Filibuster Not a Right or Procedure Authorized by the Constitution
Contrary to the beliefs of John Kerry, Diane Feinstein and their ilk, POLITICIANS who know their viewpoint is not the one that will prevail, use this technique to make the majority miserable for a period of time and get themselves some face time to further their own political aspirations. Why on earth John Kerry would possibly believe he could ever be a viable presidential candidate again in his lifetime is delusional. Isn't he a little TALL to have a Napolean complex?
Comment(s) »
» Leave a comment
- Your E-mail address is never displayed. If you enter it, it will only be visible to the blog author
- Since there already are comments to this post, your eventual comment might trigger a notification e-mail to the persons that commented before you.
- The line and paragraph breaks automatically






























Comment by C-Mom— 2006/01/27 @ 11:17 PM — (Reply)
Put up or shut up, that's my motto - and I haven't seen ANYTHING put up (except a fight) by the Dems in quite a while!
Comment by Cate— 2006/01/28 @ 07:40 AM — (Reply)
I am not sure (I am from OZ) how filibustering is possible with Reps having majority?
Comment by Felis— 2006/01/28 @ 11:49 PM — (Reply)
Debate (which is what a filibuster technically is - a very long and completely derailed debate) can only be ended with cloture which requires 60 votes. So a simple majority isn't enough.
It is not a process that the founders knew - it came along much latter I think just before the turn of the 20th C.
Comment by Cate— 2006/01/29 @ 12:52 AM — (Reply)