No Debate?

By Joe Klein | @JoeKleinTIME | February 5, 2007 | +

I just spoke with a prominent Democratic member of the Senate who is worried that the anti-surge forces won’t be able to muster the 60 votes necessary to open debate this evening on the Warner resolution to oppose the President’s policies in Iraq.

If so, the Republicans are going to have to explain what they have against free speech…

2:07 PM Update: Harry Reid is on the floor of Senate saying the Republicans have refused all deals on staging a debate…”The minority…has decided to stamp out debate. America demands more than filibuster on the President’s flawed plan.”

2:14PM: Did I just hear Reid say, “According to the Republican leader, all Republicans will vote not to proceed” with the debate? That seems weird: Warner will vote against debating his own proposal?

2:20 PM–Mitch McConnell, Republican leader, has called this “a bump in the road…and aa fairness vote.” Apparently, he wants all resolutions subjected to 60 vote majority

2:25 PM–Reid: why not a simple up or down vote on each of the resolutions–Warner, McCain, Gregg (which would posit that the Senate will not cut off support for the troops).

3 pm–Apparently there will be a debate on whether or not to have a debate at 4pm, and aa vote at 5:30 pm…I’ll be back at 4 pm.

Related Topics: Uncategorized

@TIMEPolitics

Latest on Swampland

Housing February 10, 2012

The Foreclosure Deal: Obama and the Banks Win Big While Homeowners See Modest Reward

Those of you who have read our previous coverage of the back and forth between the state attorneys general and five major mortgage servicers know that the settlement announced on Thursday is a massive, complicated, multi-year deal negotiated by the country’s most ambitious public prosecutors, its most powerful financial institutions and some of the highest-paid lawyers in New York City. There are several levels to judge it on: the help it gives homeowners; its benefit for various political players; and what it may do for the economy. But overall, it’s a clear win for Obama and Democrats, a qualified win for the banks, and a minor, belated victory for homeowners.
From our Partners
Romney: 'I Misspoke'HuffPost Politics

Did Obama Just Declare Victory in Afghanistan?Slate
Santorum Gives Health Update On DaughterHuffPost Politics
Mitt Romney February 9, 2012

Mitt Romney’s Sweet Spot: Just Conservative Enough

Why is Mitt Romney having trouble winning over the conservative Republican base? One reason is his lack of political finesse, an air of dorky rich-guy aloofness that reminds some people of John Kerry. More important, however, is his ideological profile. In almost every important way, Romney’s policy platform is more moderate than those of Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum. Gingrich offers a much more conservative tax plan, along with crowd-pleasing ideas like his plan to sic federal marshals on “radical” liberal judges. Santorum carries a blazing social-conservative torch, championing ideas like a constitutional ban on abortion. Both Gingrich and Santorum talk quite openly about the virtues of bombing Iran. Romney’s temperature runs cooler in all these areas. Not to mention his past record of pro-choice, pro-gay rights positions. As Jon Chait notes today, the GOP establishment is defending Romney but also working hard to push him to the right.