” And the other part of it, as a conservative, I am extremely happy that the Democrats are doing this. The prospects are very strong that the Democrats are going to lose the Senate next year and there is an excellent chance of losing the White House. And the Democrats will absolutely rue the day because they not only are going to allow a Republican majority — which will come one day anyway — to get its nominees through, but Chuck Grassley has said that when Republicans come into you power, they’re going to include Supreme Court nominees, and that will be a devastating blow to the liberals on the Court and to the liberals in the country. So I don’t think Democrats will remember this day with any joy in the near future.”
Only time will tell if Mr Krauthammer is correct in his assumption , and to be fair it is a very commonly held assumption at this point , one that common sense tells us should be undeniably true . The only problem with the assumption that the Democrats will live to regret establishing the “nuclear option” as the new standard is the natural tendency for the GOP to blow every opportunity for political gain that has ever been dropped in their laps .
Incompetence is the only word that adequately describes the recent Republican caucuses and idiocy and fecklessness has a long and storied history in the party of Lincoln . If there is a way way to fail to score when you are feet from the end zone and all alone the Republicans are up to the task . The only fight the GOP seems capable of mounting is against their own upstart allies in the Tea Party .
” Conservatives are outraged over Harry Reid pulling the trigger on the so-called nuclear option in the Senate, making it impossible for Republicans to stop President Obama from nominating anyone he wants to positions in the government.
But some on the right are finding comfort in the theory that Reid’s legislative maneuver could actually make it easier for Republicans to eventually repeal Obamacare — if all the pieces come together in 2017.”
This easily falls into the “be careful what you wish for” category and it is amazing that the Democrats could be so short-sighted in their desire to approve a gaggle of lower court judges . They obviously want to pack the courts in an effort to shore up legal support for Obamacare but that only works with a presumption of a continued grasp on the reins of power . Are they really that confident that they will never be faced with a Republican majority that can now use the majority rule to their advantage ?
This whole messy proceeding leads one to one of two inescapable conclusions … either the Dem’s have more dirty tricks up their sleeves that they believe will maintain them in power for some time to come or they are truly delusional . Which do you suppose it is ? Say what you will about the Dems , and we have little positive to offer on their behalf , they are and always have been willing to fight … unlike their capitulation-prone opponents on the other side of the aisle . This should give us all pause to reflect and not be so confident that the invocation of the “nuke option” will turn around and bite the Dems on the a** .
As usual Mr Steyn is right on the mark regarding a societal lack of restraint …
” Restraint is an unfashionable concept these day, but it is the indispensable feature of civilized society. To paraphrase my compatriot George Jonas, punching a spinster’s lights out isn’t wrong because it’s illegal, it’s illegal because it’s wrong. But, in a world without restraints, what’s to stop you? If a certain percentage of your population feels no moral revulsion at randomly pulverizing fellow citizens for sport, a million laws will avail you naught: The societal safety lock is off.”
He continues with the corresponding lack of restrain oozing from the world’s “greatest deliberative body” as embodied by it’s ersatz ringleader , Dingy Harry Reid …
That’s “visceral man.” What about Lewis’s “cerebral man”? In free nations, self-restraint is required not only of the underclass but of the rulers, too. Harry Reid is an unlikely gang leader, but, for a furtive little rodent, he landed a knockout punch on America’s governing norms. Like the lil’ old lady, Mitch McConnell never saw it coming. One minute, the time-honored practice that judicial appointments required supermajorities was there; the next, it was lying on the ground dead. Yes, yes, I know Senate procedural rules aren’t quite as gripping as “polar-bearing.” But, as I said, a free society requires self-restraint at all levels. Forget the merits of Reid’s move to simple majority rule, and simply consider how he did it. “
Chaos In Washington Senate – Democrats Strip GOP Of Power – The Kelly File W/ Megyn Kelly
Published on Nov 21, 2013
” Grassley: If The Democrats Are Bent On Changing The Rules, I Say Go Ahead! There A Lot More Scalia’s & Thomas’s Out That We Love To Put On The Bench! Democrats Go “Nuclear” Senate Severely Limits Power Of Minority Chaos In Washington Senate – Democrats Strip GOP Of Power – The Kelly File W/ Megyn Kelly”
” As a number of Senate Republicans take a stand against Barack Obama’s nomination of far left judges, the chamber’s top Democrat wants to find a way to stop them. In an announcement Thursday, Majority Leader Harry Reid voiced his support of a rule change that would curtail the practice of filibustering.
For the minority party, filibusters are one of a handful of tactics available to make its position heard. Reid, on the other hand, said that such allowances have resulted in a “broken” Senate.
“It’s time to change the Senate before the institution becomes obsolete,” Reid said, noting that the chamber has “wasted hours and wasted days between filibusters.”
To think it was only one administration ago that the alleged “pederast” of the Senate was singing a different tune . Give a listen to Dingy’s explanation of why the filibuster rule is was an essential part of our republican , not democratic , form of government .
” Unfortunately, the Nevada senator seems to miss the point that debate on a particular issue is actually a congressional responsibility, not something that needs to be eradicated. Of course, leftist legislators rely on ramrodding laws and nominations that could not stand Republican scrutiny.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who many conservatives feel has been too moderate in his response to Reid regarding other issues, was emphatically opposed to his current proposal.”
Perhaps “Dingy Harry” could use a history lesson on the importance of the filibuster …
” While several leftist groups have joined in the push for this so-called “nuclear option,” McConnell explained that such support could backfire “a lot sooner than you think.”
Mr Reid needs to be reminded that the purpose of the filibuster is to prevent the tyranny of the majority that our forefathers were rightfully so concerned about , to allow the minority to be heard and that it is one of the very features of government that make ours a republic and not a simple democracy(mob rule) . He would also do well to recognize that he won’t be Senate Majority Leader forever , perhaps not past 2014 as a matter of fact and thus he should very carefully consider the precedent he is threatening to set . We all know what they say : ” payback is a b**ch” .
” Though Republicans are currently the minority party in the Senate, Democrat support of the unpopular ObamaCare law has caused the approval rates of many legislators to plummet. Should the GOP regain power of the chamber after next year’s midterm elections, that party would benefit from Reid’s rule change.
Predictions of a Republican-led Senate are certainly encouraging to millions of Americans fed up with the current direction of the nation; however, the fight to end Reid’s proposal has far more immediate implications.”
Why don’t we let Senator Reid himself explain to us the filibuster , it’s long history , it’s essential nature to the American form of governance and also regale us with a conversation that took place over two hundred years ago between George Washington and Thomas Jefferson on just why the filibuster is an absolute necessity for the protection of the republic .
The following is a speech delivered by Harry on the floor of the Senate and recorded into the record on May 18th , 2005 : We’ll let Mr Reid do the rest of the talking :
” Mr. President, yesterday morning I spoke here about a statement the Majority Leader issued calling the filibuster a “procedural gimmick.”
The Websters dictionary defines “gimmick” as – – “an ingenious new scheme or angle.” No Mr. President, the filibuster is not a scheme. And it is not new.
The filibuster is far from a “procedural gimmick.” It is part of the fabric of this institution. It was well known in colonial legislatures, and it is an integral part of our country’s 217 years of history.
The first filibuster in the U.S. Congress happened in 1790. It was used by lawmakers from Virginia and South Carolina who were trying to prevent Philadelphia from hosting the first Congress.
Since 1790, the filibuster has been employed hundreds and hundreds of times.
Senators have used it to stand up to popular presidents. To block legislation. And yes – even to stall executive nominees.
The roots of the filibuster can be found in the Constitution and in the Senate rules.
In establishing each House of Congress, Article I Section 5 of the Constitution states that “Each House may determine the rules.”
In crafting the rules of the Senate, Senators established the right to extended debate – and they formalized it with Rule XXII almost 100 years ago. This rule codified the practice that Senators could debate extensively.
Under Rule XXII, debate may be cut off under limited circumstances.
– 67 votes to end a filibuster of a motion to amend a Senate rule.
– 60 votes to end a filibuster against any other legislative business.
A conversation between Thomas Jefferson and George Washington describes the United States Senate and our Founders Fathers vision of it.
Jefferson asked Washington what is the purpose of the Senate?
Washington responded with a question of his own, “Why did you pour that coffee into your saucer?”
“To cool it,” Jefferson replied.
To which Washington said; “Even so, we pour legislation into the senatorial saucer to cool it.”
And this is exactly what the filibuster does. It encourages moderation and consensus. It gives voice to the minority, so that cooler heads may prevail.
It also separates us from the House of Representatives – where the majority rules.
And it is very much in keeping with the spirit of the government established by the Framers of our Constitution: Limited Government…Separation of Powers…Checks and Balances.
Mr. President, the filibuster is a critical tool in keeping the majority in check. This central fact has been acknowledged and even praised by Senators from both parties.
In fact, my colleague from Georgia – Senator Isakson – recently shared a conversation he had with an official from the Iraqi government.
The Senator had asked this official if he was worried that the majority in Iraq would overrun the minority. But the official replied… “no….we have the secret weapon called the ‘filibuster.’”
In recalling that conversation, Senator Isakson remarked: “If there were ever a reason for optimism… it is one of [the Iraqi] minority leaders, proudly stating one of the pillars and principles of our government, as the way they would ensure that the majority never overran the minority.”
And he was right.
I spoke yesterday about Senator Holt and his 1939 filibuster to protect workers’ wages and hours.
There are also recent examples of the filibuster achieving good.
In 1985, Senators from rural states used the filibuster to force Congress to address a major crisis in which thousands of farmers were on the brink of bankruptcy.
In 1995, the filibuster was used by Senators to protect the rights of workers to a fair wage and a safe workplace.
Now Mr. President, I will not stand here and say the filibuster has always been used for positive purposes.
Just as it has been used to bring about social change, it was also used to stall progress that this country needed to make. It is often shown that the filibuster was used against Civil Right legislation. But Civil Rights legislation passed – – Civil Rights advocates met the burden.
And it is noteworthy that today the Congressional Black Caucus is opposed to the Nuclear Option.
For further analysis, let’s look at Robert Caro, a noted historian and Pulitzer Prize winner.
At a meeting I attended with other Senators, he spoke about the history of the filibuster. He made a point about its legacy that was important.
He noted that when legislation is supported by the majority of Americans, it eventually overcomes a filibuster’s delay – as public protest far outweighs any Senator’s appetite to filibuster.
But when legislation only has the support of the minority, the filibuster slows the legislation …prevents a Senator from ramming it through…and gives the American people enough time join the opposition.
Mr. President, the right to extended debate is never more important than when one party controls Congress and the White House.
In these cases, the filibuster serves as a check on power and preserves our limited government.
Right now, the only check on President Bush is the Democrats ability to voice their concern in the Senate.
If Republicans rollback our rights in this Chamber, there will be no check on their power. The radical, right wing will be free to pursue any agenda they want. And not just on judges. Their power will be unchecked on Supreme Court nominees…the President’s nominees in general…and legislation like Social Security privatization.
Of course the President would like the power to name anyone he wants to lifetime seats on the Supreme Court and other federal courts.
And that is why the White House has been aggressively lobbying Senate Republicans to change Senate rules in a way that would hand dangerous new powers to the President over two separate branches – the Congress and the Judiciary.
Unfortunately, this is part of a disturbing pattern of behavior by this White House and Republicans in Washington.
From Dick Cheney’s fight to slam the doors of the White House on the American people…
To the President’s refusal to cooperate with the 9-11 Commission…
To Senate Republicans attempt to destroy the last check in Washington on Republican power…
To the House Majority’s quest to silence the minority in the House…
Republicans have sought to destroy the balance of power in our government by grabbing power for the presidency, silencing the minority and weakening our democracy.
America does not work the way the radical right-wing dictates to President Bush and the Republican Senate Leaders. And Mr. President, that is not how the United States Senate works either.
For 200 years, we’ve had the right to extended debate. It’s not some “procedural gimmick.”
It’s within the vision of the Founding Fathers of our country. They established a government so that no one person – and no single party – could have total control.
Some in this Chamber want to throw out 217 years of Senate history in the quest for absolute power.
They want to do away with Mr. Smith coming to Washington.
They want to do away with the filibuster.
They think they are wiser than our Founding Fathers.
I doubt that’s true. ”
We would say those were words to live by Mr Majority Leader , but then again everything from the democrats comes with an expiration date doesn’t it sir ? Even principles .
What a difference an administration makes . To think that eight short years ago the filibuster was , according to the senator from Nevada , “part of the fabric of this institution” and that “the filibuster is a critical tool in keeping the majority in check” and anyone brazen enough to attempt to eliminate the people’s tool were on a “quest for absolute power” to this :
” Without the option of a filibuster, Republican senators have precious few options through which to protect America’s courts.”
They’ve done it . As we were putting this piece together the scalawags from the democratic caucus in the Senate broke the rules to change the rules and thereby have eliminated the one tool that a David representing the minority could use to great effect against the Goliath tyranny of the majority . Democrats … Party of the people ? Defender of the little guy ? Balderdash ! Oh yes , did we mention …. SQUIRREL !
Does anyone have any idea why the appointment of judicial nominees is of such importance now , just as we are gearing up for the holiday recesses ? One word comes to our mind , well two actually , one (squirrel) that is what Mr Reid and Co are shouting today and the second word is Obamacare , the one word Mr Reid would love to knock off of the airwaves and out of people’s minds.
Good luck with that Senator , although we think you have made a grave miscalculation . The people will never be able to forget about the S**t sandwich you and your cronies forced down their throats and now you’ve treated them to the ultimate display of hubris and hypocrisy with your invocation of your so-called “nuclear option” and along the way revealed yourself and your colleagues for the unprincipled mountebanks that you are .
YouViewed/Editorial 