March 26, 2013

Time for another filibuster?

Rand Paul and Ted Cruz gear up for another big limiting-government show.

20 comments:

AllenS said...

One filibuster a week would be nice.

AprilApple said...

The left collectively scream "How dare you! Don't you know who I am!?"

Fprawl said...

OK, this guy is really hitting all the right buttons.
Finally a choice between a Liberal (next elections dem nominee) and a Conserlibertarian.

Lets see who wins.

I am assuming he runs, obviously.

Larry J said...

Perhaps we should follow the InstaPundit's suggestion in USA Today and enact waiting periods for enacting new laws. Maybe then we wouldn't have to pass the law to find out what's in it.

rhhardin said...

You'd think filibuster would be third of fourth declension plural ablative or dative.

Mark said...

It might make the news, but I bet it is then end of real presidential hopes for Rand Paul.

He will think it is good, but we are but one Newtown or Columbine from having this filibuster as an anchor to his political hopes. Can America have a full primary and election cycle without a bloodbath that will shatter his chances?

Doubtful.

edutcher said...

Filibuster the damned budget.

Or, better yet, close down the damned place until they repeal ObamaTax.

bpm4532 said...

This may be the only way we can educate the masses. Get the Dems screaming and people will tune in to see what's the fuss about. Perhaps even the media might lend some real perspective.

Inga said...

Showtime! Where mah popcorn?

Broomhandle said...

Making a regular practice of giving statists the finger may be far more politically popular than anyone imagines.

Broomhandle said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John said...

Bring it on!

I was a fan of the father for 25+ years.

I am thinking I like the son even more.

He seems to have the values right without the perception (unmerited, IMHO) of the father's craziness.

This is why I think the election and re-election of Obama was a great thing for the US. Probably the best possible thing, in the long run, that has happened in a long, long time.

Finally we are getting a conversation (discussion? Argument?) about liberty vs government. About whether we are to be ruled by laws or men (and women. About whether the Constitution has meaning.

We did not have that under Clinton or Bush. We would not have had it under Gore, Kerry, McCain or Romney.

Short run, Obama is a horrible president. He makes Jimmy Carter look good. Long run, his incompetence, arrogance and over-reach may make him the best president we have ever had.

John Henry

John Henry

John said...

Bring it on!

I was a fan of the father for 25+ years.

I am thinking I like the son even more.

He seems to have the values right without the perception (unmerited, IMHO) of the father's craziness.

This is why I think the election and re-election of Obama was a great thing for the US. Probably the best possible thing, in the long run, that has happened in a long, long time.

Finally we are getting a conversation (discussion? Argument?) about liberty vs government. About whether we are to be ruled by laws or men (and women. About whether the Constitution has meaning.

We did not have that under Clinton or Bush. We would not have had it under Gore, Kerry, McCain or Romney.

Short run, Obama is a horrible president. He makes Jimmy Carter look good. Long run, his incompetence, arrogance and over-reach may make him the best president we have ever had.

John Henry

John Henry

grackle said...

Reid and the democrats would like to hold a vote allowing democrat Senators from red states to vote against the anti-gun legislation so those red state democrats can go home and tell their conservative constituents that they voted 'no' on gun control.

Of course, needing just 50 votes allows Reid to extend this relief to the potentially endangered democrats from red states. But filibuster-challenged bills require 60 votes to be bought to the floor and the red state democrat Senators would have to vote 'yes' in order for the bill to pass. A 'yes' vote could mean their defeat at the polls in the next election. Favoring gun control doesn't go over well in the states the red state dems represent.

Since I believe Reid wants to preserve the small voting majority the dems currently enjoy in the Senate I think this filibuster strategy insures that gun control legislation of any type is not going to happen. At long last I think we finally have some Repubs in DC who are willing to fight.

Methadras said...

This won't matter one wit when Banstein can add her Assault Weapons Ban list as an amendment to the bill. It still may die a horrible death, but I'm sick of congressional rules that allow for this kind of politicking. But I'm all for anyone that makes the democrats hurt and bleed. However, states like california and new york are still pushing for their own bans that further limit our/my ability to buy the weapon of my choice.

AlanKH said...

Don't you know who I am?

I believe the next line is, "I'm the Juggernaut, bitch! ."

prairie wind said...

Making a regular practice of giving statists the finger may be far more politically popular than anyone imagines.

Yep. Plus, Rand Paul seems to mean exactly what he says: that the Constitution matters. In his first filibuster, he made it clear that his real point wasn't Brennan or the drones; his real point was that the legislative branch needs to take back power from the executive branch, that Congress and Senate need to pay attention.

Bob said...

My respect for Rand is rising because he picks his battles well and defends his positions. Watching some left and moderate heads explode is icing on the cake.

grackle said...

I see another filibuster coming on the impending immigration bill. A filibuster is a good way to publicize the unpalatable parts of any legislation. Stuff like making all illegal immigrants eligible for Obamacare. Here's the political equation as I see it -

The recent history of immigration policy:

As long as immigration as an issue is merely discussed the dems have the advantage. They can always count on the MSM to paint the conservatives as bigoted towards latinos. There's usually no lack of stupid statements by obscure conservatives that the MSM can exploit.

But once the actual nuts and bolts of impending legislation must be revealed, even through the MSM's fog of eager obfuscation, the public(including a significant proportion of latinos) usually decides that maybe it's not such a good idea, after all. At least that's what happened the last time there was a serious push for immigration reform. McCain was also involved in that aborted legislation.

That's why I don't believe Obama and the dems really want immigration reform. But they DO want to continue to TALK about it as long as possible. It reaps enormous benefits for them because of the negative picture of the conservatives the MSM can paint. A resolution of the issue through actual legislated law would end that particular cash cow.

If the current effort by the gang of eight reaches the unlikely point of becoming an actual bill up for vote I think a poison pill will be attached by the dems to the bill that would make it unable to survive a vote, especially if a filibuster exposes the poison pill.

It's a win-win situation. Paul and Cruz get deserved credit for standing up against unwise legislation – the dems get to keep immigration on the propaganda menu as an issue to be used against conservatives.

khesanh0802 said...

As painful as living with it is I agree with JOHN that Obama's elections are ultimately going to benefit us. His own abysmal performance and that of his administration is going to wake up a lot of people. I believe that the Democrats continuing overreach has finally begun the swing of the pendulum back toward individual liberty. Cruz and Paul are providing real leadership that, I hope, will be emulated by other Republicans in Congress.