03-08-2005 05:13									#121
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by KrazyHorse Thank you for making my point. If you're not going to take the UN seriously then they have no reason to place much stock in any suggestions you have for their reform.

How does recognizing that the position of UN ambassador is a powerless and unimportant one translate into not taking the UN seriously? In case you haven't noticed, the US does take the UN seriously from time to time, but when we do it's not the UN ambassador that does the heavy lifting there.

As for reform, I think that if the most important country on earth lacks faith in an international organization, reform should be high on that organization's list of priorities.

	03-08-2005 05:52									#122
	Suffering from ads?

For all the circle jerk about the filibuster, it is more of akin to erecting a high, high hoop to jump through in order to get a vote on your issue. It isn't a "no" because it's a use of procedure to delay a vote. Senators are allowed an unlimited time to debate, so when they don't like a bill, they use various parliamentary tricks to extend the debate time. It's not a no, and it's not a yes. It's simply a delay. It doesn't signify either losing or winning. Yes, it does kill a lot of bills, but in and of itself it doesn't signify much beyond the desire of a few Senators

One thing to remember is that filibusters are far easier to conduct nowadays than they used to. You no longer have to stand at the podium to do it like they used to. Nore more Mr. Smith goes to Washington style filibusters. If the Republicans want to make things interesting, they would move to make filibusters more like they used to. Congeniality might return to the Senate of quorum calls, roll calls and motions were made to go on all night long.

Another thing to remember is that "advise and consent" for the most part has been delegated to the committee level. No matter what political theory you subscribe to as to the purpose/usefulness of committees, they have been made to act as a mini-Senate that performs many of the advise and consent functions without having to deal with 100 Senators. If a cadidate makes it through committee with a recommendation and a near unanimous vote to send them to the floor, then they deserve a vote.

On a side note, as much as I laugh at Senate Dems for screaming about this, it does concern me that Bolton was kicked out of committee without a recommendation. The letter circulated supporting his nomination conspicuously lacks Powell's signature. It also lacks Kissenger, Haig, Eagleberger and other former SecState signatures. If none of the patriarchs of Republican foreign policy can agree to sign a letter in support of your nomination, that immediately sends up red flags.

	03-08-2005 06:42									#123
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by shawnmmcc Thanks Imran - you made it clear it wasn't just me. BTW, it's nice to know you are now a "vast left wind conspirator." Hell, I guess that makes me a member of Che's communist party.

Haah just means Imran is doing his level best to keep the status quo wherein the party inpower is blocked and otherwise impeded. Afterall his mantra during the presidential runup was elect Kerry as he will be checked by the Repub senate ala Clinton years.

He may want it that way doesn't mean however he is right.

	03-08-2005 06:50									#124
	Suffering from ads?

Except for the fact that here I am right.

	03-08-2005 06:53									#125
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

If you're still talking about the "filibuster is more than just a delaying tactic" thing, then you're actually not right...

	03-08-2005 06:54									#126
	Inflate your Upload Space

Center right perhaps but not correct.

	03-08-2005 07:00									#127
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

It's a delaying tactic whose net effects can, in some circumstances, lead to killing a bill. It all really depends on schedules, horse trading, what point it is in the session, etc. It's more complicated than "it's a veto".

	03-08-2005 07:02									#128
	Increase the size of your Attachments

It's a particularly effective delaying tactic, especially in its modern form, but a delaying tactic nonetheless.

	03-08-2005 07:03									#129
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

If you want to call the filibuster a precident that has assumed actual legal status due to squating rights, then recess appointments have the exact same status.

In any case "abuse of power" is a ridiculous claim, and if filibusters are of the same caliber, as it would be if Imran is correct, then Democrats are the last people to be whining about abuses.

	03-08-2005 07:03									#130
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Timexwatch It's a delaying tactic whose net effects can, in some circumstances, lead to killing a bill. It all really depends on schedules, horse trading, what point it is in the session, etc. It's more complicated than "it's a veto".

And it's more complicated that "it's just a delaying tactic'". In the case of Bolton it basically was a veto. Unless you really though he would eventually be confirmed by Congress.

	03-08-2005 07:08									#131
	Inflate your Upload Space

Then by God vote him down but regardless make the friggin Senate do their job.

	03-08-2005 07:12									#132
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui In the case of Bolton it basically was a veto.

You'ld be hard pressed to prove it, as no actual filibuster took place merely the threat of one.


Chickenshits the whole lot of them.

But I suppose now the absence of any action at all is now to be construed as a veto.

	03-08-2005 07:15									#133
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Patroklos If you want to call the filibuster a precident that has assumed actual legal status due to squating rights, then recess appointments have the exact same status.

That's a bad comparison because recess appointments are based in the Constitution and filibusters in the Senate's parliamentary rules.

	03-08-2005 07:16									#134
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe Then by God vote him down but regardless make the friggin Senate do their job.

As che has said, there is speculation that Frist didn't bring his name to the full Senate because he wasn't sure he'd pass. I'm not actually sure if there was any filibuster taking place, though if they had the vote on the floor (and there was a chance he'd pass), then it would have prevented him from taking that office.

However, even if it had. They WOULD BE doing their job. The filibuster is a procedural tool that is given to the Senate in the doing of their job. Using that tool would be a part of doing their job. As history has proven up and down votes in front of the full Senate is not required for the Senate to "do its job". One can legitimately argue that the Senate blocking extremists, in any way it can, is actually more doing its job than rubber stamping nominees through.

	03-08-2005 07:26									#135
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: That's a bad comparison because recess appointments are based in the Constitution and filibusters in the Senate's parliamentary rules.

True, but if we consider a nonconstitutional filibuster "legal" then the recess appointment is beyond reproach.

	03-08-2005 07:27									#136
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui As che has said, there is speculation that Frist didn't bring his name to the full Senate because he wasn't sure he'd pass. I'm not actually sure if there was any filibuster taking place, though if they had the vote on the floor (and there was a chance he'd pass), then it would have prevented him from taking that office. However, even if it had. They WOULD BE doing their job. The filibuster is a procedural tool that is given to the Senate in the doing of their job. Using that tool would be a part of doing their job. As history has proven up and down votes in front of the full Senate is not required for the Senate to "do its job". One can legitimately argue that the Senate blocking extremists, in any way it can, is actually more doing its job than rubber stamping nominees through.

And I still say indeed they would not have done their job until such time as the matter at hand they are voting on is the candidate proper and not procedural issues. Anything short of that is not proper advise/consent.

As for the matter of whether filibuster is anything more than delay, I find it interesting your comments in another thread...

quote: I should have guessed that wikipedia was the place to go .

To wit I remind you of an earlier posting of mine

quote: Filibuster - In a legislature or other decision making body, a filibuster is an attempt to obstruct a particular decision from being taken by using up the time available, typically through an extremely long speech. The term first came into use in the United States Senate, where senate rules permit a senator, or a series of senators, to speak for as long as they wish and on any topic they choose. The term comes from the early 17th century, where Buccaneers were known in England as filibusters. This term had evolved from the Spanish filibustero which had come from the French word flibustier, which again evolved from the Dutch vrybuiter (freebooter). A similar form of parliamentary obstruction practiced in the United States and other countries is called "slow walking". It specifically refers to the extremely slow speed with which legislators walk to the podium to cast their ballots. For example, in South Korea this tactic is known as a "cow walk" . In general it refers to the intentional delay of the normal business of the legislature [1].

	03-08-2005 07:28									#137
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

"I am Dubya, King of the 'Mericans. Join us on our quest!"

Attachment: filibusted.jpg
This has been downloaded 51 time(s).

	03-08-2005 07:28									#138
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: The filibuster is a procedural tool

It is a procedural loophole. I would prefer it if you didn't make bueracrats/government employees/elected officials believe operating loopholes equates to doing thier jobs, the DMV already runs on a power trip as it is.

	03-08-2005 22:09									#139
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: To wit I remind you of an earlier posting of mine

.... and?

It says nothing about the filibuster not being a de facto legislative veto... in fact it alludes to it:

"filibuster is an attempt to obstruct a particular decision from being taken by using up the time available"

If you obstruct a decision from being taken by using up all the time available, you've killed the decision. Ie, it ceases to be. It is no more.

	04-08-2005 06:11									#140
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

squirm buddy because it explicitly says:

'In general it refers to the intentional delay of the normal business of the legislature [1].

Can't be any clearer than that. You may wish to read more into than that but that simply is your desire to read more into the definition.

In fact what you aqttempt to lay down as a definition of filibuster is an effect of it, but not its true definition, which clearly is a delay to avoid making a decision.

	04-08-2005 06:22									#141
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe squirm buddy because it explicitly says: 'In general it refers to the intentional delay of the normal business of the legislature [1]. Can't be any clearer than that. You may wish to read more into than that but that simply is your desire to read more into the definition. In fact what you aqttempt to lay down as a definition of filibuster is an effect of it, but not its true definition, which clearly is a delay to avoid making a decision.

Jesus Christ almighty, you are desperate aren't you?

quote: originally posted by wikipedia A similar form of parliamentary obstruction practiced in the United States and other countries is called "slow walking". It specifically refers to the extremely slow speed with which legislators walk to the podium to cast their ballots. For example, in South Korea this tactic is known as a "cow walk" . In general it refers to the intentional delay of the normal business of the legislature [1].

Slow walking, while 'similar', is obviously not the same thing as a filibuster! Slow walking... eventually you have to get there and vote (it's just the leaders taking a long time bringing it up to the table). Filibuster, can obstruct forever, by not having the votes for cloture ever.

Another nugget from wiki:

quote: originally posted by wikipedia In 1946 Southern Democrats blocked a vote on a bill proposed by Dennis Chavez of New Mexico (S. 101) that would have created a permanent Fair Employment Practices Committee (FEPC) to prevent discrimination in the work place. The filibuster lasted weeks, and Senator Chavez was forced to remove the bill from consideration after a failed cloture vote even though he had enough votes to pass the bill.

Just a "delaying tactic" huh?

	04-08-2005 06:26									#142
	Increase Your PM Length

And interestingly from the wiki article:

quote: According to a Historical Moments Essay on the U.S. Senate website, the Republican Party was the first to initiate a filibuster against a judicial nominee in 1968, forcing Democratic president Lyndon Johnson to withdraw the nomination of Associate Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas to be chief justice.

Oh, Republicans... pot calling the kettle black here.

	04-08-2005 06:45									#143
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui And interestingly from the wiki article: quote: According to a Historical Moments Essay on the U.S. Senate website, the Republican Party was the first to initiate a filibuster against a judicial nominee in 1968, forcing Democratic president Lyndon Johnson to withdraw the nomination of Associate Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas to be chief justice. Oh, Republicans... pot calling the kettle black here.

You omitted the part about him accepting $15,000 in speaking fees which lead to more scrutiny of his acceptance of fees from a friend who was a convicted felon. Fortas' insulation from private interests was certainly a legitimate subject of debate.

	04-08-2005 06:47									#144
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Wikipedia sucks when it comes to things like perspective and context, assigning relative importance to different events and so on.

Actually, the thing it's best suited for is finding out if a specific person was gay or not. Rumours of gayness are given high priority also. That, and when people were born and died, fair's fair.

	04-08-2005 06:52									#145
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui And interestingly from the wiki article: quote: According to a Historical Moments Essay on the U.S. Senate website, the Republican Party was the first to initiate a filibuster against a judicial nominee in 1968, forcing Democratic president Lyndon Johnson to withdraw the nomination of Associate Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas to be chief justice. Oh, Republicans... pot calling the kettle black here.

And that means what to me as I am not a Republican?


As for the issue of filibuster you still don't get it. You ascribe the effect of filibuster as the definition. It don't work that way. Filibuster is simply a delay. The effect of that delay MAY be an inevitable negation of the nomination but it is not assured as othe outcomes are possible if not likely. It is however totally appropriate to call a filibuster a means to avoid making a decision as that is its real definition according to wiki and any sane person.


One is causal the other is the REAL definition.

	04-08-2005 17:48									#146
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by shawnmmcc Thanks Imran - you made it clear it wasn't just me. Ogie has officially entered the Nedaverse - personal interpretations trumping historical facts, precedents set, and how things work in the actual world. He even admits he doing this to be obnoxious. [q]I simply find it easy pickins to stir up the vast left wing conspirators of 'poly by tweakin them on their typical anti-bush rants[/b] That's the difference, at least Ned had the integrity to actually have a conversation, this is just Ogie being, well, Ogie. BTW, it's nice to know you are now a "vast left wind conspirator." Hell, I guess that makes me a member of Che's communist party.

I agree with Ogie, delaying tactics (in this case the filibuster) are not the same thing as going on the record with a vote. While both require a decision to be made in order to implement them, only one is clear and definitive and requires senators to actually take a stand. Not surprisingly they avoid it like the plague. This is true of both parties and has existed in any number of guises through the years.

Simply Ogie is right, while you and Imran are wrong. This doesn't bother Imran so much, he gets extra lawyer points for winning an argument when he is wrong. Your ad hominem above is simply an admission of the futility of your arguments in my eyes. Regardless I think we all can agree that the senate is filled to the brim with a lot of disagreeable and spineless turds.

	04-08-2005 19:36									#147
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

The lack of a vote is a decision on the part of the Senate. Just as killing it by a blue slip or in the Judiciary Committee is a decision on the part of the Senate. The Senate is structured such that strong majorities can veto the will of a simple majority, and a filibuster is one of the parliamentary tactics that allow that. The same philosophy is why Orrin Hatch gets the same vote as Barbara Boxer; if the popular majority got its way, the Dems wouldn't even need a filibuster to kill the Bolton nomination.

But ignoring that, the filibuster against Bolton wasn't simply a "delaying tactic," but a demand for documents that would clarify whether or not Bolton's a partisan hack who would misrepresent intelligence to further political objectives, and thus whether he would be qualified for the job.

	04-08-2005 19:39									#148
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Ramo The Senate is structured such that strong majorities can veto the will of a simple majority,

	04-08-2005 19:44									#149
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Don't interupt them. If you leave them alone they will eventually cry themselves to sleep.

	04-08-2005 19:44									#150
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Yes Dino, that typo certainly is confusing...