15. Republicans have proven they will not allow cloture on anything unless they have to.

Your talk about the distinction between threats and an actual filibuster is nothing more than a hollow argument not supported by the facts of the things we have all actually experienced the past 3 years. There is not one reason in the world to believe the Republicans wouldn't prevent cloture on votes where deals were otherwise made. They've proven on many other votes for things that never became law that they will in fact do just that.

[rug]

22. Test them.

"There is not one reason in the world to believe the Republicans wouldn't prevent cloture on votes where deals were otherwise made."

They wouldn't, they won't, we can't, is not pragmatism, let alone principled politics. Neither is boohoo.

[ProSense]

25. Hmmmm?

"Test them."

How many times before it becomes clear?

I take back the "brilliant" comment.

[rug]

31. That blue link leads to a ProSense post which has another blue link to a Daily Kos post which itself

has a blue link to the Financial Times which has a blue link to a site to register if you want to read it. Although i may be dizzy from wandering around a bizarre hall of mirrors, with the occasional appearance of the word filibuster reflected in the distance, I have yet to read an actual article that explains when and where in the last three years the republicans actually monopolized the Senate through an actual filibuster tp prevent the passage of progressive legislation.

On the other hand, I've read lots where they threatened it, sometimes including an arched eyebrow, and the legislation was abandoned.

[ProSense]

34. Hmmm?

"That blue link leads..."

It leads to facts, which usually causes heads filled with nonsense to spin out of control...must introduce a non sequitur, straw man, red herring or whatever other lame distraction to obfuscate.

[rug]

42. Hmmmmn, no,. It leads to one of your posts.

[phleshdef]

48. They've BEEN TESTED. They've killed cloture several times.

Some of you never actually watch the news around here.

[dionysus]

50. you know damn well the fillibuster doesn't work like in the old movies, yet you push that falsehood

over and over.... you're not fooling anyone.
:rofl:

[karynnj]

51. The reason was TIME

The fact is that McConnell's track record in filibustering when he said he would is extremely good - they used every procedural rule they could. (I think they should have voted a tax cut for all but the top before the election. It would have lost but it would have helped define the parties.)

So, what if they wrote the package as Clinton suggested and it was filibustered, what would be the impact? This was the lame duck session and time was VERY short. If the Republicans filibustered, it would have wasted a few days - as they would have insisted on it being schediuled the requisite amount of time. Then Obama would have had to resubmit the changed package.

Remember the Republicans were refusing to pass ANYTHING until that bill passed. That might have meant that time would have run out on Don't Ask Don't tell or the START treaty - possibly pushing them to the next Congress. Tell me a Republican majority in the House would have even put DADT to a vote. In the Senate, not only would the SFRC have had to have new hearings, but getting 67 with only 53 Democrats might have made it impossible.

[Enrique]

6. it wasnt the filibuster, it was that Obama trusted the Republicans

thats coming from Obama himself, I heard it with my own ears, he didnt say anything about the filibuster, he said he trusted Boehner and didnt imagine that the Republicans would hold the economy hostage.

[ProSense]

11. It

"it wasnt the filibuster, it was that Obama trusted the Republicans"

...meaning the OP, has nothing to do with Obama trusting Republicans, which you can't know regardless of his public statements. It has everything to do with ridiculous handwringing. From the OP:

In his new book, Bill Clinton writes, as Politico puts it, that he was "mystified that Democrats last year would have agreed to Republican demands to extend the Bush era tax cuts without insisting on a simultaneous increase in the federal debt limit." That Obama — what an amateur! But yesterday, Clinton recanted his criticism, telling an audience at the New York Historical Society, "I was wrong."

Do the critics of the Bush tax cut extension agree with this? The end result would still have been an extension of the Bush tax cuts.

Does Clinton believe that Republicans were going to agree to that, on top of unemployment benefits for a year, expanded funding for Medicaid for six months, extending the EITC and other aid?

[Enrique]

19. well Obama was asked, and he didnt say any of that

he didnt say anything about the filibuster, unemployment benefits, Medicaid, or the EITC.

What Obama said was that he took Boehner at his word, and that he didnt think the GOP would risk harming the economy.

[ProSense]

24. Is

"he didnt say anything about the filibuster, unemployment benefits, Medicaid, or the EITC...What Obama said was that he took Boehner at his word, and that he didnt think the GOP would risk harming the economy."

...this about what Clinton said? I know what Obama said, and still maintain that taking Boehner at his word is a public statement based on Boehner's public statement.

[Enrique]

28. it lends credence to Clinton's initial comment

and detracts credence from Clinton's revised comment.

Clinton's initial comment assumes that it was Obama's choice not to tie the tax cuts to the debt ceiling. Obama's answer is evidence that this assumption was correct.

[ProSense]

30. That's

"Clinton's initial comment assumes that it was Obama's choice not to tie the tax cuts to the debt ceiling. Obama's answer is evidence that this assumption was correct."

...a huge leap there, using a statement about taking Boehner at his word to say Clinton is right about something he's now claiming he's wrong about.

Someone selling pretzels?

[Enrique]

39. i dont care that much about what Clinton said

i'm just reminding people that this was not about the filibuster, it was about Obama misjudging the GOP.

[paulk]

21. yeah, that Clinton sure sucked as President

LOL

[AtomicKitten]

27. His policies sure sucked: NAFTA, DOMA, DADT, repeal of Glass-Steagall,

China MFN, Telecommunications Act of 1996, welfare reform, etc., and let's not forget the ladies ..
Monica, Gennifer, and Paula.

Ah, good times. :puke:

[paulk]

55. I don't know

his tenure was the only period of my life where I felt the American Dream was a possibility. At least it was for me - and millions of other Americans, if the numbers are to be believed. Whatever. He made mistakes, but overall he did a decent job, imo.





it's strange to me this Clinton hate that flows from so many of the Obama sycophants. Considering that Obama is vying for the title of "the best Republican President of my lifetime" , formerly held, according to the left, by Clinton, I would think you'd be down with Clinton's presidency.

And the "ladies"? I don't know - I've always felt that consensual sex between two people was a matter for the people involved...

[AtomicKitten]

56. The collapse of the financial markets can be traced back to deregulation on BClinton's watch.

That reflects his policies, not any imagined jihad you've conjured up in your head.

[paulk]

57. with DU's ever amorphous rules and changing interpretations

of those rules, it's often hard to define "personal attack"...

[Ikonoklast]

59. Try this one on for size.

"Obama sycophants"?

Fuck off, right-wing shitheel...at least that's what I would say to anyone that called me that.

[paulk]

60. whatever

[FrenchieCat]

41. DotCom was booming till the very end of his term.....

but was that a policy of his or mostly good luck
that the boom occurred while he was in office,
and busted as he was leaving office?

[paulk]

58. yes, that is the right wing line on the Clinton Presidency

should I be surprised that you're using it?

[Proud Liberal Dem]

47. Did the Republicans use the filibuster that much against him?

Well, I suppose they wouldn't since they were in charge of Congress for 75% of his Presidency but I don't really even recall them using it that much during the 1993-1994 session. In fact, they could've stopped his economic plan (and a whole bunch of other stuff) dead in their tracks had they done so. Until the Democrats took control of Congress in 2007 and especially when Obama became President in 2009, I had NEVER before recalled such obstructionism via the use of the filibuster by the minority party. I remember the Republicans screeching about the venal Democrats were engaged in massive obstructionism in the Senate in 2005 when Bush couldn't get a lot of his ultra-conservative judicial nominees confirmed (which was later settled by the so-called "Gang of 14" Gentleman's Agreement :eyes: :puke: ) but they NEVER brought the Senate to a grinding halt like the Republicans have. What has been going on since 2009 has (correct me if I am wrong) been unprecedented in modern history (if not the history of the country). I hope the Republicans get spanked for their obstructionism next year so that maybe when everybody goes back to work in 2013, we can go back to having a functional Senate again that can actually allow for debate and passage/actual defeat of most legislation. I don't think that the filibuster was ever meant to work how the Republicans have been using it. Under them it's been perverted into a dreadful weapon against democracy IMHO.

[Beacool]

52. It is always the same around here, the CDS will never cease.

Well, I for one am glad that Clinton was president. Furthermore, I don't give a rat's tail end who doesn't like him.

:shrug:

[Honeycombe8]

54. Since when is asking McConnell "trying" to pass a bill? Of COURSE McConnell

is going to say "Don't do that, or else."

I think Clinton was right the first time.....that Congress shouldn't have extended the cuts w/o a quid pro quo. "Trying" to pass that would entail actually presenting it for a vote....not kindly asking McConnell if he'd please let them pass that bill.

I still don't think the cuts should've been extended. I understand that they wanted to get that out of the way so they could pass two other things they considered more important, while in a Democrat controlled lame duck session. But I consider the cut extension as MORE important than the other two bills they passed in that session.

Now, we're in danger of the cuts being made permanent.