709
Booker Today During His Ongoing 22+ Hour Filibuster
(i.imgur.com)
Booker: "I confess that I have been imperfect. I confess that I've been inadequate to the moment. I've confess that the Democratic Party has made terrible mistakes that gave a lane to this demagogue. I confess we all must look in the mirror and say 'we will do better.'"
Is it even filibustering if he's not trying to stop any laws being passed?
I'd argue no. I'm kind of confused. I guess it's a prolonged speech protesting the actions of the admin in general? I somewhat applaud the push back by any member of congress, but I feel like it's a wasted gesture if it isn't specifically filibustering an important bill. This just seems like a publicity stunt rather than a meaningful action of resistance.
Its blocking all movement on the floor. Which slows all the garbage they are trying to push through.
I wouldn't call it a wasted gesture.
But why not wait to filibuster an actual policy as both a protest against the admin itself, and to call attention to, and spark outcry, about the policy? It still seems like a waste to not time this type of once in a lifetime event with a particular action by the admin. I feel like if he's going to do something like this, especially something historic which will get people paying attention, why not use all that attention to it's maximum potential? The garbage is still going to be pushed through eventually, but if he were doing it at the moment that a garbage policy was being pushed through it would call much more attention to it and create more pushback from people.
Because then theyd be waiting rather than doing? Because this isnt a filibuster, but they can still actually filibuster should something come up?
Because one does not preclude the other?
I didn't say one did preclude the other. My point is that if you're going to do something historic that, by it's unusual and uncommon nature, gets you more attention then usual, why wouldn't you use that gesture to BOTH protest, and filibuster a bill that will put more attention on the bill because of the historic nature of the filibuster?
And yes, by all means, continue to filibuster and stymie the admin's progress by filibustering whenever possible. However, the American public are notoriously short of attention, especially when something has already been done before, that subsequent filibusters won't have the same impact as the original, especially when you have outlets like Fox that can just spin it towards being not worth notice because "same old shit by the dems". People will eventually tune out, and the opportunity to really amp up the pressure on the Republicans will be lost.
.... Or do both, and break your own record?
I dont know about you, but I prefer something to nothing. And I will continue to support anyone being against what Trump is doing. So I'm not going to disparage him for this. I have plenty of things to complain about with Booker. This isn't one of them.
To each their own I guess.
That's my point, you can break your own record, but the media and public will be desensitized to it after the first time, sadly most people will tune out after the novelty has passed.
I'm not disparaging him, as much as I am calling into question the timing of it. Any pushback at all is welcome, but it just seems to me to be poorly timed in terms of effectiveness.
I guess we'll see what kind of effect this has afterwards and if it has a positive outcome.
I would think the novelty would be in doing it twice.
But that's just my opinion.