• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

American Family Association email on filibustering and Liberals

Status
Not open for further replies.
http://dailykos.com/story/2005/4/6/19510/88616

The most important vote in Congress this session will be coming up soon. The Senate will vote to either abide by the Constitution and require a simple majority to end a filibuster, or to require 60 votes to end a filibuster as liberals desire.

Call your Senators today. Tell them you want them to vote to end a filibuster by a simple majority as the Constitution requires. Should the Senate fail to conform to the Constitution's rule of a simple majority, a minority of 40 liberal Senators can use the filibuster to force their agenda on every American.

Get your friends to call.

The toll-free number is 1-866-808-0065. Ask to speak with your Senator. When finished leaving your message, call your other Senator.

Here is the agenda the liberals want to achieve. They want Senators to filibuster any judicial nominee who will not support this agenda.

1. Approval of homosexual marriage
2. Legalizing euthanasia
3. Banning prayer in school
4. Banning the public display of the Ten Commandments
5. Banning the Pledge of Allegiance
6. Basing our laws on the laws of other nations
7. Maintaining abortion on demand
8. Forcing the Boy Scouts and similar organizations (including churches) to place homosexuals in positions of leadership
9. Complete protection for all kinds of pornography
10. Creating hate crimes laws to punish those who believe homosexuality is wrong
11. Denigrating Christianity to a secondary status
12. Making secularism the only legitimate religion


Sincerely,

Don

Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and Chairman
American Family Association

P.S. Please forward this email to family and friends.

Go to the "family" site here...

Now that's what family is all about!! Scaring the everliving shit out of people so they'll conform to your demands on a whim!
 

xsarien

daedsiluap
After the Schiavo backfire, the GOP would be smart to distance themselves from people like this for a good, long while.
 

909er

Member
xsarien said:
After the Schiavo backfire, the GOP would be smart to distance themselves from people like this for a good, long while.

Yeah, it's like having Al Queda or NAMBLA's support. These uber right wing Christians are crazy.
 

WedgeX

Banned
Denigrating Christianity to a secondary status

Perhaps behind...say...the Constitution?!

There really, really, need to be some more vocal moderate-to-liberal Christian groups.
 

whytemyke

Honorary Canadian.
-What religion are you?
-Oh, my religion? My religion is secularism. I believe that there is holiness to be found in treating every religion equally. It's kind of hard to worship, but then, if it wasn't hard, my afterlife spent dancing among the clouds with perfect social security and dead fetuses wouldn't be worth it.


This letter is actually right-on with one thing: liberals forcing homos into positions in the Boy Scouts.

"BE A SCOUT LEADER! DO IT OR YOU'LL NEVER GET MARRIED!!!!"
 

MetatronM

Unconfirmed Member
I'd love to know where in the Constitution it says that you must have a simple majority to break a filibuster.

In fact, I dare anybody to even FIND the word filibuster in the Constitution.
 

Drensch

Member
In fact, I dare anybody to even FIND the word filibuster in the Constitution.

It's not. But neither are a lot of things. Filibusters and what not are part of procedural and parlimentary rules.
 
whytemyke said:
This letter is actually right-on with one thing: liberals forcing homos into positions in the Boy Scouts.

"BE A SCOUT LEADER! DO IT OR YOU'LL NEVER GET MARRIED!!!!"

Link? From what I understand, we want the Boy Scouts to accept homosexuals into different positions if they continue to work with various governments. This probably isn't about pushing the gay population into the Boy Scouts.
 

whytemyke

Honorary Canadian.
Hammy said:
Link? From what I understand, we want the Boy Scouts to accept homosexuals into different positions if they continue to work with various governments. This probably isn't about pushing the gay population into the Boy Scouts.

Here's your link. Read it and go back to hiding behind a tree, you tossers!
 

Phoenix

Member
Filibuster (cloture) is defined in Senate rule 22.

http://rules.senate.gov/senaterules/rule22.htm


Its not an earth shattering thing, its not a big deal and is designed to give the minority party a chance to speak, engage, and delay voting on issues. Without this, a stacked senate pretty much bitch slaps the minority party into irrelevance.
 

Phoenix

Member
A filibuster is a process, typically an extremely long speech, that is used primarily to stall the legislative process and thus derail a particular piece of legislation, rather than to make a particular point in the content of the diversion per se. The term first came into use in the United States Senate, where senate rules permit a senator, or a series of senators, to speak for as long as they wish and on any topic they choose. The term comes from the early 19th century Spanish and Portuguese pirates, "filibusteros", who held ships hostage for ransom.

Under Senate rules, the speech need not be relevant to the topic under discussion, and there have been cases in which a senator has undertaken part of a speech by reading from a telephone directory. Legendary segregationist Senator Strom Thurmond set a record in 1964 by filibustering the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for 24 hours and 18 minutes. Thurmond broke the previous record of 22 hours and 26 minutes set by Wayne Morse (I-OR) in 1953 protesting the Tidelands Oil legislation.

Filibusters have become much more common in recent decades. Twice as many filibusters took place in the 1991-1992 legislative session as in the entire nineteenth century. (Frozen Republic, 198)

Until 1917, there was no formal mechanism to allow the senate to close debate, and any senator could start a filibuster. From 1917 to 1949, two-thirds of those voting could limit debate on a measure. As civil rights loomed on the Senate agenda, this rule was revised in 1949 to allow cloture on any measure or motion by two-thirds of the entire Senate membership; in 1959 the threshold was restored to two-thirds of those voting. After a series of filibusters in the 1960s over civil rights legislation, the Senate revised its cloture rule so that three-fifths of the Senate (usually 60 senators) could limit debate. Despite this rule, the filibuster or the threat of a filibuster remains an important tactic that allows a large minority to affect legislation.

Filibusters do not occur in legislative bodies in which time for debate is strictly limited by procedural rules, such as the United States House of Representatives.
In current practice, Senate rules permit procedural filibusters, in which actual continuous floor speeches are not required, although the Senate majority leader may require an actual traditional filibuster if he so chooses.

Budget bills are governed under special rules called "Reconciliation." Reconciliation theoretically only applies to bills that would reduce the budget deficit, but it has been used for bills that are only tangentially related to budget issues.
The 1939 film Mr. Smith Goes to Washington climaxes with a young senator, played by Jimmy Stewart, falsely accused of corruption, staging a filibuster in order to forestall his expulsion from the chamber.

On the TV show The West Wing, on episode #39 "The Stackhouse Filibuster" (Second Season, aired March 14, 2001) the senator Howard Stackhouse filibusters from a Friday afternoon through a good part of the night The West WIng UnOfficial Continuity Guide
A unique form of filibuster was pioneered by the Ontario New Democratic Party in the Legislative Assembly of Ontario in April, 1997. To protest Progressive Conservative government legislation that would create the megacity of Toronto, Ontario, the small New Democratic caucus introduced 11,500 amendments to the megacity bill, created on computers with mail merge functionality. A typical NDP amendment would name a street in the proposed city, and provide that public hearings be held into the megacity with residents of the street invited to participate.

The Ontario Liberal Party also joined the filibuster with a smaller series of amendments; a typical Liberal amendment would give an historical designation to a named street. The filibuster occupied the legislature day and night for approximately ten days, members alternating in shifts. On the fifth day, tired and often sleepy government members inadvertently let one of the NDP amendments pass, and residents of Cafon Court in Etobicoke were granted the right to a public consultation on the bill.

Although a filibuster is usually effective, it can be defeated by the governing party if they leave the debated issue on the agenda indefinitely, without adding anything else to the agenda. Thurmond's attempt to filibuster the Civil Rights Act was defeated when President Lyndon Baines Johnson refused to refer any further business to the Senate, which required the filibuster to be kept up indefinitely. Instead, the opponents were all given a chance to speak and the matter eventually was forced to a vote.

Here is the wikipedia information for the lazy.
 

fennec fox

ferrets ferrets ferrets ferrets FERRETS!!!
Dude, I want homos leading the Boy Scouts. Period. That and ferret legalization in California. WTF Arnold?
 

Shig

Strap on your hooker ...
If I was the next pope, I'd spend years doing good work and earning the adoration and full support of christians, and then announce I was gay and watch the neocons' heads explode.
 

DarthWoo

I'm glad Grandpa porked a Chinese Muslim
fennec fox said:
Dude, I want homos leading the Boy Scouts. Period. That and ferret legalization in California. WTF Arnold?

Considering that the very founder of the Boy Scouts was a closet homosexual AND likely pedophile, I don't see why they have such problems with it.
 

Nerevar

they call me "Man Gravy".
Phoenix said:
Filibuster (cloture) is defined in Senate rule 22.

http://rules.senate.gov/senaterules/rule22.htm


Its not an earth shattering thing, its not a big deal and is designed to give the minority party a chance to speak, engage, and delay voting on issues. Without this, a stacked senate pretty much bitch slaps the minority party into irrelevance.

I don't think anyone was confused as to what a filibuster was, they were just taking issue with this little nugget of wisdom:

Call your Senators today. Tell them you want them to vote to end a filibuster by a simple majority as the Constitution requires. Should the Senate fail to conform to the Constitution's rule of a simple majority, a minority of 40 liberal Senators can use the filibuster to force their agenda on every American.

which is, as is par for the course for goups like this, simply wrong. Filibusters aren't mentioned at all in the Constitution. But that doesn't stop retards from throwing around "facts" like that anyway.
 

whytemyke

Honorary Canadian.
ugh. that's why we need a black pope, so all these people in the country who think we're not ready for a black leader will be forced to choke on it when the pope is black.

edit: this was in relation to the hal turner quote/link. actually, at the bottom of that site is him eluding to the 'fact' that he killed someone over the weekend, hahaha. right now i'd pay money to have two hard pipe-swingin' niggas go after him, pulp fiction style.
 

Phoenix

Member
Nerevar said:
I don't think anyone was confused as to what a filibuster was, they were just taking issue with this little nugget of wisdom:



which is, as is par for the course for goups like this, simply wrong. Filibusters aren't mentioned at all in the Constitution. But that doesn't stop retards from throwing around "facts" like that anyway.

Actually I was showing people where is WAS defined so the next time some idiot mentions this (or if you want to do a reply-all to that email) you can say "you're an idiot and here is what it says and where it says it now get your facts straight before you say anything else"
 

ge-man

Member
whytemyke said:
ugh. that's why we need a black pope, so all these people in the country who think we're not ready for a black leader will be forced to choke on it when the pope is black.

The thing is, it might just happen. Cardinal Arinze (a Nigerian) is one of the front runners in the succession speculation. I'm curious to see what would happen if he was asked to be the pope.
 

whytemyke

Honorary Canadian.
Hey, if they elect a nigerian to the papacy, more power to them. I'm all for it. Personally I think it'd be a good move toward integration of everyone in the world, and the Church itself can use the PR on the human rights front. I think it'll have been overall a good past 12 months for minorities in religion: Anglican Church elects first gay bishop, and Catholic Church puts a black man... an African... as Pope. Great things in my eyes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom