Jeff Danziger for March 07, 2013

And people looked….

Oh this was sooooo true! What a bunch of nothing this man spews. Again, Jeff Danziger hits the nail on the head.

I usually agree with Danziger but not this time. Paul raised some legitimate concerns. Has the POTUS exceeded his authority? Are the rights of American people violated? Has the Congress abrogated its own powers regarding declaration of war?These are important questions all Americans should be concerned about.

Don’t y’all know that a filibuster is great as long as you are the one fillibustering?If its someone else, then we need to vote the fool outta office.

I respect that Rand actually stood up and spoke as is supposed to happen with a filibuster, but can’t buy his TEA party arguments, especially as “W” killed over 5,000 Americans with phony, illegal wars, which he did NOT actually get “permission” from Congress to start in the manner he did, by ignoring their demand in the “War Powers Act” to sill prove necessity for that final attack option.

But yes, change the filibuster rule to mandate Paul’s actions, and stop the over 200 “filibusters” McConnell called under “revised Senate rules”.

I believe the filibuster to be a quaint and pretty useless addition to the governmental bag of tricks, but I can appreciate its usability under much more limited circumstances than it is being used now.

I would like to suggest a compromise: keep the filibuster, but return to the original rules: the person initiating the filibuster must talk, and continue to talk, until either he stops and the filibuster abruptly ends, or a cloture vote is passed. You don’t need to talk on the subject. Indeed, in the good old days, many legislators talked about their to-do list, or laundry products, or anything else, just to keep the filibuster going.

Now that we have C-Span, and people like Jon Stewart, who are willing to show us snippets of how the people’s business is being “conducted”, the public wouldn’t be likely to stand for the delay tactic, unless the legislation being filibustered deserved it.

Nowadays, all you have to do is say, “I filibuster”, and we go from a need for a simple majority to 60 votes. Regardless of the party who uses it, there is not significant risk to careers to continue to use it, so it will be abused, regardless of party, until the old rules are restored.

Stop whining for whining’s sake. It’s a FILIBUSTER for cryin’ out loud. If all you get is “look at me”, who cares?

#StandwithRand

Rand Paul was making a good point: does the Administration believe they have the authority to kill an American Citizen, on American soil, without due process? I’m not satisfied with the Administration’s response, which was, basically they would not order a strike against an American who was,“not engaged in combat on American soil.”That begs the question, what do they consider “engaged in combat”?It should go without saying that this nonsense started with the Patriot Act.

mdavis, please note: while he did do the filibuster correctly, he basically has total contempt for the actual Constitution, like most in the “TEA party” today, and no, not those who originally just started out complaining about taxes.

Yet you and the rest of the Tea Party wingnuts ignore the fact that Obama and Holder BOTH have stated it is Unconstitutional to kill American Citizens on American soil without due process. Even McCain and Graham said that Rand’s claims were unsupported by any facts.

rand’s rant was a lot like gilda radners ‘nevermind’ when she ranted and raved about her own misunderstanding of a single word.