quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
Its easy to say "just do your job," but these little courtesies are the source of power.

Patronage and control of who gets these jobs is very important. A President will not appoint someone to a judgeship who has not been recommended by the senior Senator of the President's own party in that state. Jobs for the boys, and all that.

In a state like Whackyland, where neither Senator is from the President's party, the Senators expect that no one will be nominated who is obnoxious, objectionable, to them. They know they won't get their guys nominated, but at least hope to prevent their worst enemies from getting jobs. The President can ignore them, but that is considered poor manners, not soon forgotten when a vote is needed.

Similarly, any Senator can delay a vote. You don't ignore that without paying a price, sooner or later.

Which is exactly the BS nonsense that supports the current reality that the senate is where good bills go to die. I'm over tradition, and courtesy, and all the other BS the senate engages in every day that essentially ends up benefiting them at our expense. The simple demand on our part should be..."Get it done, or get out."

Time to evolve out of the 19th century and get some stuff done, the country needs some decisions made to address all the problems the politicians have created.....

quote:

"Get it done, or get out."

McConnell shows a basic lack of competence to lead the Senate.

The majority leader is not up to the job.

McConnell’s number-one priority in the Senate has been to control and conceal information. A leader who has true conviction is unafraid of open debate and information. A leader who has no conviction is exposed by open debate and the free flow of information.

Freedom and the GOP are dying under ‘Leader’ McConnell
https://www.conservativereview...der-leader-mcconnell

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

"Get it done, or get out."

McConnell shows a basic lack of competence to lead the Senate.

The majority leader is not up to the job.

McConnell’s number-one priority in the Senate has been to control and conceal information. A leader who has true conviction is unafraid of open debate and information. A leader who has no conviction is exposed by open debate and the free flow of information.

Freedom and the GOP are dying under ‘Leader’ McConnell
https://www.conservativereview...der-leader-mcconnell

Ahahahahahahahahahaha! What are you talking about?

Ever heard of Lyndon B. Johnson? He led by fear and intimidation, and bribery, the good old traditional Democratic way.

The GOP Senators are such a bunch of choir boys that there is very little to extort them over, their thirsts, peccadillos, undisclosed arrangements with their accountants and business associates of similar dignitude, etc. and the money is so big now that nobody can afford to bribe them all.

It isn't as easy as you make out.

quote:

Ever heard of Lyndon B. Johnson? He led by fear and intimidation, and bribery, the good old traditional Democratic way.

Did you know June Welch?
He was a history teacher and story teller at the University of Dallas. He knew LBJ and was fascinated with him. Anyway, he taught me that history is not about dates or events, it's about people.

Yes, LBJ was effective. McConnell is not.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

Ever heard of Lyndon B. Johnson? He led by fear and intimidation, and bribery, the good old traditional Democratic way.

Did you know June Welch?
He was a history teacher and story teller at the University of Dallas. He knew LBJ and was fascinated with him. Anyway, he taught me that history is not about dates or events, it's about people.

Yes, LBJ was effective. McConnell is not.

No. I grew up an easy drive from the LBJ Ranch, and among people who knew Johnson very well. The stories go on and on, some highly complementary, many not so much.

Many of the professors at UT were buddies of his and one was reputedly on "the short list" for a Supreme Court nomination. In the UT band, I probably shook his hand maybe half a dozen times.

I've read a number of biographies about him, and John Connally who I worked with a little and came to admire. Connally probably knew him better than anyone, even Lady Bird.

Johnson was a very unusual man. John Connally discussed his many traits in this C-Span interview.

Like Lyndon B. Johnson..., Schumer is playing to win:

July 13, 2017
Schumer is playing to win, so why aren't we?
By Silvio Canto, Jr.

We have a majority in the U.S. Senate but act like the other guys are in charge. Yes, I understand tradition and playing by the rules. However, there are limits, specially when the other side is slowing up governing.

Senator Schumer is winning. His blockade is working just fine, as the Wall Street Journal writes:

The Trump Presidency is well into its seventh month but the Trump Administration still barely exists.

Senate Democrats are abusing Senate rules to undermine the executive branch, and Republicans need to restore normal order.

President Trump got an inexcusably slow start making nominations, but in the past few weeks he’s been catching up to his predecessors.

According to the Partnership for Public Service, as of June 28 Mr. Trump had nominated 178 appointees but the Senate had confirmed only 46. Barack Obama had 183 nominees confirmed by that date in his first term, and George W. Bush 130.

The White House has understandably begun to make a public issue of the delays, and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer says it “has only itself to blame.” But a press release Mr. Schumer sent out Monday made the White House case, showing that the Senate has received 242 nominations but confirmed only 50 through June 30. Democrats are now the problem.

Democratic obstruction against nominees is nearly total, most notably including a demand for cloture filings for every nominee — no matter how minor the position. This means a two-day waiting period and then another 30 hours of debate. The 30-hour rule means Mr. Trump might not be able to fill all of those 400 positions in four years. The cloture rule also allows the minority to halt other business during the 30-hour debate period, which helps slow the GOP policy and oversight agenda.

Democrats have also refused to return a single “blue slip” to the Judiciary Committee, which has the effect of blocking consideration of judicial nominees from their home states. Senators like Minnesota’s Al Franken and Amy Klobuchar are holding hostage the eminently qualified Minnesota Supreme Court Justice David Stras for the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals for no reason other than politics.

Yes, it's time for this nonsense to stop.

First, all of these Senate rules are just that: Senate rules! They can be changed by the Senate. There is no need to change the U.S. Constitution. Again, these are Senate rules and can be changed by U.S. Senators.

Second, these rules were created to generate bipartisanship or to force U.S. senators to work together. Unfortunately, that's not happening. No one is working together or getting anything done. Government is not working and that's unfair to the voters.

Third, it's okay for the U.S. Senate to require financial or other disclosures from people who in public positions. However, it's not okay to reverse the election results by countless demands.

Last, but not least, Senate Democrats up for reelection in West Virginia, Montana, Indiana, Missouri and others should be asked about these delays. My guess is that it's not popular in places where Mr. Trump won by more than 10 points!

Memo to the Majority Leader: you have 52 votes and it's time to use them, as you did with Justice Gorsuch.

http://www.americanthinker.com...so_why_arent_we.html

quote:

It isn't as easy as you make out.

Well, our problem is a different one, anyway. How do we get McConnell on track and moving? The guy seems absolutely determined to find the least feasible route to getting anything done, and then taking forever to try to get something done.

The worst part about this whole pathetic mess? The next time there is a democrat in the white house the republicans will rubber stamp every single nominee post haste. Wouldn't want to look like you are obstructing the will of the people would you?

Our government is BROKEN, and the majority party refuses to get it back on track.

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:

quote:

It isn't as easy as you make out.

Well, our problem is a different one, anyway. How do we get McConnell on track and moving? The guy seems absolutely determined to find the least feasible route to getting anything done, and then taking forever to try to get something done.

Just what would you have him do?

Some say how about new Senate rules? Get rid of all Crying Chucks parliamentary bullshit.

Are you sure Republican Senators would approve that? Those rules are there because they contribute to Senate, and Senator's, power. Emasculating the Senate for short term advantage might be costly in the long run. Ask Harry Reid. Senators might not go along.

We need more sophisticated analysis, and strategy, than "McConnell isn't doing what I want, so he can FOAD."

And that's exactly why the republicans are never going to get anything accomplished. They are trying to fight a 21st century war with 16th century tactics. It's time to fight like the enemy is fighting, or just be prepared to lose.

When your enemy has said "to hell with tradition and decorum, full speed ahead!" you had better be prepared to counter that. So far the republicans have shown they are not One of the reasons Trump won against the largest negative onslaught in history was because he refused to play by their rules.

The DEMs are not abiding by any "gentleman" rules.

Look at the Obama years.

They ruined the formerly best health care in the world.

They opened the borders to tens of millions of illegals and handed them tax payer funded "benefits". Including lawyers to fight to let them stay

They pushed the global warming hoax and continue to attempt to have hundreds of billions spent on CO2 control. While China and India go full bore in coal plant production.

They demonized police officers and proclaimed as champions people that are just ordinary thugs and rioters who not suitable for living in a civilized society.

They enabled the most corrupt U.S. administration of modern times. Maybe of all of our history.

They turned every federal agency into vicious weapons against anyone who stood in their way.

it goes on and on.

Why bother to pretend there any gentleman rules w the DEMs?

So go do the job that President Trump ran on in his campaign.

Don't worry about the slightest offense to the DEMs.

You really think the DEMs aren't going to do every dirty trick they can whether or not the REPs play hardball?

This is about raw political power and we are in a political / cultural war.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
The DEMs are not abiding by any "gentleman" rules.

Look at the Obama years.

They ruined the formerly best health care in the world.

They opened the borders to tens of millions of illegals and handed them tax payer funded "benefits". Including lawyers to fight to let them stay

They pushed the global warming hoax and continue to attempt to have hundreds of billions spent on CO2 control. While China and India go full bore in coal plant production.

They demonized police officers and proclaimed as champions people that are just ordinary thugs and rioters who not suitable for living in a civilized society.

They enabled the most corrupt U.S. administration of modern times. Maybe of all of our history.

They turned every federal agency into vicious weapons against anyone who stood in their way.

it goes on and on.

Why bother to pretend there any gentleman rules w the DEMs?

So go do the job that President Trump ran on in his campaign.

Don't worry about the slightest offense to the DEMs.

You really think the DEMs aren't going to do every dirty trick they can whether or not the REPs play hardball?

This is about raw political power and we are in a political / cultural war.

There is little doubt about all that, and more besides. The question has to do with the way the Senate has operated over the decades, with some tweaking of the rules from time to time, and the wisdom, or not, of abandoning those rules in the present circumstances to gain a perceived immediate advantage over the Godless Commies.

Maybe we should go whole hog, abandon all these procedural nuances, majority rules, the minorities eat shit and die, 51 votes to do anything. In fact, maybe just have the House and Senate merge, the ayes have it!

I don't have a wise answer to grow old worrying about,and probably won't be growing a lot older anyway. I can only offer the advice of a Tennessee Congressman, "Be sure you are right, then go ahead."

We have seen what happened to our adversaries who impatiently changed the rules to ram some things through the Senate. Do they think it was a good idea?

Following Senate "traditions" are a sure path to failure.

The republicans are the old British army, standing in an open field waiting to meet the enemy in open, scripted combat.

The democrats are the indians who are riding roughshod over military "tradition", using hit and run, cover and concealment, picking off the British at will.

Someone asks the British commander, "why don't you get behind cover, fight like they do?"

He replies "Nonsense! Tradition dictates this is how we do battle, we aren't like those heatherns!"

And we all know how that turned out don't we?

Are the dems upset they started the nuclear option? Nope. Just a slight setback. Rest assured the next time they are in power they will do far worse. If you think "tradition" will restrict them you are mistaken. These aren't your daddy's democrats. It is all about the ends to them, the means are secondary. People need to realize that and adjust accordingly if they want any type of victory.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
Just what would you have him do?

I'm not just ticked off at McConnell. If Reid can use scheduling to decide what reaches a vote, then so can McConnell. The Dems have to have certain things from the Feds, particularly money. That doesn't happen unless the House and Senate both vote for it.

The Dems are going to want certain judges (even moderate Dems are better than Republicans to the Dems because Dems can still market their being raised to the bench as a "win"), and, in certain cases, the Reps will be willing to give them those judges. Do some horse trading to get Senate votes on those judges the Republicans want.

McConnell can't control what Dems get assigned to what committees (I believe), but McConnell can work with committee chairs to not only determine what subjects the committees discuss, but which committees get to discuss and vote on them. Got a Dem in an ag-dependent state? They'll want the folks back home to know they took the initiative on ag issues. That doesn't happen if an issue is defined as 'energy' or 'security' related (think petroleum-based fertilizers) and never comes before their committee. This was a classic move by Sam Rayburn, and in turn an old favorite of LBJ's, wasn't it?

By the same token, Cruz can be permitted to run wild within the institution. That burns up time Dems could use to push for their side of the meat'n'potatos issues. That would also reposition the discussion of several different issues. The Dems might wind up being happier if McConnell and Cruz continued to be each others' biggest enemies in the Senate - rather than McConnell deciding that he's so desperate for every last vote that he's willing to accommodate Cruz more often and too a greater degree than he has in the past.

The Dems may want to tar (as they see it) McConnell with the same brush they're trying to use to tar Trump. Even so, the disconnect between Trump and McConnell has made it much easier for the Dems to resist any reforms and disrupt any reform initiative being pushed by a Republican. That includes a raft of things that Trump has identified as "what he wants". At the same time, there are a number of issues that aren't controversial enough to matter in the next elections (e.g., taking a more competitive position vis-a-vis China, boosting enforcement of immigration laws against illegals who've engaged in multiple crimes). The Dems would love to tie McConnell to any Trump initiative that can be so much as presented as controversial. However, they don't really want to see McConnell working more closely with Trump on the stuff that generally flies underneath the "Election '18" and "Election '20" radars because they will then have to confront a river of votes that they don't want and can't really do anything about. Meanwhile, both Trump and the Congressional Republicans get to point to a laundry list of things they've gotten done and issues where voting for the Republicans actually made a difference.

McConnell can take advantage of next week's "Save What's Left Of ObamaCare" vote if the bill doesn't pass by getting on the side of "repeal first, consider replacing only after there's been a total repeal", or anything up to and including that position. The Dems are then forced to gamble that the Republicans will be punished in the next election - after OCare has been condemned as a failure by the majority and after the Dems publicly turned their noses up at a prime opportunity to lose less, rather than more, ground. Oh, and that would be after the Dems have publicly demonstrated that they can't effectively defend OCare, too, which raises the question as to whether voting for Dems in the next election will solve the problems the Dems want to use as campaign issues. The Dems may even be dragged into a debate over the specifics. The issue is incredibly soporific to begin with. Can you imagine them trying to come up with a coherent defense of as poorly written and incoherent a mess as OCare?

People keep singing McConnell's praises as some kind of 'wizard', but we're seeing only so many results. Lets see him use time, money, issue couching, access and opportunity to generate more movement in a better direction. All I've seen is an astonishing (yes, to me) lack of initiative and aggression.

OTOH, if he's no wizard and there's nothing else special about him, then I think we need to start asking our Senators to pick a new Majority Leader. Which, of course, the Dems might also want or not want to see.

quote:

OTOH, if he's no wizard and there's nothing else special about him, then I think we need to start asking our Senators to pick a new Majority Leader.

But they won't. At least not until after the 2018 elections. For this term, we are stuck with McConnell.

Understood. But the threat can be made at any time any time (or times, so long as they haven't been made too often!), and there hasn't really been any evidence yet that the Dems have a prayer of taking over the Senate next November.

At the same time, it is entirely possible for McConnell to retain the title but either delegate more work, let others take the initiative more often, or find himself bypassed by Senators putting together majorities that McConnell will be forced (by collegiality alone, I'm sure ) to accommodate. None of these possibilities will please the Dems because the one person who is nationally prominent enough that they can personally attack him will be the one person who's not actively involved - McConnell.

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
Just what would you have him do?

I'm not just ticked off at McConnell. If Reid can use scheduling to decide what reaches a vote, then so can McConnell. The Dems have to have certain things from the Feds, particularly money. That doesn't happen unless the House and Senate both vote for it.

McConnell does that in terms of scheduling. What money do the Dems need?

quote:

The Dems are going to want certain judges (even moderate Dems are better than Republicans to the Dems because Dems can still market their being raised to the bench as a "win"), and, in certain cases, the Reps will be willing to give them those judges. Do some horse trading to get Senate votes on those judges the Republicans want.

That usually works from states there is no Senator of the Presidents party. At least you might get nominees not AS obnoxious, but here, the Dems are in effect blocking EVERY nominee, much like they did to El Diablo, but diferent tactics.

quote:

McConnell can't control what Dems get assigned to what committees (I believe), but McConnell can work with committee chairs to not only determine what subjects the committees discuss, but which committees get to discuss and vote on them. Got a Dem in an ag-dependent state? They'll want the folks back home to know they took the initiative on ag issues. That doesn't happen if an issue is defined as 'energy' or 'security' related (think petroleum-based fertilizers) and never comes before their committee. This was a classic move by Sam Rayburn, and in turn an old favorite of LBJ's, wasn't it?

I doubt the Chairmen can be dictated to what subjects are discussed. The Majority Leader has some power, considerable influence but very little absolute control. Each of the 100 Senators is an egomaniacal big shot in his or her own right, susceptible to persuasion on some things, but hard to dictate to.

quote:

By the same token, Cruz can be permitted to run wild within the institution. That burns up time Dems could use to push for their side of the meat'n'potatos issues. That would also reposition the discussion of several different issues. The Dems might wind up being happier if McConnell and Cruz continued to be each others' biggest enemies in the Senate - rather than McConnell deciding that he's so desperate for every last vote that he's willing to accommodate Cruz more often and too a greater degree than he has in the past.

I have no idea what good this might do, or what the advantage might be.

quote:

The Dems may want to tar (as they see it) McConnell with the same brush they're trying to use to tar Trump. Even so, the disconnect between Trump and McConnell has made it much easier for the Dems to resist any reforms and disrupt any reform initiative being pushed by a Republican. That includes a raft of things that Trump has identified as "what he wants". At the same time, there are a number of issues that aren't controversial enough to matter in the next elections (e.g., taking a more competitive position vis-a-vis China, boosting enforcement of immigration laws against illegals who've engaged in multiple crimes). The Dems would love to tie McConnell to any Trump initiative that can be so much as presented as controversial. However, they don't really want to see McConnell working more closely with Trump on the stuff that generally flies underneath the "Election '18" and "Election '20" radars because they will then have to confront a river of votes that they don't want and can't really do anything about. Meanwhile, both Trump and the Congressional Republicans get to point to a laundry list of things they've gotten done and issues where voting for the Republicans actually made a difference.

McConnell can take advantage of next week's "Save What's Left Of ObamaCare" vote if the bill doesn't pass by getting on the side of "repeal first, consider replacing only after there's been a total repeal", or anything up to and including that position. The Dems are then forced to gamble that the Republicans will be punished in the next election - after OCare has been condemned as a failure by the majority and after the Dems publicly turned their noses up at a prime opportunity to lose less, rather than more, ground. Oh, and that would be after the Dems have publicly demonstrated that they can't effectively defend OCare, too, which raises the question as to whether voting for Dems in the next election will solve the problems the Dems want to use as campaign issues. The Dems may even be dragged into a debate over the specifics. The issue is incredibly soporific to begin with. Can you imagine them trying to come up with a coherent defense of as poorly written and incoherent a mess as OCare?

People keep singing McConnell's praises as some kind of 'wizard', but we're seeing only so many results. Lets see him use time, money, issue couching, access and opportunity to generate more movement in a better direction. All I've seen is an astonishing (yes, to me) lack of initiative and aggression.

OTOH, if he's no wizard and there's nothing else special about him, then I think we need to start asking our Senators to pick a new Majority Leader. Which, of course, the Dems might also want or not want to see.

The God Damned Commies are defending Obamacare with their voting power, forcing the GOP to cram the dinosaur of repeal through the key hole of reconciliation. Almost impossible.

Which Senator might do better?

You refer to LBJ and Speaker Rayburn. Rayburn had been Speaker since the Civil War nearly. Johnson had the benefit of Rayburn's experience and Brown and Root's checkbook, among others. They had Eisenhower to deal with. They discussed matters between the 3 of them. If they agreed, things got done. If they did not agree, nothing could happen. I give it to you.... McConnell is no LBJ. There hasn't been one like him, as cunning, as determined, as crafty, as sophisticated, a master of the legislative process, a master salesman, a thorough weasel.

its time to stop playing nice

its time to get nasty

its time to burn bridges

we don't need 'tyraditions' - we need results, and if these people aren't up to it then we need to figure out how to get rid of them and replace them with people that are

I don't give a flying fuck about traditions in the senate - time to do to the democrats what they've been doing to the republicans for the last 60 years

beat them like baby seals

this shit is tiring and will lead to violence if they don't smarten up

Ryan and McConnell are not leaders in any sense of the word or meaning of leasdership

both lack the balls to do the job

every democrat and every RINO shjould look like Harry Reid after he tripped over the treadmill