Robert's Stochastic thoughts
Asymptotically we'll all be dead
HOME
Feed
e-mail me
Angry Bear
Brad De Long's Semi Daily Journal
no more mister nice blog
Atrios
Mark Thoma
Matthew Yglesias
Michael Froomkin
Jim Henley
Glenn Greenwald
A Fistful of Euros
Benen and Hilzoy
Norwegianity
Jon Swift
my brother in law
formerly meta&meta
I Hans
Sour Grapes
fafblog:glofish central
voracious rationalist
archives
7/1/02 - 8/1/02
10/1/02 - 11/1/02
12/1/02 - 1/1/03
1/1/03 - 2/1/03
3/1/03 - 4/1/03
4/1/03 - 5/1/03
5/1/03 - 6/1/03
6/1/03 - 7/1/03
9/1/03 - 10/1/03
10/1/03 - 11/1/03
11/1/03 - 12/1/03
12/1/03 - 1/1/04
1/1/04 - 2/1/04
2/1/04 - 3/1/04
3/1/04 - 4/1/04
4/1/04 - 5/1/04
5/1/04 - 6/1/04
6/1/04 - 7/1/04
7/1/04 - 8/1/04
8/1/04 - 9/1/04
9/1/04 - 10/1/04
10/1/04 - 11/1/04
11/1/04 - 12/1/04
12/1/04 - 1/1/05
1/1/05 - 2/1/05
2/1/05 - 3/1/05
3/1/05 - 4/1/05
4/1/05 - 5/1/05
5/1/05 - 6/1/05
6/1/05 - 7/1/05
7/1/05 - 8/1/05
8/1/05 - 9/1/05
9/1/05 - 10/1/05
10/1/05 - 11/1/05
11/1/05 - 12/1/05
12/1/05 - 1/1/06
1/1/06 - 2/1/06
2/1/06 - 3/1/06
3/1/06 - 4/1/06
4/1/06 - 5/1/06
5/1/06 - 6/1/06
6/1/06 - 7/1/06
7/1/06 - 8/1/06
8/1/06 - 9/1/06
9/1/06 - 10/1/06
10/1/06 - 11/1/06
11/1/06 - 12/1/06
12/1/06 - 1/1/07
1/1/07 - 2/1/07
2/1/07 - 3/1/07
3/1/07 - 4/1/07
4/1/07 - 5/1/07
5/1/07 - 6/1/07
6/1/07 - 7/1/07
7/1/07 - 8/1/07
8/1/07 - 9/1/07
9/1/07 - 10/1/07
10/1/07 - 11/1/07
11/1/07 - 12/1/07
12/1/07 - 1/1/08
1/1/08 - 2/1/08
2/1/08 - 3/1/08
3/1/08 - 4/1/08
4/1/08 - 5/1/08
5/1/08 - 6/1/08
6/1/08 - 7/1/08
7/1/08 - 8/1/08
8/1/08 - 9/1/08
9/1/08 - 10/1/08
10/1/08 - 11/1/08
11/1/08 - 12/1/08
12/1/08 - 1/1/09
1/1/09 - 2/1/09
2/1/09 - 3/1/09
3/1/09 - 4/1/09
4/1/09 - 5/1/09
5/1/09 - 6/1/09
6/1/09 - 7/1/09
7/1/09 - 8/1/09
8/1/09 - 9/1/09
9/1/09 - 10/1/09
10/1/09 - 11/1/09
11/1/09 - 12/1/09
12/1/09 - 1/1/10
1/1/10 - 2/1/10
2/1/10 - 3/1/10
3/1/10 - 4/1/10
4/1/10 - 5/1/10
5/1/10 - 6/1/10
6/1/10 - 7/1/10
7/1/10 - 8/1/10
8/1/10 - 9/1/10
9/1/10 - 10/1/10
10/1/10 - 11/1/10
11/1/10 - 12/1/10
12/1/10 - 1/1/11
1/1/11 - 2/1/11
2/1/11 - 3/1/11
3/1/11 - 4/1/11
4/1/11 - 5/1/11
5/1/11 - 6/1/11
6/1/11 - 7/1/11
7/1/11 - 8/1/11
8/1/11 - 9/1/11
9/1/11 - 10/1/11
10/1/11 - 11/1/11
11/1/11 - 12/1/11
12/1/11 - 1/1/12
1/1/12 - 2/1/12
2/1/12 - 3/1/12
3/1/12 - 4/1/12
4/1/12 - 5/1/12
5/1/12 - 6/1/12
6/1/12 - 7/1/12
7/1/12 - 8/1/12
8/1/12 - 9/1/12
9/1/12 - 10/1/12
10/1/12 - 11/1/12
11/1/12 - 12/1/12
12/1/12 - 1/1/13
1/1/13 - 2/1/13
2/1/13 - 3/1/13
3/1/13 - 4/1/13
4/1/13 - 5/1/13
5/1/13 - 6/1/13
Monday, April 25, 2005
Thermonuclear option
One of the signs of serious blog addiction is that I am interested in the Republicans' efforts to claim that they never called the nuclear option "the nuclear option". One of the more clever efforts (won't bother finding the link) is the suggestion that it is only called the nuclear option because of the fierceness of the Democrats' possible response. This is a problem. I think the Democrats' option of full court obstructioninsm needs its own name. How about the thermonuclear option.
The Republicans want to call the nuclear option "the constitutional option." Clearly aside from trying the press to adapt to their change in spin (again) they are pushing for a totally biased phrase. In fact, the nuclear option is close to unconstitutional. The rules of the Senate are supposed to be made by the Senate and the Senate has decided that they can only be changed by a super majority. The nuclear option consists of making a huge change in the rules by claiming that it is not a change. The plan is (or was if they are chickening out) for Cheney to declare that filibusters are currently not allowed in debates on approval of judicial nominations and for a simple marjority to confirm (dishonestly) that his (dishonest) reading of the current rules is accurate.
It is worth noting that a ban on filibusters would require a definition of a filibuster, which is impossible, since any minute of a good filibuster is indistinguishable from normal debate.
Comments:
Post a Comment
