Remember the Republicans' "nuclear option?"

[smoogatz]

Whenever the Democrats so much as grumbled at some Republican initiative, even with the Republicans' slim majority, they were able to shut down debate with the threat of the "nuclear option"--a rarely used procedural move that would allow them to shut down any use of the filibuster. The Democrats crumpled like a wet Kleenex every time Frist threatened to use it; now they crumple like a wet Kleenex whenever the Republicans threaten to oppose them. Pathetic.

[Indydem]

1. Different Circumstance

The "Nucular" Option was to be used on the approval of Federal judges as they are required to be advised and consented to by the senate, but fall outside of normal senate rules for filibusters (or so the pukes said)

I think that having the filibuster is a good thing in general. If we are ever in the minority again, we will lament the short-sighted action of changing the rules and allowing a 50-vote cloture.

[zbdent]

2. right ... but what assurance was there that, once the Repugs got the "nuclear option" one one part,

they wouldn't take it to all of the stuff they wanted to shut down?

(See, the Repugniconvicts always do the "slippery slope" or "give an inch, they'll take over the country and force your to abort your babies and convert to Islamofascism" arguments)

Remember, a significant number in the populace is comfortable living under a dictator, as long as it's a faux "tough guy" Republican dictator ...

[Igel]

6. Probably none.

May I note that your argument slipped a little down the slope? It went from 'they said this' to 'but we don't know they wouldn't have done this, too'. Since only, apparently, repubs actually fail to get traction on slippery slopes I thought you'd want to be on the alert for it, less you be forced to vote (R) next election.

When you make an argument based on what they said, it's best not to put words in their mouths. (Plus it's an unsanitary practice at best requiring the use of rubber gloves, just ask any dentist.)

I mean, it plays well with those who already agree with you. But it doesn't help those who actually might learn from the argument, if that's your intent.

[Deep13]

3. Instead of hedging our bets, we ought to going full steam ahead.

I don't think fear of (at this point) inevitable R majority should prevent us from accepting an undemocratic institution now.

[Penguin31]

4. I despise the procedural filibuster

If the Republicans want to try to filibuster a health care bill, fine. Let them read from the DC phone book until they've run out of hot air. None of this current nonsense.

[smoogatz]

5. The point is that the mere threat was suffcient

to bring the Democrats in line. Instead of calling their bluff, as we should have, we caved. Just as we caved on Bush's judicial appointments when the Republicans trotted out their "up or down vote" business. Remember? Their argument was that the filibuster was essentially undemocratic--tyranny of the minority, or some such. Now we cave at the mere suggestion of a Republican filibuster. Make them DO it--let the voters see what obstructionist horses' asses they are. Write a GOOD bill and watch the Republicans crap themselves in front of God and everybody. But no, Reid caves every time. I know the reality is that there's a cadre of conservative Dem senators who are as firmly in the pockets of the financial/insurance industries as any Republican, and that's why the senate healthcare bill sucks. But still, it's frustrating. We voted for Democratic majorities, for an end to the hand-in-hand relationship of corporate interests and government, and what we got was Bush all over again--except now there's the pretense that it's good for us.

[treestar]

7. Since you're so against "caving"

What might have happened, and could it have backfired?

People who want the repukes to filibuster now because it would supposedly hurt them (I doubt that with the M$M on their side) might do well to think how it would be had the Dems had to do it. 25 hours a day coverage of it, all condemning it and speculating how it is hurting the Dems (while, if Dems made the Rs do it, the M$M would cover is 34 hours per day and gush about the senators making a name for themselves - and they wouldn't read the phone book - they'd come up with something far more clever).

[smoogatz]

8. You think a lot like Harry Reid.

The Big, Bad Republicans are so pants-wettingly scary there's just no point in taking them on. Much better to let them kick you around than to try to stand up to them and risk getting slapped in the mouth. When I was a kid growing up in southeast Ohio we had a word for people who thought that way. I can't say it here for risk of offending people, but it starts with a capital "P" and ends with "ussy." And we wonder why voters tend to perceive Democrats as being weak.