Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rekna
I have been following this story as i'm sure most of you have been. I have been trying to figure out why they need 2/3rds vote in order to end the debate? Is this essentially a fillibuster? And if so could the democrats threaten to go 'Nuclear' as the GOP did with judicial nominations?
|
Democrats made a tatical error. They should have forced the debate during the Patrous confirmation rather than rubber stamping a general who supports Bush's plan. Or, it is possible that they did not really want to go on record. They rationalized the Patrous vote and they knew they did not have the votes on the non-binding resolution without Republican support. Their games either back-fired or they accomplished exactly what they wanted.