Friday Open Thread | 60s Genre Music| Funk R & B Sexy & SOULFUL

Happy Friday, Everyone! Hope you’ve been enjoying the music of the 1960s.

Today’s 3 Chics features the music of FUNK, SEX, & SOUL

The Soul Children was an American vocal group who recorded soul music for Stax Records in the late 1960s and early 1970s. They had three top ten hits on the U.S. Billboard R&B chart – “The Sweeter He Is” (1969), “Hearsay” (1972), and “I’ll Be The Other Woman” (1973) – all of which crossed over to the Hot 100.

The group was formed in 1968 by Isaac Hayes and David Porter of Stax Records in Memphis, Tennessee, after one of the label’s top acts, Sam & Dave, left Stax to join the Atlantic label. As leading songwriters and producers for the label, Hayes and Porter put together a vocal group with two male and two female singers, all of whom sang lead on some of the group’s recordings. The original members were Norman West, John Colbert (aka J. Blackfoot), Anita Louis, and Shelbra Bennett. Colbert – who had been known from childhood as Blackfoot for his habit of walking barefoot on the tarred sidewalks of Memphis during the hot summers – had recorded solo singles before joining The Bar-Kays as lead singer, after four original band members were killed with Otis Redding in a plane crash. Anita Louis was a backing singer on some of the records produced by Hayes and Porter. Shelbra Bennett had recently joined the label as a singer. Norman West, Jr., the last to join the group, grew up in Louisiana, and sang in church with his brothers Joe, James, and Robert. He replaced William Bell as a member of The Del-Rios in 1962, later recorded several unsuccessful solo singles in Memphis, and sang with a rock band, Colors Incorporated, which had been formed by members of Jerry Lee Lewis’ band.[1]

Nina Simone

I Want a Little Sugar In My Bowl

About these ads

About Ametia

I am a Spiritual traveler, a devoted wife, mother, sister, lover of dream study, reading, theater, music, dance, and thought-provoking discussions on love, life, humor and service.
This entry was posted in Current Events, Media, Music, Open Thread, Politics and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

88 Responses to Friday Open Thread | 60s Genre Music| Funk R & B Sexy & SOULFUL

  1. rikyrah says:

    first lady ladies home journal 2013
    First Lady Michelle Obama by Alexei Hay for Ladies Home Journal Dec 2013/Jan 2014.

  2. rikyrah says:

    The new meanness
    By Liberal Librarian

    One of the most popular shows on television is CBS’ “Two and a Half Men”. And I’ve often wondered at its popularity.

    It is a very well-written and acted show, as far as it goes. But if you watch it for any length of time, you come away with a wretched taste in your mouth. It is, without a doubt, a show with characters who have no redeeming qualities. Everyone is gleefully mean to everyone else, reveling in cutting barbs and casual humiliation. Obviously, it’s a comedy painted in broad strokes, as sitcoms normally are. However, if you watch it on your local station in reruns before the prime time schedule comes on, you’ll be forgiven for wondering why anyone should give a damn about what happens to any of the show’s characters.

    And yet, for more than a decade it has been one of the most popular shows on television. Before Charlie Sheen melted down, he was the highest paid actor on TV thanks to it. Millions of people tune in to watch a weekly display of dysfunction so severe that suspension of disbelief becomes increasingly difficult.

    Obviously, you can’t judge an entire culture by the popularity of one television show. But here is another data point. Bloomberg has an article helpfully entitled “Obamacare Shows How Americans Are Becoming Jerks“. From the piece:

    What’s clear is that the shifting views on health care predate the Affordable Care Act. The number of Americans who think health care is the government’s responsibility hovered around two-thirds for the first half of the 2000s, peaking at 69 percent in 2006. Then those numbers started falling, hitting 50 percent in 2010 and 42 percent this year.

    The shrinkage of American generosity during that period wasn’t just about health care. The onset of the recession corresponded with a change in public opinion on a range of issues, and in most cases the effect was to make Americans less caring about others.

    Starting in 2007, the portion of Americans who said the government should guarantee every person enough to eat and a place to sleep started falling, from 69 percent to 59 percent last year. People who said the government should help the needy, even if it means going deeper into debt, fell from 54 percent to 43 percent over the same period.

    http://theobamadiary.com/2013/11/22/the-new-meanness/

  3. A dance-off broke out between a Detroit usher and a young fan when the Pistons played the Knicks on Tuesday night.

  4. rikyrah says:

    Learned this from Maddow last night:

    The Federal Judiciary contains 390 judges appointed by Democratic Presidents.

    The Federal Judiciary contains 390 judges appointed by Republican Presidents.

    There are currently 93 open spots….and now, the President gets to fill them.

  5. rikyrah says:

    About the killing of the filibuster…

    Between the previous 43 White Presidents, there were 86 Presidential Appointees.

    Since President Barack Obama took office, there have been 82 of his nominees blocked.

    Previous 43 White Presidents=86

    President Barack Obama (1/20/2009-Present)=82

    and folks don’t see what the hell is wrong here?

  6. My son is in the kitchen cooking. I swear it smells like Pappadeaux’s in my house. mmmmm….

  7. Yahtc says:

    Jovan Mays – “Play Ball”


    Published on Nov 17, 2013 by Button Poetry
    Performing at the 2013 Great Plains Poetry Pile-Up.

  8. Ametia says:

    WATCH: Daily Show Offers Shopper Tips To Avoid Racial Profiling on Black Friday
    Hint: “Don’t be black.”

    http://www.alternet.org/video/watch-daily-show-offers-shopper-tips-avoid-racial-profiling-black-friday

  9. Yahtc says:

    Singing

    From the park you hear the happy sound of a carousel
    Mm-mm, you can almost taste the hot dogs and French fries they sell
    Under the boardwalk, down by the sea

    • Yahtc says:

      Sittin’ in the mornin’ sun
      I’ll be sittin’ when the evenin’ come
      Watching the ships roll in
      And then I watch ‘em roll away again, yeah

  10. Ametia says:

    KENNEDY-e830d4aa5d39db27430f6a70670036c9

    The United States Naval Academy Glee Club sings during a ceremony to mark the 50th anniversary of the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Friday, Nov. 22, 2013, at Dealey Plaza in Dallas. President Kennedy’s

  11. First Lady Michelle Obama Hosts the PCAH National Arts and Humanities Youth Program Awards

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/live

  12. Get him , Snoopy! The chair started it! :)

  13. Yahtc says:

    Kennedy White House had jitters ahead of 1963 March on Washington

    http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/28/politics/march-on-washington-kennedy-jitters/

  14. Ametia says:

    Juicy! Babyface Talks Divorce & More on ‘Oprah’s Next Chapter’ (Watch)

    As always, “Oprah’s Next Chapter” is something to look forward to.

    This coming Sunday’s edition is no exception because it features Kenneth “Baybyface” Edmonds.

    Oprah hangs with “Face” at his Los Angeles home and discusses, among other things, his upcoming duets album with Toni Braxton, Love, Marriage & Divorce (out in February).

    http://www.eurweb.com/2013/11/juicy-babyface-talks-divorce-more-on-oprahs-next-chapter-watch/

  15. rikyrah says:

    Democracy Returns to the Senate
    By THE EDITORIAL BOARD
    Published: November 21, 2013

    For five years, Senate Republicans have refused to allow confirmation votes on dozens of perfectly qualified candidates nominated by President Obama for government positions. They tried to nullify entire federal agencies by denying them leaders. They abused Senate rules past the point of tolerance or responsibility. And so they were left enraged and threatening revenge on Thursday when a majority did the only logical thing and stripped away their power to block the president’s nominees.

    In a 52-to-48 vote that substantially altered the balance of power in Washington, the Senate changed its most infuriating rule and effectively ended the filibuster on executive and judicial appointments. From now on, if any senator tries to filibuster a presidential nominee, that filibuster can be stopped with a simple majority, not the 60-vote requirement of the past. That means a return to the democratic process of giving nominees an up-or-down vote, allowing them to be either confirmed or rejected by a simple majority.

    The only exceptions are nominations to the Supreme Court, for which a filibuster would still be allowed. But now that the Senate has begun to tear down undemocratic procedures, the precedent set on Thursday will increase the pressure to end those filibusters, too.

    This vote was long overdue. “I have waited 18 years for this moment,” said Senator Tom Harkin, Democrat of Iowa.

    It would have been unthinkable just a few months ago, when the majority leader, Harry Reid, was still holding out hope for a long-lasting deal with Republicans and insisting that federal judges, because of their lifetime appointments, should still be subject to supermajority thresholds. But Mr. Reid, along with all but three Senate Democrats, was pushed to act by the Republicans’ refusal to allow any appointments to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, just because they wanted to keep a conservative majority on that important court.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/22/opinion/democracy-returns-to-the-senate.html?hp&rref=opinion&_r=1&

  16. TyrenM says:

    Happy Birthday to the woman who introduced me to the Black Blogosphere. Who shows up all over the place. Brangs the noize and the funk! I hope you have a great day…and weekend. Happy B earth Day Rikyrah.

  17. rikyrah says:

    @DebsWorldNY
    My Nanny from Ireland had more pictures of #JFK on her walls than her own family. When she spoke of him she always had a tear in her eye.

    • Ametia says:

      And there you have it! Me and my family feel the same way about the Obamas.

      My scrapbooks, paintings, framed photos, and other memorabilla are for me and my grandchildren.
      It’s history. They are HISTORY, and the Obamas will ALWAYS be a part of our family.

  18. rikyrah says:

    Does anyone hear watch Reign on the CW?

    I’ve gotten hooked on this show.

    • Ametia says:

      No I’ve never seen this show. Waht’s it about?

      • rikyrah says:

        set back in the time of Mary, Queen of Scots.

        it’s when a teenaged Mary finally goes to French Court, because she’s been engaged to the Prince of France since she was 6 years old.

        I admit…it’s nothing, but a soap opera. I was only gonna watch the premiere, but I keep on coming back..

        all the shenanigans that could be going on in a palace..

        here’s a hint…the King lives at French Court with his wife AND his mistress AND his bastard son by his mistress…they’re all there, like Kool and the Gang…LOL

  19. rikyrah says:

    @Ziggy_Daddy
    So wait, #Republicans want to delay #Obamacare because 1-2% of the uninsured might have to pay a little more for proper health coverage?

  20. rikyrah says:

    I love these weekly reviews:

    AFTERBUZZ TV — Scandal is a weekly “after show” for fans of ABC’s Scandal. In this show, host Emile Ennis Jr. breaks down the episode in which Josie’s campaign faces a potential crisis, so Olivia’s team attempt to manage it while also trying to get to the bottom of Operation Remington. Elsewhere, Cyrus fails to think of the collateral damage that could result from his plotting Sally’s downfall. There to help Emile are co-hosts Sofia Stanley, Kennelia Stradwick, and Bamm Ericsen. It’s Scandal’s “Vermont Is for Lovers, Too” podcast!

  21. rikyrah says:

    LUVVIE’S SCANDAL RECAP:

    ………………..

    Vermont is for Lovers, Too: Scandal Episode 308 Recap
    November 22, 2013 | Luvvie

    All the applause for Ava Duvernay, who directed this episode of Scandal, which made history! It was the first time a Black woman (Ava) directed a prime-time network TV drama created by a Black woman (Shonda Rhimes) and starring a Black woman (Kerry Washington). AND IT WAS PHENOMENAL!!!

    THANK YOU, AVA!!! YOU DID THAT, MA’AM!!!

    And with that, let’s get into the episode.

    http://www.awesomelyluvvie.com/2013/11/vermont-lovers-scandal-episode-308-recap.html

  22. rikyrah says:

    Georgia GOP dusts off Jim Crow tactic: Changing election date
    11/22/13

    For years, Augusta, Georgia, has held its local elections in November, when turnout is high. But last year, state Republicans changed the election date to July, when far fewer blacks make it to the polls.

    The effort was blocked under the Voting Rights Act (VRA) by the federal government, which cited the harm that the change would do to minorities. But now that the Supreme Court has badly weakened the landmark civil rights law, the move looks to be back on. The city’s African-Americans say they know what’s behind it.

    “It’s a maneuver to suppress our voting participation,” Dr. Charles Smith, the president of Augusta’s NACCP branch, told msnbc.

    The dispute is flaring at a time when Georgia, long deep-red, is becoming increasingly politically competitive, and Democrats have nominated two candidates with famous names for high-profile statewide races next year.

    http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/georgia-revives-jim-crow-tactic

  23. rikyrah says:

    De Blasio gets policing advice — from ex-cons
    By Frank Rosario and Natalie O’Neill
    November 21, 2013 | 8:27pm

    Forget Ray Kelly, Bill de Blasio is getting his policing advice from the real experts — hardened criminals.

    A group of 50 ex-cons, junkies and chronic vagrants gathered at a Manhattan “Think Tank” Thursday to describe what they thought the NYPD should be doing to make their lives easier.

    The felonious forum outlined a clear “get-soft-on-crime” vision.

    “I like the idea of ending stop and frisk. That was the first thing that was totally there for me,” opined Mikell Green-Grand, a 49-year-old former jailbird who has convictions for grand larceny and identity theft.

    http://nypost.com/2013/11/21/de-blasio-hearing-plenty-of-policing-advice-from-ex-cons/

  24. rikyrah says:

    WHAT-THE-FUCK?

    They can kiss my ENTIRE BLACK ASS with this bullshyt.

    ……………..

    How Michelle Obama became a feminist nightmare.
    By MICHELLE COTTLE
    Nov 21, 2013

    Coverage of the new program stressed that it marks a rare foray into policy by FLOTUS. The New York Times observed that many of Michelle Obama’s supporters have been itching for her to move beyond “evangelizing exercise and good eating habits,” noting that, despite her widespread popularity, the first lady has long “been derided by critics who hoped she would use her historic position to move more deeply into policy.”

    Don’t count on it. As President Obama claws his way through a second term, the sense of urgency for his well-educated wife to do more—to make a difference—may well be mounting. But that doesn’t mean it’s going to happen. In fact, East Wing officials I spoke with stress that Michelle Obama is not about to tap her inner wonk—she will focus on young people, not policy—and while the task of promoting higher ed may be new, speaking directly to kids is simply what Michelle does. Sure enough, in a sit-down with BET’s 106 & Park the week after the Education Department rollout, there was the first lady in full mom mode, lecturing students about nothing more politically controversial than the need to do their homework and get to school on time.

    So enough already with the pining for a Michelle Obama who simply doesn’t exist. The woman is not going to morph into an edgier, more activist first lady. The 2012 election did not set her free. Even now, with her husband waddling toward lame duck territory, she is not going to let loose suddenly with some straight talk about abortion rights or Obamacare or the Common Core curriculum debate. Turns out, she was serious about that whole “mom-in-chief” business—it wasn’t merely a political strategy but also a personal choice. “We got exactly what we were told we were going to get,” Jennifer Lawless, director of the Women & Politics Institute at American University, reminds me. “When the Obamas were campaigning in 2008, the American people were informed that she was going to primarily be taking care of her children.”

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2013/11/leaning-out-michelle-obama-100244.html#ixzz2lNuhDtMh

  25. rikyrah says:

    Lizz Winstead

    about 8 hours ago

    Questioning Michelle Obama’s feminism: From the presspool into the cesspool. #FailIsTooKind

    Wow. I don’t know where to begin on this. This is an article written by someone who decided to put her issues into other women’s mouths. And in Politico, AKA “The Fluffers for The Chamber of Commerce” no less.
    Good news is the only people who take this shit seriously are the Below The Beltway types the rest of the public ignore.
    We’ve seen this technique before on TV news interviews. The correspondent will say to the subject something like, “Some people have said you are a…” and then a list a slew of character assassinations that apparently “Some unnamed people” have said.This article feels like that. Except the sum total of “some people” is her.

    http://www.politico.co

    I think what makes me the maddest about the piece is that so many women are buried in low wage jobs, trying to feed kids, make ends meet and the first lady has dedicated her life to showing them they have an advocate and this writer not only is so profoundly tone deaf about how important that is, she feels it is a flaw!

    Now after you read this, and before you start stabbing your couch, please know that this same writer, was paid to write a piece crowning Sarah Palin as a new feminist icon. Thanks to @KateHarding for finding this gem.
    More at NPR ›
    Can’t decide who I am more disgusted with- The writer or Politico itself.

    http://sulia.com/channel/feminism/f/e46577f6-a381-43b5-ae7c-bb298ccb4bae/?source=fb

  26. rikyrah says:

    20/20 ✔ @ABC2020
    Follow
    .@BarbaraJWalters exclusively interviews @BarackObama and @FLOTUS in their first joint TV interview this year: @abc2020, Fri Nov 29th, 10pm.

    7:15 AM – 22 Nov 2013

  27. rikyrah says:

    hopefruit2
    November 22, 2013 at 8:13 am

    Now that Obamacare’s enrollment is on the upswing, and the ACA website is vastly improved, expect to see more propaganda polling from the media about people disliking “Obamacare” relative to the “Affordable Care Act.”

    Whenever the law seems to be doing well, the media wants to remind us that it is “The Affordable Care Act.” Whenever it seems to be doing not so well, the media calls it Obamacare….

    • Ametia says:

      There’s a poll out every sec about how PBO’s approval ratings are slipping. LOL That’s to take the attention off how LOW the media’s ratings have SLIPPED, to try and gain ratings for their reporting said PBO rating slippage. GOT IT?

  28. rikyrah says:

    Scandal….

    HUCK DOES NOT PLAY!!

  29. rikyrah says:

    GOP antics may lead to a ‘de-Americanized world’
    10/15/13 02:10 PM
    By Steve Benen

    When there’s a global economic crisis, investors from around the world have spent the last several generations doing one thing: they buy U.S. treasuries. The reasoning, of course, is that there is no safer investment, anywhere on the planet, than the United States of America – which has the strongest and largest economy on the planet, and which always pays its bills.

    All of these assumptions, of course, were cultivated over generations, and pre-date the radicalization of the Republican Party.

    But what happens when U.S. treasuries are no longer considered safe, Americans can no longer be counted on to pay its bills, and the nation’s most powerful economy chooses to default on purpose? The world starts reevaluating old assumptions, that’s what.

    In Britain, Jon Cunliffe, who will become deputy governor of the Bank of England next month, told members of Parliament that banks should be developing contingency plans to deal with an American default if one happens.

    And Chinese leaders called on a “befuddled world to start considering building a de-Americanized world.” In a commentary on Sunday, the state-run Chinese news agency Xinhua blamed “cyclical stagnation in Washington” for leaving the dollar-based assets of many nations in jeopardy. It said the “international community is highly agonized.”

    I know I’ve been pushing this thesis in recent weeks, but it’s important to remember the unique role the United States plays in global leadership and the extent to which Republican antics in Congress will change the dynamic that’s been stable for the better part of the last century.

    http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/gop-antics-may-lead-de-americanized?lite=

  30. rikyrah says:

    Once Again, Republican Obstinacy Bites Them in the Ass
    —By Kevin Drum
    | Thu Nov. 21, 2013 10:32 AM PST

    So, the filibuster. Did Harry Reid do the right thing getting rid of it for judicial and executive branch nominees?

    I’d say so. And yet, I think Republicans missed a bet here. I’ve never personally been a fan of the idea that the Senate’s raison d’être is to be the slowest, most deliberative, and most obstructive branch of government. Hell, legislation already has to pass two houses and get signed by a president and be approved by the Supreme Court before it becomes law. Do we really need even more obstacles in the way of routine legislating?

    Still, I’ll concede that my own feelings aside, the Senate really was designed with just that in mind. It wasn’t designed to be an automatic veto point for minority parties, but it was designed to slow things down and keep the red-hot passions of the mob at bay. So here’s what I wonder: why weren’t Republicans ever willing to negotiate a reform of the filibuster that might have kept it within the spirit of the original founding intent of the Senate?

    What I have in mind is a reform that would have allowed the minority party to slow things down, but would have forced them to pay a price when they did it. Because the real problem with the filibuster as it stands now is that it’s basically cost-free. All it takes to start a filibuster is a nod from any member of the Senate, which means that every bill, every judge, every nominee is filibustered. The minority party has the untrammeled power to stop everything, and these days they do.

    But what if filibusters came at a cost of some sort? There have been several proposals along these lines, and all of them would have allowed the minority party to obstruct things they truly felt strongly about. But there would have been a limit to how many things could be obstructed, or how long the obstruction could go on, and the majority party could eventually have gotten its way if it felt strongly enough. It would have been ugly, but at least Republicans would have retained some ability to gum up the works.

    Instead, by refusing to compromise in any way, they’ve lost everything. Just as they lost everything on health care by refusing to engage with Democrats on the Affordable Care Act. Just as they lost everything on the government shutdown and the debt ceiling. Just as they lost the 2012 election.

    http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/11/once-again-republican-obstinacy-bites-them-ass

  31. rikyrah says:

    Nine reasons the filibuster change is a huge deal
    By Ezra Klein, Published: November 21 at 1:22 pm

    1. The change the Senate made today is small but consequential: The filibuster no longer applies to judicial or executive-branch nominees. It still applies to bills and Supreme Court nominations.

    2. Well, technically it still applies to all bills and Supreme Court nominations. In practice, legislation that mainly uses the government’s tax and spending powers can evade the filibuster using the budget reconciliation procedures. That’s how George W. Bush’s tax cuts passed, and how Obamacare was finished. As for the Supreme Court, it’s very hard to believe that Democrats or Republicans would accept filibusters of qualified Supreme Court nominees, either. And, as Democrats proved today, they don’t have to.

    3. The filibuster now exists in what you might call an unstable equilibrium. It theoretically forces a 60-vote threshold on important legislation. But it can — and now, in part, has —been undone with 51 votes. Its only protection was the perceived norm against using the 51-vote option. Democrats just blew that norm apart. The moment one party or the other filibusters a consequential and popular bill, that’s likely the end of the filibuster, permanently.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/11/21/9-reasons-the-filibuster-change-is-a-huge-deal/

  32. rikyrah says:

    Did frustrated mainstream Republicans help pull the trigger?
    By Jonathan Bernstein
    November 21 at 4:48 pm

    The big mystery of today’s majority-imposed rules change in the Senate is: What happened to the deal-making Republicans?

    There’s nothing much to figure out on the Democratic side. It was clear to most observers that the three-seat blockade of the D.C. Circuit Court was solidly over the line separating Democratic senators’ individual preference for maintaining the filibuster and their party interest in seating a Democratic president’s choices for the federal bench. Democrats believed that they had no choice but to proceed.

    Republicans, however, certainly did have a choice. After all, in the short run, they’re clearly worse off by this change than they would be had they used the filibuster far more selectively. That was enough to get them to compromise the last time this happened. So why didn’t they hold back again?

    One possibility is that they simply miscalculated, believing that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) was bluffing. If that was the case, however, they could have backed off at the last second.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2013/11/21/did-frustrated-mainstream-republicans-help-pull-the-trigger/?clsrd

  33. rikyrah says:

    For liberals, a long crusade finally pays off in reform
    By Greg Sargent
    November 21 at 3:49 pm

    In 2007, when Jeff Merkley was considering a run for the Senate from Oregon, he met privately with Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer. Merkley suggested to the two Dem leaders that the Senate needed to reform the filibuster — having watched both parties, including Dems in 2005, abuse it so badly that it was rendering the Upper Chamber dysfunctional.

    “Harry Reid grabbed his head with both hands and proceeded to explain that the problem was not the rules but the behavior, and that we needed to return to the norms of the past,” Merkley told me by phone today.

    That meeting may have been the genesis of a long tale that culminated this afternoon, six years later, when Reid finally went nuclear and changed the rules by simple majority — after a years-long campaign in which Merkley and other Senate liberals were instrumental.

    The meeting underscores two important things about what happened today. First, for liberal reformers who have long wanted to dilute the filibuster’s grip on the Senate, this has never really been about partisanship. And second, it took literally years of pushing by reformers before the proper conditions were created to overcome objections to reform by the institution’s traditionalists.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/11/21/for-liberals-a-long-crusade-finally-pays-off-in-reform/

  34. rikyrah says:

    The Senate has gone nuclear. Here’s what’s next.
    By Jonathan Bernstein
    November 21 at 1:23 pm

    Harry Reid and the Democrats today have acted: we have majority-imposed rules change in the Senate, by a 52-48 vote. All Republicans opposed the change, and three Democrats — Joe Manchin, Mark Pryor, and Carl Levin — joined them. From now on, simple majorities will be sufficient to confirm executive branch and judicial nominees. Reid made an exception for Supreme Court nominees, but that’s surely a technicality; if and when a successful filibuster is conducted against a Supreme Court choice, it’s virtually certain that the exception will be closed.

    This is a major, major, event. It changes how the nation is governed in a significant way. That said, it’s not as if the Senate has been static since the last time filibuster rules were changed (at least in a major way) almost 40 years ago; most reform is incremental, and one could argue that the rules change today returns nominations closer to how things were done in the 1970s than they have been for the last decade, and especially during the Obama era. However, what’s more likely is that we’ll see a Senate that isn’t really like either of those bodies.

    This change was basically forced by Republicans; the interesting question, I think, is why the group of Republicans who weren’t willing to push the Democrats over the brink in the summer decided to do so now.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/11/21/the-senate-has-gone-nuclear-heres-whats-next/

  35. rikyrah says:

    Another reason for filibuster reform: It will help Dems crack down on Wall Street
    By Ryan Cooper
    November 21 at 12:24 pm

    The big news right this second is that Democrats have actually taken steps to break the filibuster for executive branch nominees and all judicial ones save to the Supreme Court. This is great news for many reasons, but a big one has to do with financial regulation. With Democrats on the D.C. Circuit Court, the rules in the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill (both existing and ones yet to be finalized) will have a much greater chance of surviving frivolous court challenges.

    The success of financial regulation is crucial to the success of the Democratic Party in the long term, particularly if the party is going to stake out a economically populist position. Filibuster reform may be a key ingredient in making that happen. At stake are the three empty seats on the D.C. Circuit Court. Today, either Republicans will cave and allow new judges to get a vote, or the filibuster reform will allow them to be seated with simple majority vote in the Senate.

    While writing good financial laws and regulations is important, any regulations are seriously handicapped by the power imbalance between the regulators on one side, and stupendously profitable financial companies and their loyal judges on the other. Reforming the filibuster is just one step in improving background conditions for regulators, so they are not so outmatched.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/11/21/another-reason-for-filibuster-reform-it-will-help-dems-crack-down-on-wall-street/

  36. rikyrah says:

    Good Morning, Everyone :)

    The music this week has been awesome!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s