The coolest place on the internet, according to this tagline.
AskArchiveFAQ

July 16, 2013
15:19 // 1 year ago
April 17, 2013
17:11 // 1 year ago
March 7, 2013
kohenari:


Rand Paul’s 12+ hour filibuster about drones gets a succinct 43-word response.

Your cafe experience is safe, friends.

This may be the shortest letter ever written by a government official.

kohenari:

Rand Paul’s 12+ hour filibuster about drones gets a succinct 43-word response.

Your cafe experience is safe, friends.

This may be the shortest letter ever written by a government official.

(Source: think-progress)

14:15 // 1 year ago

How Did Rand Paul’s Filibuster Stack Up?

medilldc:

The Washington Post outlines how Republican Sen. Rand Paul’s filibuster yesterday compared to some of the great filibusters in American history, then looks at how long Paul would have needed to continue to match the record:

“Paul’s filibuster, which finished just shy of 13 hours, didn’t come close to the legendary filibusters — starting with Jimmy Stewart in “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington,” who was depicted as having spoken nearly 24 hours, though the 1939 movie only ran a bit more than two hours.

The record filibuster goes, of course, to former South Carolina Sen. Strom Thurmond in opposing the 1957 civil rights bill. Thurmond, then a Democrat, held the floor for 24 hours and 18 minutes.”

Though to be fair, Jimmy Stewart wasn’t actually a member of the Senate at the time. :D

9:50 // 1 year ago
I’d like to break Strom’s record, but I have discovered there are limits to filibustering, and I have to go take care of one of those

Senator Rand Paul who officially yielded the floor at 12:39 AM est (via antigovernmentextremist)

Rand Paul filibustered for 12 hours and 52 minutes. During a snowstorm in D.C. With President Obama’s usage of drones as the main topic, and the nomination of would-be CIA head John Brennan hanging in the balance. It was the first “real” filibuster—dude-talking-for-hours-style—since Bernie Sanders did it in 2010. More details here.

(via antigovernmentextremist)

0:54 // 1 year ago
March 6, 2013
If past is any indicator, a Democratic “threat” to reform the filibuster is much like a Charlie Brown threat to go home if Lucy doesn’t play nice with the football this time. This isn’t the first time the Democratic leadership in the Senate has made noises about reforming the filibuster; it’s not even the first time they’ve admitted that they screwed up filibuster reform last time but are serious about it this time. Democrats always balk at the last minute, so don’t expect this to go anywhere. source

If past is any indicator, a Democratic “threat” to reform the filibuster is much like a Charlie Brown threat to go home if Lucy doesn’t play nice with the football this time. This isn’t the first time the Democratic leadership in the Senate has made noises about reforming the filibuster; it’s not even the first time they’ve admitted that they screwed up filibuster reform last time but are serious about it this time. Democrats always balk at the last minute, so don’t expect this to go anywhere. source

19:28 // 1 year ago
February 14, 2013
We do not have, at 12 o’clock today, a Secretary of Defense.
Harry Reid, revealing today that Senate Republicans have rounded up the 41 votes necessary to block the nomination of Chuck Hagel to the Defense Department. Today is outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s last day on the job; if Republicans make good on their threats during Hagel’s confirmation vote tomorrow—and this is certainly a big “if”—it will be the first time a nominee for Secretary of Defense has been filibustered, and the country will be left without a Defense Secretary. A couple of Republican senators have threatened to block Hagel’s nomination unless the Obama Administration releases more information about the attack last year on the American consulate in Benghazi, an incident with which Hagel was wholly uninvolved. A Hagel spokesman said today that despite the threats of his former colleagues, the Nebraska Republican is not withdrawing his nomination. source
12:14 // 1 year ago
January 5, 2013
The talking filibuster movement picked up a little steam a couple days ago, with Democratic Sens. Udall, Merkley and Harkin presenting a resolution to establish the reform. The “Mr. Smith Goes To Washington” ideal of the filibuster is, in fact, not how business is conducted in the Senate these days — Senators can block legislation from being brought for a vote without holding or talking from the floor, and as a consequence bear far less public accountability for the decision than advocates of reform say there would be under the new rule. What do you guys think?

The talking filibuster movement picked up a little steam a couple days ago, with Democratic Sens. Udall, Merkley and Harkin presenting a resolution to establish the reform. The “Mr. Smith Goes To Washington” ideal of the filibuster is, in fact, not how business is conducted in the Senate these days — Senators can block legislation from being brought for a vote without holding or talking from the floor, and as a consequence bear far less public accountability for the decision than advocates of reform say there would be under the new rule. What do you guys think?

20:24 // 1 year ago
February 29, 2012
Snowe’s retirement will have many lamenting the endangered moderate and wondering how we can turn back the clock. But we can’t. About that, Snowe is right. Polarization is with us now and will be with us for the foreseeable future. The question is whether we will permit it to paralyze our political system and undermine our country or whether we will accept it and make the necessary accommodations.
Ezra Klein • Arguing that the problem with congress isn’t partisanship, or ideological polarization, but rather that the institutions and procedures codified in our political system aren’t well-equipped to handle a polarized congress. Klein’s prime example is the filibuster, which as we’ve seen the past couple of years, is absolutely crippling when the two parties in the Senate don’t agree on anything. “Our system, as any historian will tell you, was built by men who hated parties and anticipated their absence from American politics,” Klein says. “But as the two parties have polarized, we’ve learned that a system built for consensus is not able to properly function amid constant partisan competition.” source (viafollow)
1:54 // 2 years ago
May 26, 2011
Obama Judicial nominee Goodwin Liu asks to withdraw his name
Goodwin Liu says goodbye: One of the many contentious battles between the Republican Party and the Obama administration may come to a close, as judicial nominee Goodwin Liu has asked the President to withdraw his name from consideration. Obama nominated Liu on February 24th, 2010, and he’s languished in the Senate approvals process ever since. His nomination was a hit with the President’s liberal base, as Liu is rather liberal himself (and a UC Berkeley professor, to boot), but that made the political strategy for the GOP all too obvious. With the strength of the Senate filibuster still in hand, they decided to wait it out, hoping that Senate gridlock would scuttle his nomination. It seems that they were right. source
Follow ShortFormBlog

Goodwin Liu says goodbye: One of the many contentious battles between the Republican Party and the Obama administration may come to a close, as judicial nominee Goodwin Liu has asked the President to withdraw his name from consideration. Obama nominated Liu on February 24th, 2010, and he’s languished in the Senate approvals process ever since. His nomination was a hit with the President’s liberal base, as Liu is rather liberal himself (and a UC Berkeley professor, to boot), but that made the political strategy for the GOP all too obvious. With the strength of the Senate filibuster still in hand, they decided to wait it out, hoping that Senate gridlock would scuttle his nomination. It seems that they were right. source

Follow ShortFormBlog

15:51 // 3 years ago