Time to go Nuclear. Anybody with me?

[librechik]

It's long past time to Old boy's Club Senate was buysted or eliminated. Peoploe will die becasue of Lieberman's treachery.

Let's blow up the stupid fillibuster.

[Taverner]

1. LETS USE THE NUKE

[ixion]

2. It was BS when the Repubs tried it, and it's BS now

I can't believe what I'm seeing on this board. The same things we railed against for the past 8 years are suddenly now being suggested as feasible.

:wtf:

[Hawkeye-X]

4. Why? The right wanted to use it to get their own way, until the Gang of 6 compromised

and there's no compromise anymore, it's time to use the nuclear option, and it's feasible, and it's in a time of a national emergency.

We need critical bills passed without any obstruction from the Rethuglicans or Blue Dogs, and they've already screwed us 12 ways from Sunday, and we need to screw them back, HARD.

It is past time to end the 40 year of Republican strangehold.

If the nuclear option is invoked, we will be witnessing a rebirth of the United States of America, and there will be no more conservative assholes, Republicans, Liberterians, or Teabaggers to get in the way. Once the rebirth is complete, we will revoke the nuclear option and pass necessary laws to prevent another Chimp from getting into power and destroying the country as we knew it.

Hawkeye-X

[ixion]

5. it will have precisely the opposite effect you predict

in my opinion, and if history serves as any guide.

It's a power grab, any way you want to rationalize it. And power grabs never end well.

And it wasn't a compromise as much as it was a capitulation. The neocons made no concessions, save for not nuking the filibuster.

[lumberjack_jeff]

13. So?

We have it. Elections have consequences.

[ixion]

14. That is a short-sighted statement

and if you think that the Dems will always be in the majority, you're fooling yourself.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

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

[ixion]

16. I'll thank you to maintain decorum

I am entitled to my opinion, even if it's not yours.

[lumberjack_jeff]

18. Democrats are more likely to stay in the majority if they deliver for their constituents. n/t

[ixion]

19. These are excuses... it's a POWER GRAB

made by the majority. I am disgusted that this is even a topic. Bringing it up brings the dems down to the level of the neocons, and that is sad and pathetic.

Seriously, do I need to go dig up the archived threads from back when the neocons did this? I saw ZERO support for such an option on this board. Why weren't you speaking out for it back then?

[lumberjack_jeff]

21. You saw zero support because they were going to use their power to harm.

It's not subjective. They would have used it to destroy social security. We would use it to save lives. If you think it's the same thing, then you should reevaluate whatever values brought you here.

Conservatives criticize us for moral ambiguity... with some basis, it seems.

[ixion]

22. We will have to disagree, sir

I find your logic flawed in the extreme, and I'll thank you not to tell what I ought to think.

[Raspberry]

6. Interesting

What laws do you think could be passed that would prevent the election of another "chimp?" And--isn't that rather, um--anti-democratic?

[Hawkeye-X]

7. I mean any neo-conservatives that has no interest in looking after America, which is exactly what

Chimp did.

All he did was raid the Treasury and gave way trillions to the fatcats that didn't need any more money, do preemptive strikes on countries that hasn't even bothered us (like Iraq).

I'll cite a few examples here:

1) September 11th 2001
2) Minnesota's I-35 collapse
3) Tax giveways to the rich that will sunset in 2010 (Republicans are fighting to extend it)
4) "No Child Left Behind" act that was a major educational failure.
5) Katrina
6) Minimum wage ($7.75/hour) - a fucking joke.

I could think of a few more, but these five examples are EXACTLY the example of Republican failures.

We need laws to prevent EXACTLY that.

They've had their chances.

Republicans needs to be a permanent minority for the next 200,000 years. Conservatives are not really conserving anything. They are tax and spend assholes.

[Raspberry]

8. What laws??

And what makes you so sure that such laws couldn't be turned against us at some time in the future?

[librechik]

11. we still have The House. Lots of countries get by with just one camera

from what i understand, the Senate was added as Madison said, specifically to protect rich landowners. I don't think we need to protect them anymore. In fact i think we need protection from them. All the Republicans do is abuse the fillibuster, And all the Dems do is never use the fillibuster, or never force it to be used correctly. It's become exclusively a tool to be used by the "landowning party" against the People. Make it go away so we can stop the insanity--including the loss of lives.

[Raspberry]

20. Are you kidding?

You want to get rid of the Senate? How far do you think that idea would go?

What I learned in high school civics was that the Senate was created to protect the interests of the residents of less populous states, NOT to "protect rich landowners."

No one here on DU will ever believe it, but the vast majority of people in this country are way less liberal than the average DUer. Most people probably fall in the middle, and when you start talking about some of this crap--getting rid of the Senate, for instance--you will drive them FROM the middle, and right into the Republican party. Just because, most people like our form of government, most people like capitalism, most people don't even mind Wal-Mart!

[librechik]

23. hmm--they didn't mention anything about the smaller states and slavery?

At least my school mentioned it. No, I have no serious hope that we will ever lose the stupid Senate. We are stuck in time like flies in amber, probably forever. And as for the zeitgeist of DU--I have been a member here since 2001. And we call ourselves Underground for a reason--because we are not mainstream moderates or even your standard Lefties. We are DFHs and proud of it. And we want to be able to discuss radical ideas vigorously without fear of censorship. It doesn't operate perfectly, but it works for me. Sorry it doesn't work for you. And anybody who bothers to join the republicans after the last 8 years is welcome to. We don't need that kind in our caucus.

I voted for change. We'll never get it unless we start talking about things that make Republicans--and others, apparently--clutch their pearls and sink onto the fainting couch. It's a thread on a forum, not Pelosi on national tv.

BTW, be careful with that "less liberal than we think" stuff. Others might take you for a troll, spewing that sort of CW.

[Tesha]

17. Who railed against it? I was perfectly in favor of the Republicans doing it...

...because 1) I knew this day would come when we would benefit from
the elimination of the filibuster and 2) the filibuster STRONGLY favors
the smaller (and therefore, more Republican) states.

Tesha

[Hawkeye-X]

3. Yep. I advocated the nuclear option last night.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6869303&mesg_id=6869303

[burning rain]

9. I'm with you.

American democracy is already compromised by the electoral college, which allows you to lose the vote and still be duly installed as president; and equal representation in the Senate for each state regardless of population, so that, for instance, the votes of residents of Wyoming for US senators count more than Californians'. So allowing the filibuster amounts to piling insult upon injury.

[bertman]

10. Who exactly is this Peoploe guy who's gonna die because of Lyin' Joe's treachery?

[lumberjack_jeff]

12. Nuke 'em from orbit.

[Kansas Wyatt]

24. As long as we're going to do that....

Can we at least get a REAL Public Option, rather than the watered down BS scam the Democrats are trying to say is a Public Option?

[samsingh]

25. completely with you.