In a headline. I guess if that’s all you ever read, it’s no surprise that you come out with these hilarious whoppers.

It was all the Republicans fault — they used their evil mind control rays to make Harry Reid debate all night rather than proceeding with the cloture vote.

Funny, I’m pretty sure that’s not at all what I said. But it’s fairly rich to complain that Harry Reid sat up all night resisting the Republican attempt to block an up-or-down vote, instead of capitulating right away.

Spin all you want, but spin doesn’t change the facts.

The fact is, Republicans couldn’t defeat the amendment with an up-or-down vote, so they used the same filibuster that they were so bitterly complaining about not 2 years ago.

If there was no filibuster, Jay, then why didn’t the amendment come up for an up-or-down vote? Why was it defeated in cloture?

The majority party can’t filibuster, by definition.

Which is why the Democrat’s plan was called a “faux filibuster”.

They don’t have to, because they can win the up-or-down vote. Republicans refused to allow the amendment to come to an up-or-down vote, because they didn’t have the votes to defeat it; thus, they filibustered it.

Yes, that’s right. It was all the Republicans fault — they used their evil mind control rays to make Harry Reid debate all night rather than proceeding with the cloture vote.

Again, you can have your own opinions, but not your own facts. There was no Republican filibuster, this was a Democratic stunt, and if you want to make a ridiculous argument, fine, but it just makes you look like a fool. Reid was the one who wanted to hold the Senate all night, it was his choice, and it was his procedural moves. He knew he couldn’t win, so he decided to placate MoveOn.org — that wasn’t the GOP’s decision, and Senator McConnell called for a cloture vote at the beginning of the night. Spin all you want, but spin doesn’t change the facts.

Did you stop there? Apparently. Because if you’d gone on:

WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats are planning an all-night session Tuesday, daring Republicans to engage in an old-fashioned filibuster over Iraq troop withdrawals rather than just threatening one.

First paragraph in the article. (And it’s actually spelled “pwn3d”. Which is what I just did to you.) The majority party can’t filibuster, by definition. They don’t have to, because they can win the up-or-down vote. Republicans refused to allow the amendment to come to an up-or-down vote, because they didn’t have the votes to defeat it; thus, they filibustered it.

The one that everyone acknowledges got it completely backwards? Why would I do that? Here’s a much better article:

The headline of which reads “Senate Democrats plan faux filibuster to pressure Republicans on Iraq”?

Normally I prefer a more erudite response, but all that’s required is this:

pwned.

Right. It’s a filibuster when you vote no on cloture, because debate continues – blocking the up-or-down passage of the bill.

It’s not that complicated, Jay, and there’s a reason why nearly everybody on both the right and the left is calling this a Republican filibuster – because that’s exactly what it is.

Again, read The Washington Post article.

The one that everyone acknowledges got it completely backwards? Why would I do that? Here’s a much better article:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/18016.html

This whole thing could have been over in an hour, had Reid not wanted to stage his show.

The point was to try to convince some Republicans to vote for cloture, instead of blocking it, so that the amendment could pass with the simple majority that it already had.

But the Republicans filibustered, blocked cloture, and the amendment died because they couldn’t get 60 votes. That’s filibuster. This isn’t that complicated, honestly. Here, look:

In the Senate, unlike the House of Representatives, the minority party can slow or block the passage of controversial bills through the threat of endless debate, known as a filibuster. If the minority insists, the party in power needs 60 of 100 votes rather than a simple majority to cut off that debate and move to a final vote.

See? Saying it wasn’t a Republican filibuster is just nonsensical.

That’s what I said – they blocked cloture by voting against it.

Which is a cloture vote, not a filibuster.

When you vote against cloture you’re voting to continue debate, and filibuster is when you prevent a simple majority vote by preventing the vote from coming up by continuous debate.

Except the vote was to kill the amendment, not continue debate.

The Republicans didn’t do anything. Senator Reid chose to hold the Senate in overnight to prolong the vote. There’s no reason why he had to do that other than to make a political point. Your attempts to lay the blame for this little publicity stunt on the Republicans is completely false — this was a procedural move by Harry Reid, not the Republicans. Again, read The Washington Post article.

Or just look at the Congressional Record — Senator McConnell brought a floor motion to invoke cloture before the debate even began, which Reid tried to extend for political purposes. The vote could have happened right then and there, but Reid deliberately extended the debate to play to the anti-war base.

This was Reid’s doing, and no amount of spin can undo the facts. The Republicans pushed for a cloture vote, but Reid decided to extend debate despite the fact that he knew he couldn’t win. This whole thing could have been over in an hour, had Reid not wanted to stage his show.

That’s what I said – they blocked cloture by voting against it.

When you vote against cloture you’re voting to continue debate, and filibuster is when you prevent a simple majority vote by preventing the vote from coming up by continuous debate.

It’s filibuster, plain and simple. How hard is this to understand?

that makes Granma look like a fount of journalistic objectivity

You can impugn the credibility of Media Matters all you like, but the only information I got from them was their mission statement, because we were talking about their mission. If there’s something that disqualifies them from being credible about their own stated purpose you have yet to explain what exactly that is.

The Republicans filibustered the Democratic bill for withdrawl. That’s a matter of procedural fact. When you vote against cloture, you’re filibustering. It’s funny how, after complaining endlessly between 2000 and 2006 about Democrats filibustering judges, you – and the rest of the so-called “liberal” media – seem to have forgotten the word, entirely.

C’mon now, Jay. Refusing to vote for cloture is filibuster, and that’s exactly what Republicans did – blocked the cloture vote.

No, they did vote for cloture. The cloture vote failed, 52-47. Again, from The Washington Post:

Senate Democratic leaders are planning a rare all-night session tonight, employing theatrics and scheduling votes that they hope will chip away at Republican resolve to back President Bush’s Iraq war strategy.

This was entirely Reid’s doing, and it was a cheap trick that had no chance of success — the only reason why Reid scheduled it was to appease the MoveOn.org crowd.

That’s filibuster. Try not to pretend that IOKIYAR, ok? It was a Republican filibuster because it was the Republicans blocking the cloture vote. All Reid did was highlight that.

No, it wasn’t. You’re entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts. The cloture vote could have taken place earlier, but Senator Reid chose to pull an all-nighter first.

I wouldn’t have presumed that a law student would need to have Senate procedures explained to him.

And I would presume that someone who admits to getting their information from Media Matters — that makes Granma look like a fount of journalistic objectivity — would have a complete lack of understanding about what’s really going on in Washington.

Stop reading propaganda and pick up a newspaper — a democracy requires an informed citizenry, not one that’s been brainwashed.

C’mon now, Jay. Refusing to vote for cloture is filibuster, and that’s exactly what Republicans did – blocked the cloture vote.

That’s filibuster. Try not to pretend that IOKIYAR, ok? It was a Republican filibuster because it was the Republicans blocking the cloture vote. All Reid did was highlight that.

I wouldn’t have presumed that a law student would need to have Senate procedures explained to him.

Yeah, but Karl Rove tricked him. Again!!

No offense but I think you misspelled “Republican filibuster.”

Except for the fact that it wasn’t — nobody held up the floor vote other than Senator Reid, who knew he was going to lose. The whole thing was Senator Reid’s idea: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/16/AR2007071601597.html

No offense but I think you misspelled “Republican filibuster.”