Obama: Filibuster Harming Democracy

Reader Comments
Back to blog

It is a uniquely American tradition- every party in a position to utilize this tactic -has.This is more proof of the Obama's intent to use our system to destroy it from within.

Geoff of DE 9:15PM December 28, 2009

Any News outfit that features articles from this man and Robert Reich on a regular basis is doing nothing but showing it's true political colors. Fat chance that we are going to see any articles from Rush or Hannity coming from U.S. News and World Report any time soon. They are too far right. But ridiculous diatribes from the far left are a regular offering from this Democratic sounding board. You need to drop the News from your name guys. How about "U.S. Far Left and Progressive Report". If you bothered to check the latest polls you would see that over 60% of the U.S. public now think that Congress is on the wrong course and leading us over a financial cliff. A Filibusters are our only shot at stopping this "Progressives Gone Wild" congressional horror film.

Biased US News of FL 8:00PM December 28, 2009

JDZ57 of WI wrote: "The Repubulicans are on pace to shatter the record for the number of times the filibuster will be used . . ."
Perhaps, but the record will likely only stand until 2010. At which point, the pendulum will swing to the otherside and Dems will be the ones filibustering. At which point THEY will be the ones that "shatter" any and all records.
How can anyone have a meaningful discussion with you when you fail to acknowledge that Dems historically have used the filibuster as much as Republicans and fail to even address the blatant point I made.
Perhaps I need to make my saliet point even more blatently obvious:
Filibuster use became more prevalent as constituents became better informed and thus more involved.
Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely. The party in power has always disliked the filibuster because it keeps them in check. Republicans didn't like it when the Dems did it and now the Dems don't like it when the Republicans do it.
Obama particularly does not like it because it slows his goal to turn the United States into a socialist confederacy. I'll even help him find a name for his liberal, utopian vision; SCAM (Socialist Confederacy of AMerica) and the motto of his new world order will be "Arbeit Macht Frie."

david of ID 4:41PM December 28, 2009

Do any of you really believe there is a difference in democrats and republicans, as it relates to being politicians? They are both the same in terms of lying and taking kickbacks, the only fundamental difference is daggone abortion, the right to have guns and the belief in treating minorities equally, other than that, what's the difference. AS long as men and women have genitals they are going to get together, period! Guns have been known to kill innocent people, even by over zealous want to be law abiding repubs, but the overcompensation theory abounds with republican men, you needs a big gun and a big truck to back up those big mouth's they have. As far as race, it's a wrap, they will never accept blacks in any form or of any status, it's easy to see that they use the word "liberal" in the same connotation as they used to use the phrase "N***er Lover," what's sad is they only espouse it online behind their computers or in groups of other hate-mongers, that's funny because they claim to be such big strong men, but hide like cowards behind the computers. This should really get their bloods boiling!

Mitchell of NC 3:59PM December 28, 2009

Let's do it this way. So far, the GOP has filibustered 106 items includung appointments by this President. The party of no has shown that this is how they intend to legislate for President Obama's terms. All we do is keep track of the total number, then if and when a Republican takes the Whitehouse, the Democrats respond with the equal number of nonsensical objections. At which point we will hear the Republicans howl at how unfair the Democrats are being. And for David of ID. The Repbulicans are on pace to shatter the record for the number of times the filibuster will be used, so you are nothing more then a black kettle.

JDZ57 of WI 2:32PM December 28, 2009

Does anybody else see the irony of Mr. Schlesinger calling people clowns? I mean, he's the one with the Bobo bow tie & funny hairdo. A red rubber nose is all that is missing.
His missed lesson in "glass houses" aside...
I wonder how many articles he'll write decrying the mis-use of filibuster AFTER the GOP landslide elections scheduled for Nov. 2010?
Although his timing tips his unabashed left bias and transparent hypocracy, Mr. Schlesinger does have a point. There is an obvious solution, however. Changed the rules back that forces a person to actually stand and talk. This would ensure it's use only in truly important issues as much of the congress is made up of lazy arrogant types who would be willing to spend little time actively filibustering on the floor.

R. Miller of ID 2:16PM December 28, 2009

That is what the filibuster is doing now. The Dems are railroading bills through that the American people do not want. The elistist Dems don't give a damn what the people think. They know best in their little perverted brains.
The minority party has to use the tools available. Leave it alone. Our Founding Fathers knew what they were doing and understood the human condition pretty well.
We do not need a dictatorship!

Fed Up of IN 2:08PM December 28, 2009

If you don't learn about history, you're doomed to repeat it. So your premise, Bob Schlesinger, is that we didn't filibuster in the 1950's so therefore we should not filibuster now?! That's about the lamest thing I ever heard.
Ask any American this simple question: Do you expect your congressional representative to use every tool at their disposal to represent you in Congress? The resounding answer, I suspect would be yes, which, incidently, Schlesinger, includes the filibuster.
Not using the filibuster would be akin to a builder not using his hammer, or his saw. So why didn't Congress use the filibuster tool more since the 1950's. I doubt it was all out of decorum or decency. I doubt it was "tit for tat"; you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. I was because of technology and history.
Technology has given the average American more insight and knowledge with regard to Congress than we had in the 1950's. Now, because of the internet and a plethora of more and better/accurate news sources, Americans are more aware than ever, and, as a result, more involved than we were in the 1950's. That means that congressional representatives are getting an ear full from constituents about legislation BEFORE it's voted on. Consequently, those representatives, if they want to be re-elected, are more apt to be responsive to constituents. Hence, if they want to be re-elected then they better be using every tool at their disposal. Thus the frequent use of the filibuster.
Understand, Bob, that Congress has a history and they have learned that can't trust each other. Look at the back room dealing and midnight legislation on this health care mess and how ALL Senators blindly voted YEA or NAY on this monumental/sweeping legislation. Look at Specter changing parties, Olympia Snow being a traitor, Nelso/Landrieu selling their vote for extra-ordinary concessions. So, based on that trust, or lack thereof, I understand why Congress is more inclined to utilize the filibuster than they were in 1950 and I'm inclined to believe that both parties, if they had it to do all over again, would have used the filibuster more.
And, why throw Obama in the mix, Bob? Who cares what Obama thinks about the filibuster? He's no longer affiliated with the legislative branch. And really, what does the former freshman Senator from Illinois know about filibuster? He spent most, if not all, of his time in Congress schemeing to be president.
Consequently, what I read/take from your comments, Bob, is that Dems/Obama like the filibuster when, and only when, it's advantageous for them. Understand, Bob, that Dems have historically, used the filibuster as much as Republicans. Take caution before you call the kettle black.

david of ID 1:43PM December 28, 2009

Kevina, you are quite amusing! Whose crying, besides you internally, since Obama won the presidency? Your imaginary knowledge and your little man complex do not escape me, in fact you have a shot at backwoods comedy circuit. Jim-bob and elroy would find your brand of comedy hysterical. I am sure you could entertain a neo-nazi group, man your potential isunlimited! Thanks for the inspiration...Loser! 2010 it may or may not happen as you seeit, but one thing for sure is, no matter what happens in the next election you better thank your dad for that inheritance, because you were obviously skipping school and smoking dope, because you are quite dopel, little man. Continue to over compensate or just face it, you are one of the teenie Ween**s, so grab a white robe and pointed hat and continue to look sharp and impress your trailer park hoochies!

Mitchell of NC 6:06PM December 27, 2009

Michelle would then agree with the idea of removing health insurance from employers putting all that money into workers pockets and allowing individuals to buy health insurance from any company, requiring only catastrophic insurance, (why is liposuction paid under insurance (except for life saving conditions), why are sniffles covered under insurance) pay out of pocket. An idea that was presented but of course as a democrat i'm sure you will totally ignore it and claim boo hoo hoo, no one else makes any recommendation.
Lisa, would you agree to mandating insurance companies can not deny coverage for preexisting coverage and dropping coverage if someone is sick in a life savings situation.
demonphats need to stop claiming they are for individual responsobilites as long as someone else pays for everything and everyone who can't. boo hoo hoo, it's not fair that someone saw an opportunity for advancement and put in the long hours to better themselves. Thank god Republicans will take over next year and stop all the problems congress have shoved down our throats. per Democrats, my baby's momma must have someone else pay for her breast enlargement because after five kids they be starting to sag and because I am crying so loud about mine mine mine I can't hear anyone else give a recommendation that will actually do some good.

Kevin S. of LA 5:46PM December 27, 2009