'The Democratic Party and Blanche Lincoln'

[Kulindahr]

Kuli, I posted that definition and link to the Senate glossary, highlighting the last clause. That's what prompted Nick to come up with his cite to the historical filibuster. BostonPirate, you are 100% right. When the rules of the filibuster changed, the definition of filibuster came to encompass all of the delaying tactics available to stop legislation and for which cloture would need to be invoked.

I just thought I'd make it Exhibit A in contrast to his wild grabbing at something that didn't even claim to be a definition -- and lying about what it was.

 

[palemale]

I just thought I'd make it Exhibit A in contrast to his wild grabbing at something that didn't even claim to be a definition -- and lying about what it was.

Good idea to bookend the silliness.

 

[NickCole]

Kuli, I posted that definition and link to the Senate glossary, highlighting the last clause. That's what prompted Nick to come up with his cite to the historical filibuster.

The link you posted characterized its definition as "informal term." Most people understand the word filibuster to mean what's described in the link I provided. Wikipedia, a source likely to reflect common usage, defines filibuster as, "A filibuster (also known as speaking or talking out a bill) is a type of parliamentary procedure. Specifically, it is a form of obstruction in a legislature or other decision-making body whereby a lone member can elect to delay or entirely prevent a vote on a proposal."

Your own choice to insist upon coupling filibuster with the parliamentary procedure of cloture clearly defined filibuster as Wiki does and as the Senate source I linked to does. Switching definitions mid-argument from standard use to "informal term" is disingenuous, like someone arguing in favor of using plastic sheeting to decorate a crib and then when they realize they look foolish advocating something so obviously unsafe, claiming they'd used the word "crib" to mean house rather than baby bed.

This discussion has been another fine illustration of the deceitfulness at the core of ObamaNation.

In fact, I'll illustrate it one step further.

Employing your new "informal term" usage, let's look at the ObamaDem claim again. The claim is unprecedented use of filibuster. Here is the the same question I asked at the start of this discussion. How many times has the filibuster been used since Obama's been President compared with during previous administrations? If you can't answer that then clearly the claim is Just Words; one can't know it's unprecedented unless one can compare the frequency of use before and after.

 

[BostonPirate]

newsweek..... http://www.usnews.com/articles/opinion/2010/03/01/why-senate-filibuster-rules-must-be-changed.html

in it there is a discussion on the volume and disparity.

Veterans Today says this on their site in an article called..... On Killing the U.S. Senate Filibuster

The filibuster is the procedure by which 41 of 100 U.S. senators can defy the wishes of the majority of the Senate and the majority of the country in pursuit of narrow, anti-social objectives.

It is an anti-democratic relic that should dispatched to the dust-bin of history.

Some two weeks ago the Brennan Center for Justice testified before the Senate Rules Committee on how the ”modern filibuster – constant and unprincipled – has grave effects upon our democracy.”

and lastly from TPM.....

so lets stop the farse. This is happening. We all know it.

pretend is not a political tool. Unfortunately congressmen and some members here don't understand that right now.

 

[palemale]

The link you posted characterized its definition as "informal term." Most people understand the word filibuster to mean what's described in the link I provided. Wikipedia, a source likely to reflect common usage, defines filibuster as, "A filibuster (also known as speaking or talking out a bill) is a type of parliamentary procedure. Specifically, it is a form of obstruction in a legislature or other decision-making body whereby a lone member can elect to delay or entirely prevent a vote on a proposal."

Your own choice to insist upon coupling filibuster with the parliamentary procedure of cloture clearly defined filibuster as Wiki does and as the Senate source I linked to does. Switching definitions mid-argument from standard use to "informal term" is disingenuous, like someone arguing in favor of using plastic sheeting to decorate a crib and then when they realize they look foolish advocating something so obviously unsafe, claiming they'd used the word "crib" to mean house rather than baby bed.

This discussion has been another fine illustration of the deceitfulness at the core of ObamaNation.

In fact, I'll illustrate it one step further.

Employing your new "informal term" usage, let's look at the ObamaDem claim again. The claim is unprecedented use of filibuster. Here is the the same question I asked at the start of this discussion. How many times has the filibuster been used since Obama's been President compared with during previous administrations? If you can't answer that then clearly the claim is Just Words; one can't know it's unprecedented unless one can compare the frequency of use before and after.

Nick, only you were talking about the fictional filibuster of Jimmy Stewart fame from the 1957 movie. The rest of us were talking about the modern filibuster as the Senate glossary defines it.

Incidentally, this is how Wikipedia defines the modern filibuster:

In the modern filibuster, the senators trying to block a vote do not have to hold the floor and continue to speak as long as there is a quorum, although the Senate Majority Leader may require an actual traditional filibuster if he or she so chooses.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster

No one was conflating cloture with filibuster, that's just you setting up yet another straw man. There does not seem to be an accurate count of actual filibusters. I used the number of cloture votes because it illustrates the number of filibusters that the Senate attempted to end. There would actually be more filibusters than cloture votes (or motions) because, presumably, no one would file a cloture motion if they believed they lacked the votes.

 

[NickCole]

No one was conflating cloture with filibuster, that's just you setting up yet another straw man.

Again flatly untrue.

You did it throughout the discussion, it's right in this thread, as did others including in the post right above where BostonPirate repeated it with pretty graphs.

There does not seem to be an accurate count of actual filibusters.

There doesn't???!!??!!

Oh my!

If there is no count of actual filibusters during Obama's presidency, what information is being used to claim unprecedented filibusters? Or is this unprecedented filibuster thingy just something you feel, another ObamaNation truthiness? Just Words.

 

[opinterph]

It's customary in debate for the two sides to define their terms. So -- how are you guys defining "filibuster"?

Here’s one Republican Senator’s explanation for the “record number of filibusters” in the 110th Congress …

May 20, 2008:

According to the non-partisan Congressional Research Service (CRS), the method Democrats are using to count filibusters is not an accurate method to count filibusters.

Cloture in the 110th Congress: An Obstructionist Minority or a Heavy-Handed Majority?​

 

[BostonPirate]

a vote of cloture ends filibuster. We are getting a bit clintonian, aren't we?

it all depends on what your definition of Is is?

filibuster extends the debate indefinitely and cloture ends debate for a basic majority vote.... you know, like they say should happen in the constitution.

 

[Kulindahr]

Here’s one Republican Senator’s explanation for the “record number of filibusters” in the 110th Congress …

May 20, 2008:

Cloture in the 110th Congress: An Obstructionist Minority or a Heavy-Handed Majority?​

Excellent reference. The Republican there is referencing a non-partisan outfit.

Since no one else has offered any objective way for actually counting filibusters, I'll enter these into the record as starting points:

CRS has said determining the number of filibusters begins by counting the “items
of business” subjected to a cloture vote. By this measure, CRS has counted 46
items of business which have been subjected to cloture this Congress.

... only 5 items of business for which cloture failed based solely on
Republican opposition.

 

[BostonPirate]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0wBpVv5YYE[/ame]