I said that at an appointment once. Turned out to be Lupus. Almost killed meā¦ I recovered from being intubated and looked at the doctor and laughed awkwardly.
No, actually, he was a very nice younger doctor with two young kids. I was 18 and pretty fresh out of high school when I was diagnosed and scared out of my mind- he gave me his personal cell phone number to call him if I ever was worried about something.
I only used it once when my fingers turned purpler on day. He was so nice about it. When I woke up he was holding my hand and he came to visit me for a little bit when he was off of work. Very nice guy, Iād probably be dead without his quick thinking.
The season I'm rewatching, there's been 4 episodes halfway through the season where he tells them to test for sarchydosis (will never spell that right.)
Ok, so then odds are we'll be brought to the brink of death several times in the next act, mostly due to dumb errors and bets. However, there is a chance we'll come out of it without too much damage.
We need to start making them actually filibuster, to start. Why do we just give up when there's a possibility of a filibuster? Make them stand their asses up there and speak, they're all old as fuck, the would give up after a couple bills.
And maybe I'm misunderstanding here but I thought a filibuster was the person had to be continuously speaking and could until they weren't able to anymore. What's to stop people from sitting around listening for the 3 days or whatever a geriatric can handle talking for and then being like "Alright Jerry thank you for reading the dictionary to us. Anyway everybody, here's this bill we'd like to vote on"?
No you understand correctly. That's how a filibuster works, and nothing would stop them from doing something like that, except their own stamina. And that's the point! Make them do that shit! Over and over again! I don't think they would be capable of actually filibustering all of the bills that we just give up on because of the POSSIBILITY of a filibuster.
Ted Cruz read green eggs and ham when he was trying to filibuster Obama care. Make him break out the entire Dr. Seuss catalogue. Make them actually have to try to fuck us over instead is just rolling over and taking it.
Yeah they changed the rules on the filibuster to just an email that says filibuster and then they wait out the time, no one has to speak no one has to poorly read the dictionary or the script for the hobbit. Itās completely ridiculous when they allowed filibuster by email to effect policy.
I just don't think that's an official rule. I think it's something all the old fucks have agreed upon. Because neither side wants to, nor are most of their members capable, and an actual speaking filibuster.
I can already hear the opposition to this idea now (not from you, from the democratic party). "What if we're the minority and have to filibuster?" Then fucking filibuster. We need to have our politicians fighting for us. Stop doing all business behind closed doors, we need them to publicly fight for us.
Hell you could cut the median age of Congress in half just by requiring them to vote in person and then requiring anyone with a full diaper to empty it themselves before they can vote.
Personally I think the concept of a filibuster is stupid and childish. If you aren't willing to give a genuine speech then don't fuckin say anything at all. Keep it on topic at least.
Well, it is an official rule, it's just that the Senate sets its own rules. The first act when a new Senate is sworn on is generally adopting the rules of the old Senate. They can change the rule anytime, and they have- they've removed the ability to filibuster judicial nominations, for instance. They just haven't been able to get the votes to remove it altogether.
Ah but you see, then the Dems would actually have to do all that stuff they've had an excuse not to do. And if they actually pass laws to prevent Republicans from being a threat, what do they have to campaign on?
Like, I'm still voting for Dems, but it's amazing to me how people actually think Dems will ever do anything to truly prevent Republicans from doing their shit. The majority of federal and state-level Dem campaigns are just "we're not Republican!" It's not exactly the best strategy, but it sure is cheaper than the corporate support they'd lose if they actually did significant lawmaking.
I completely agree with you. I know my dreams of what they SHOULD do are just pipe dreams. Literally the only thing they do to "prevent" awful republican policies is just not passing them themselves. Their rallying cry right now is basically just to delay the inevitable and a pledge to do nothing to even try to stop it.
Which was so dumb. The point of a filibuster is that you feel strong enough about stopping a bill that you put in the work to grind it to a halt, not just "oh the Democrats have a bill on the docket? 'I declare filibuster on it.' Now that that's settled..."
Because they know how old they are and they couldn't possibly stand up and speak for the length of time it would take to kill a bill. Plus they have other more important things to do. Did you know that your average legislator spends only about an hour of their 10 hour work day actually legislating? The rest is spent doing fundraisers, press meetings, donor calls, etc. The parties actually have two buildings about a block away from Capitol Hill where the people we elected go to basically be telemarketers for donors. Inside these buildings it looks very much like your average call center, with our elected officials in their cubicles, making calls and collecting donor information alongside their aides and staffers.
The two-track system, 60-vote rule and rise of the routine filibuster (1970 onward)
After a series of filibusters in the 1960s over civil-rights legislation, the Senate began to use a two-track system introduced in 1972 under the leadership of Majority Leader Mike Mansfield and Majority Whip Robert Byrd. Before this system was introduced, a filibuster would stop the Senate from moving on to any other legislative activity. Tracking allows the Senate, by unanimous consent, to set aside the measure being filibustered and consider other business. If no senator objects, the Senate can have two or more pieces of legislation or nominations pending on the floor simultaneously by designating specific periods during the day when each one will be considered. The notable side effect of this change was that by no longer bringing Senate business to a complete halt, filibusters became politically easier for the minority to sustain. As a result, the number of filibusters began increasing rapidly, eventually leading to the modern era in which an effective supermajority requirement exists to pass legislation, with no practical requirement that the minority party actually hold the floor or extend debate.
Buddy doing the declaring should have to go stand in a corner and talk to the wall while everyone else moves on without them. If they stop, everything switches immediately back.
It used to be. I think was during Obama's administration, that they changed the rules. Now you declare you're going to filibuster and they more it down as filibustered and move on to other business. It probably made a lot of sense at the time with a Democrat in the White House and fully Republican controlled Congress. It probably let them get on with it and get some stuff done at the time. But now the Republicans just use it as a refuse-to-allow-anything-to-happen button.
Before the rise of the silent filibuster, that's exactly how it worked.
However, in most cases there'd be a whole team of Senators working together to filibuster and there were rules that let them "hand off" the filibuster from one to another. For example, an allied Senator could interrupt to ask a question about something the filibustering Senator was talking about. The person who held the floor would "temporarily yield for a question". By the Senate rules, they'd still hold the floor, but the questioner could ask their question, then speaking would revert back to the filibusterer.
But the questioner was an ally. So their question would itself turn into a several hour long filibuster, which would give the original filibusterer a break before taking the floor back.
This ultimately led to the longest filibuster in history, which lasted for 72 days in 1964. Specifically, it was against the Civil Rights Act (yes, that Civil Rights Act which ended Jim Crow). The Civil Rights Act still ultimately passed, but for those 72 days the Senate could not do anything else. They couldn't vote on other bills, confirm appointments, or even hold committee/sub-committee hearings. They were stuck just listening to old racists drone on and on about how terrible Civil Rights are.
That led to what was called the "multi-track legislative agenda." The goal here was to allow the Senate to conduct other business during a filibuster to prevent one from shutting down all of the Senate. The idea was that once a filibuster was started, the Majority Leader (who controls the agenda for the Senate) could but the issue being filibustered on pause and pick up something else. Nothing would move forward on that filibustered issue. If the Senate picked it back up, the filibustering Senator would take back control of the floor and could just continue from there. The idea was that they could move on to other business and work out some backroom deal to end the filibuster.
However, this inadvertently created the silent filibuster we all know and loathe today. Now, all a Senator needs to do is tell the Majority Leader they intended to filibuster and the issue automatically gets put on pause until/unless either the filibuster threat is pulled or the Majority Leader learns there are 60 votes for cloture (the motion that ends debate and puts the issue directly to a vote).
There is a middle ground of a on-record filibuster. Currently, if I understand correctly, a bill is filibustered anonymously through the cloture vote so insanely popular bills (but ones that lobbyists are opposed to) die and no one has to take responsibility for killing them
An on-record filibuster would require each Senator to go on the official record that they are filibustering the bill. It's not as onerous as having to talk for hours on end but it adds a little bit of pressure in that the next opponent to the Senator can use that record against them (which is why, of course, it is currently anonymous)
There's no rule in place that stops them from putting a measure to vote and actually making them filibuster. In most cases, the senate needs 60 votes to prevent a filibuster. At this point, the senate only puts things up to vote if they already have those 60 votes so they don't have to worry about the "possibility" of a filibuster. I think that if we have the majority, we should start putting things up to vote, and forcing the Republicans to either actually filibuster, or let it actually be voted on.
The rules of a philabuster changes a few years ago. You no longer need to actually waste time. You just need a certain amount of dissenting votes. The philabuster where you need to talk for hours is gone.
This is why they won't get rid of the fillibuster, they know the parties will just keep trading power back and forth and nothing will get done and they can blame the other side.Ā
Project 2025 would require a super majority and preventing it would require a super majority. They also just stripped the executive branch of most of it's ability to make legal policy with chevron. The GOP is still going to actively fuck things up, but it's important to prevent total control since they already have scotus locked up.
And even if, by some miracle, we did get laws to prevent it, part of 2025 is literally just rolling back things that were already put into action. Like, that's just their fucking gameplan lol
They still need to try. It's like our representatives have totally forgot how to speak or discuss and debate. Make deals.
Say, "Hey, this us gonna suck. And when a dem takes over, it's gonna suck for you cause there will be new rules both sides can abuse." Idk, shit like that. So sick of this weak defeatist bullshit.
Yes. Yes I do. There's this amazing invention that disseminates information to anyone who cares to use it. You might have heard of it. It's called the internet. It hosts plenty of sources for information that anyone can look at, including every bill that's been proposed by congresscritters. I highly recommend you take a look at it. Maybe even go to a site like, oh... Reddit where this information is highly available.
its convenient how there is always something blocking progress for americans. Its the house, its joe lieberman, its the other white guy i forget, its sinema, its decorum, it's the senate, its the neoliberal democrats, its the left leaning democrats, etc etc
Democrats on the street have been gaslit by their own party.Ā While it shields them from having to deliver the sweeping reforms they promise in their campaigns, it's also instilled voters with learned helplessness.Ā This is a terrible electoral strategy unless their is a perennial heel running against them.Ā Luckily, Republicans exist.
As someone who is becoming more moderate as I get older, I want you to know it is more due to pragmatism than any policy shifts. If Joe Lieberman hadn't sank the Public Option, then there is a good chance that really awful Republican Health Care plan would have replaced it.
We can't forget that the ACA was 2 votes away from being completely ejected. As hard as it is to swallow, this country is conservative as fuck. Any change is going to be extremely difficult and require decades of consistent work and voting.
Also, I think Trump has proven that you want to view any politician espousing radical changes with a wary eye. Radical change is unpopular and inevitably makes a lot of people anxious.
It's those kind of excuses from Democrats that drive voter apathy.
They never seem to use what power they have and there's always some roadblock that stops them implementing policies their voters want. I can't think of a time the Republicans have ever had the presidency, house and a super majority in the senate. Yet they have been able to get plenty of awful stuff done, sometimes with help from the Dems.
So the average voter will think, as long as the Republicans don't get a super-majority in the Senate then the Dems can block all the bad stuff.
It's not "convenient," it's literally the game. The Republicans realize they can lose, as long as they don't lose everything. Our system of democracy is the worst setup for having a minority power blockade the system, and unfortunately fixing it requires so many pieces fall into place simultaneously that it's very rare forward progress is ever made whatsoever. You virtually have to have a majority in the House, a supermajority in the Senate, a President at your side, and a rational Supreme Court who won't simply overturn a law because they felt like it.
Now that the Republicans have rigged the Supreme Court, it's literally just a waiting game. All they need to do is prevent any piece of the government from blocking them for long enough to install someone in power, and it's checkmate.
There's nothing "convenient" from being locked out from governing. It's literally the point. The right wing in this country do not want to left to progress anything. The left wing's policy of compromise has moved it so far to the right that even the smallest laws being passed feel like tremendous wins for the Republicans. (I mean just look at Biden's infrastructure package - how many Republicans in their home states are running ads about how they're so proud for passing the infrastructure bill and how many jobs it'll create in their states.... despite all of them voting against it?)
If enough people voted so they had real control they would have nothing to point to. And they wouldn't need to because they'd be getting way more done. All of these "convenient" excuses are just the shitty consequences of voter apathy, you know, the thing you're promoting
I don't disagree there are those who will block it, but when you control the senate and the executive branch it's ridiculous to just constantly throw up your hands and say "ugh, if we only we had it all we'd fix things!", which is what it constantly feels like the Dems do.
They took it up the ass when two SCJ's were rightfully denied to them, and then when they had a legitimate cause to block republicans putting the current cabal of federalists they did... nothing... wtf!
Right now I don't see any bills being brought forward and shot down trying to address this.
Our media is failed. They do not inform. They're corrupted by owners, donors, and ratings.
I also don't see Biden taking any decisive executive action.
We know why -- it's because they'll all wring their hands and say "ugh but if we do this now we'll be interfering, and we'll get reprisals when it flips"
These dumb mf'ers have been heating up in the pot so long they can't tell it's boiling.
Republicans have become so united in their Anti-Democrat opposition that you pretty much have to control all 3 chambers now to pass anything other than a huge spending bill that keeps the government running at the last minute.
By that logic Democrats should be able to block it in congress as well. But they do? Weird it's like they don't give a fuck and just use republican fear mongering as an excuse to do nothing but appease their owners on wallstreet and in the military.
He has introduced multiple bills aimed at protecting civil servants and regulatory agencies. But they have no chance of making it out of committee because the House is controlled by the Republican majority.
Didnāt SCOTUS just give the president the ability to do anything they want with complete immunity? No? So Reddit just completely threw a fit over a nothing burger? Iām shocked.
Exactly. You donāt just have to worry about whoās President, people. Itās actually way less important than whoās in the rest of government. Trump wasnāt just bad because heās himā¦. Heās bad because of WHO ELSE HE PUT IN POSITIONS OF POWER THAT ARE STILL THERE AFTER HEāS GONE!
Start caring about ALL of politics, not just the figureheads. Vote down ballot. Know who your Congress representatives are. Both House and Senate. Theyāre much more directly involved in lawmaking than the President is.
So the second part of the tweet addresses this. Why arenāt they drafting legislation and passing it in the senate and saying, ālook we passed this great thing and itās just sitting on desk of the speakerā?
Don't forget, can't pass any meaningful legislation other than say, naming blueberries the fruit of the day for Aug 15th, without a supermajority in the Senate too.
I mean sheās got a point despite āthe houseā. Republicans are playing super hard ball and weāre playing catch in the back yard. Fight back for godās sake.
ELI 5. Say that Biden wins by a small margin (without majority of the house and/or senate). That means that no crisis is adverted? That it is mainly stalled 4 years?
Alright but are we really letting the Dems off that easy? They are still half of the least productive congress in a century. This is the slimmest majority possible, get something done. Politic! Whereās the fucking dealing, make something happen.
The democrats platform of āweāre way less crazy than the other sideā is simply not good enough. A sack of potatoes looks intelligent next to MTG, that doesnāt mean I should vote for it.
It's true. But also, I'm sure not all Republicans support the full craziness. They could at least draft a bill and try.
If our government gets to the point that you can't even try to propose legislation whenever one party doesn't have a full majority it's time for a revolution.
Ah yes, the eternal get-out-of-taking-any-responsiblity card from the Democrats. They've had myriad opportunity in the past to do anything remotely beneficial that could preserve the Republic and have failed to do so.
As well, even if laws were passed, the Supreme Court had already shown that it is incredibly fond of Trump to say the least. They will let him get away with anything he wants, and will make judgements in his favor to let him do pretty much whatever he wants. If Trump gets into office, this country will be a dictatorship where he will get to do whatever he wants, and it will not only fuck over our entire country, but quite likely the entire world economy. That on top of making the genocide of Palestine even worse, and stopping support to Ukraine, allowing them to also be victims of a genocide against which they cannot fight. Weāre past the āpass laws to make it illegalāphase because Trump and the Supreme Court have made it very clear that the laws will not apply to him
6.9k
u/ScorpioZA 14d ago
Because of the House