Current Issue
Back Issues
 Subscribe to BartBlog Feed
How to Read
Members ( need password)
Subscribe to BartCop!
Contact Us
Advertise With Us
Link to Us
Why Donate?
The Forum  -
The Reader
Poster Downloads
Shirts & Shots
BartCop Hotties
More Links
BFEE Scorecard
Perkel's Blog
Power of Nightmares
Clinton Fox Interview
Part 1, Part 2
Money Talks
Cost of Bush's greed
White Rose Society
Project 60
Chinaco Anejo


Search Now:
In Association with

Link Roll
American Politics Journal
Barry Crimmins
Betty Bowers
Consortium News 
Daily Howler
Daily Kos
Democatic Underground 
Disinfotainment Today 
Evil GOP Bastards
Faux News Channel 
Greg Palast
The Hollywood Liberal 
Internet Weekly
Jesus General
Joe Conason 
Josh Marshall
Liberal Oasis
Make Them Accountable 
Mark Morford 
Mike Malloy 
Political Humor -
Political Wire
Randi Rhodes
Rude Pundit 
Smirking Chimp
Take Back the Media
More Links


Locations of visitors to this page

Subject: Feingold?  Objection!!

Bart, you wrote:

> For some reason, Coburn and Inhofe have the power to block ANYTHING Obama does,
> but Feingold sat on his hands while Bush was busy destroying the middle class of this once-great nation .

I'm calling you on being out of reality. 

I like that!
And it works extra good if you can back that up  :)

Do you know how the Okie Idiots can block anything, just on their say-so? 
They state that they will filibuster it.  The Republicans will then stand behind them
and support the filibuster, so it would require 60 votes to overcome their block. 

I knew that.

Now assume someone--Feingold, Sanders, Kennedy, or another from the liberal section of the
Senate Democratic Caucus--threatened to filibuster one of George II's policies.  Are you really
that certain that the Senate Democratic Caucus in the Senate would back him?  Even 41 of them? 

He'd have lost, at the least, all the Blue Dogs and Lieberman.  The filibuster would be broken. 
This was done a large number of times during the Bush regime, and virtually every time enough
Democrats jumped ship to break the filibuster.

So you're saying if it's likely to fail there's no reason to even try?
Even on torture and illegal surveillance and wars and kidnapping/renditions and murders?

Why couldn't Feingold be a man and pull a real filibuster
and get TWO other senators to speak for him while he pees?

Couldn't they have at least pretended to try to stop Bush?
Senate Democrats stand there and advertise, "We're powerless."

Thanks for the tangle.

(short temper due to lingering pain issues)


  Back to

Send e-mail to Bart

Privacy Policy
. .