The Nuclear Option

So what kind of recourse do the Repub's. have at this juncture? how do you see it playing out? Another shut down?

If you want a good laugh, look what the lying hypocrite Harry Reid had to say about the Nuclear Option back when it was the Democrats who were the obstructionists by filibustering Presidential appointments during the Bush years...

[youtube:2v74g8eh][/youtube:2v74g8eh]

And Reid was far from the only Democrat lying hypocrite...

Barack Obama 4/25/05: "The President hasn’t gotten his way. And that is now prompting a change in the Senate rules that really I think would change the character of the Senate forever…what I worry about would be that you essentially still have two chambers the House and the Senate but you have simply majoritarian absolute power on either side, and that’s just not what the founders intended."

Hillary Clinton 5/23/2005: "So this president has come to the majority here in the Senate and basically said 'change the rules.' 'Do it the way I want it done.' And I guess there just weren’t very many voices on the other side of the isle that acted the way previous generations of senators have acted and said 'Mr. President we are with you, we support you, but that’s a bridge too far we can’t go there.' You have to restrain yourself Mr. President."

Charles Schumer 5/18/2005: "We are on the precipice of a crisis, a constitutional crisis. The checks and balances which have been at the core of this Republic are about to be evaporated by the nuclear option. The checks and balances which say that if you get 51% of the vote you don’t get your way 100% of the time. It is amazing it’s almost a temper tantrum."

Harry Reid 5/18/2005: "Mr. President the right to extended debate is never more important than the one party who controls congress and the white house. In these cases the filibuster serves as a check on power and preserves our limited government."

Dianne Feinstein 5/18/2005: "The nuclear option if successful will turn the senate into a body that could have its rules broken at any time by a majority of senators unhappy with any position taken by the minority. It begins with judicial nominations. Next will be executive appointments and then legislation."

Joe Biden 5/23/2005: "This nuclear option is ultimately an example of the arrogance of power. It is a fundamental power grab."

Harry Reid 5/18/2005: "But no we are not going to follow the Senate rules. No, because of the arrogance of power of this Republican administration."

Chris Dodd 5/18/2005: "I’ve never passed a single bill worth talking about that didn’t have a lead co sponsor that was a Republican. And I don’t know of a single piece of legislation that’s ever been adopted here that didn’t have a Republican and Democrat in the lead. That’s because we need to sit down and work with each other. The rules of this institution have required that. That’s why we exist. Why have a bicameral legislative body? Why have two chambers? What were the framers thinking about 218 years ago? They understood Mr. President that there is a tyranny of the majority."

Dianne Feinstein 5/18/2005: "If the Republican leadership insists on forcing the nuclear option the senate becomes ipso facto the House of Representatives where the majority rules supreme and the party of power can dominate and control the agenda with absolute power."

Hillary Clinton 5/23/2005: "You’ve got majority rule and then you have the senate over here where people can slow things down where they can debate where they have something called the filibuster. You know it seems like it’s a little less than efficient -- well that’s right it is. And deliberately designed to be so."

Joe Biden 5/23/05: "I say to my friends on the Republican side you may own the field right now buy you won’t own it forever I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don't make the kind of naked power grab you are doing."

Charles Schumer 5/23/2005: "They want their way every single time. And they will change the rules, break the rules, and misread the constitution so that they will get their way."

Hillary Clinton 5/23/2005: "The Senate is being asked to turn itself inside out, to ignore the precedent to ignore the way our system has work, the delicate balance that we have obtain that has kept this constitution system going, for immediate gratification of the present President."

Max Baucus 5/19/2005: "This is the way Democracy ends. Not with a bomb but with a gavel."

http://www.examiner.com/article/democrats-were-against-reconciliation-nuclear-option-before-they-were-for-it

Reid is sort of stupid....what did (and Udall and Bennett) gain....a few Judges for the new rules being expanded when the Republicans take the Senate (as early as 2014) and the House will NEVER compromise on anything presented in the future if generated in the Senate.....stupid indeed.

deltamrey wrote: Reid is sort of stupid....what did (and Udall and Bennett) gain....a few Judges for the new rules being expanded when the Republicans take the Senate (as early as 2014) and the House will NEVER compromise on anything presented in the future if generated in the Senate.....stupid indeed.

I think their genius plan is to blame the ACA turd on the Republicans and media in order to salvage the election and power. If the country actually falls for that, we may as well start writing the USA obituary... because you know what they will do with this new power they just gave themselves.

deltamrey wrote: Reid is sort of stupid....what did (and Udall and Bennett) gain....a few Judges for the new rules being expanded when the Republicans take the Senate (as early as 2014) and the House will NEVER compromise on anything presented in the future if generated in the Senate.....stupid indeed.

I think this could backfire. If Udall votes in a super lefty judge the Republicans can run ads. Especially if the judge has made some embarrassing decisions.

my big hope is that this ALL comes back to bite them in the A--.... I find it real interesting that Obama wanted to meet with a "few select" media folks, off the record...

And just in case there are still people who deny the New York Time is just an echo chamber for the Democrat party...

They were also against the Nuclear Option before they were for it.

Back in 2005...

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/29/opinion/29tue1.html?_r=1&

And now...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/22/opinion/democracy-returns-to-the-senate.html

What credibility?

pineinthegrass wrote: And just in case there are still people who deny the New York Time is just an echo chamber for the Democrat party...

They were also against the Nuclear Option before they were for it.

Back in 2005...

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/29/opinion/29tue1.html?_r=1&

And now...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/22/opinion/democracy-returns-to-the-senate.html

What credibility?

And when there is an R in the White House they will flip back. After all, everyone knows that the dems are not extremists. Only pubs are extreme. LOL


"Given the extreme degree of Republican obstruction during the Obama administration, the Democrats had little choice but to change the filibuster rule. "

Or if the Dems want to avoid the filibuster, just nominate moderate judges? what a concept!