Wednesday, October 03, 2012

Daily Wanker Robert Stein


Brad shares his twitter stream. An excerpt

J. Bradford DeLong ‏@delong: @BobStein_FT Dems could defeat filibuster 7/7-8/1/09, 11/9/09, and 9/25/09-2/4/09. Did an awful lot of Senate business in those <5 mos="mos" p="p">
Robert Stein ‏@BobStein_FT: @delong Wrong. You're only counting Dems. Specter was a pro-O vote even before he switched. No reason not to count him.
J. Bradford DeLong ‏@delong: @BobStein_FT Don't start tweets "wrong"--especially when you r wrong. Dems had 58. Specter gives them 59. Franken seated on 7/7 makes 60
Robert Stein ‏@BobStein_FT: @delong it's not the length of time they're formally seated...u can anticipate & do legis spade work and wait for formal votes when they r.

So first Stein starts a contribution to a discussion of a "length of time" with "wrong".  Then when it is pointed out that his argument is totally wrong and based on shocking ignorance, he declares the topic irrelevant. 
Also Stein considers it obvious that Coleman couldn't possibly win an election although he had more votes on the initial count and after the recanvasing.  Or rather the time when it became clear that Franken would eventually be seated is irrelevant because ... shut up.
It gets worse

Robert Stein @BobStein_FT: @delong You are a fool. That rule itself can be repealed w/ 50 votes. Talk to someone who understands how Congress works.
Now Stein has resorted to noting that when newly seated the Senate doesn't have to adopt the old rules and can adopt brand new rules.  But wait the original topic was the importance of having at least 60 seats in the Senate.  When a new Senate convenes 50 senators and the vice President can declare that 50 votes are enough for cloture and that 30 seconds not 30 hours of floor time are required for cloture motions to mature.  In fact they could declare that one vote is enough for cloture if they wanted. 

The change a rule with 50 votes argument is not a discussion of the rules of the Senate.  It is a declaration that they are irrelevant provided 50 Senators and the vice President decide to make them irrelevant on the first day of a new Senate.  
What a wanker.
I think tht the reaction of someone who should be expert and displays his ignorance by changing the subject and insulting the person who noted his ignorance has earned a response beyond Brad's and mine.  


No comments: