Reid to propose the nuclear option today?

posted at 9:21 am on November 21, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Is today the beginning of the end of the filibuster in the US Senate? So says the Huffington Post, but it’s not yet clear whether Harry Reid has the votes to pull it off.  After a number of false alarms, though, Reid may not have much credibility left if he balks now:

The Senate could go nuclear as soon as Thursday morning, according to three Democratic Senate sources close to the decision.

Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is prepared to change Senate rules that currently require 60 votes to break a filibuster by invoking cloture. Under Reid’s new rules, only a simple majority would be required for all executive and judicial nominees other than those to the Supreme Court. Reid is meeting Thursday afternoon with progressive advocates of rules reform. …

It’s still not clear if Reid has the 51 votes to make the change, but it certainly looks close. There are 55 Democrats in total, which means Reid can lose up to four. HuffPost tracked down a number of Democrats on Tuesday to see who remains opposed to making the change, and only one, Levin, definitively said no. A couple of others, Sens. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), avoided the question.

It’s practically an inevitability — even if Reid doesn’t have the votes.  He can’t keep threatening the GOP with the move and not pull the trigger at some point. For Senate Republicans, the threat and the action are now pretty much the same thing, as Reid has used it to break filibusters anyway. It’s practically a moot point already.

Reid might want this to fail, however.  For one thing, Senate Democrats have to be looking at the midterm elections with a lot more trepidation than they did a month ago, when Republicans bore the brunt of a short-term political failure on the shutdown.  The ObamaCare failure will last all year long, and will get worse just before the midterms as employers decide whether to continue providing health-care coverage or just pay a fine and dump employees in the ObamaCare exchanges.  They may end up on the short side of the aisle in 2015, and if Republicans ride ObamaCare to a 2016 victory, Reid’s caucus will have no tools left to prevent majoritarian steamrolling in the upper chamber.

Actually, the minority won’t be entirely without tools.  The Senate depends on unanimous consent to dispense with a vast amount of tedium in parliamentary procedures in order to move efficiently on legislation.  Unlike a filibuster, which takes 41 votes to sustain, one Senator can object to each motion for unanimous consent and tie up the chamber in endless bill readings and other non-essential business.  It will add days or weeks to the most mundane tasks and could be used to keep plenty of presidential appointments tied up for lengthy periods, if applied universally. Reid might find himself out of the frying pan and into the fire after this stunt.  Instead of speeding up the Senate, it might mire it for good in endless bickering.

We’ll see what happens, but if Reid does pass this, expect Republicans to retaliate — and expect them to end the rest of the filibuster as soon as they have the majority. After all, if it’s not good for confirmations, why should it apply to legislation?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Do it Mr. Reid. The chances are better than ever that the Senate will flip. And you’ve irritated enough people that the R’s may just use it on you.

oldroy on November 21, 2013 at 9:23 AM

The totalitarian impulses of progressives is just mind-boggling.

Flange on November 21, 2013 at 9:27 AM

This precedent will come in handy in cleaning out Obama’s legacy once we get rid of these losers.

forest on November 21, 2013 at 9:28 AM

“Endless bickering” is infinitely more desirable than endless spending.

Bat Chain Puller on November 21, 2013 at 9:28 AM

It’ll be interesting to see how far Crazy Harry tries to take his madness.

22044 on November 21, 2013 at 9:31 AM

The Democrats have learned nothing feom the ZeroCare debacle: it was stuff-it-down Republican throats policy changes that got us into this health insurance mess in the first place, and so too will this idea blow up in Democrat faces.

I’d like nothing more than to see the Senate begin and end every day with an endless progression of roll call votes, requiringing Senators to actually be present too. The Democrats are crazy desperate to change the news away from ObamaCare.

MTF on November 21, 2013 at 9:33 AM

If Reid does this then it will bury the democratic party….

Very myopic.

redguy on November 21, 2013 at 9:36 AM

Ok, so let’s say Reid goes ahead and does away with the filibuster. The Republicans retaliate by withholding unanimous consent.

Now, the Republicans have a huge advantage. See, without unanimous consent, it’s practically impossible to pass enormous, complex bills like Obamacare and Dodd-Frank. They’d take so long just reading the things you’d never get things done. On the other hand, a bill which reads “the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is hereby repealed” takes very little time indeed to read and vote on.

Mohonri on November 21, 2013 at 9:37 AM

These clowns act as if they will never be out of power. Ojaggazz et al behave as if everything they enact will be permanent. On their part it’s foolishness, for my part it’s kinda scary.

Akzed on November 21, 2013 at 9:37 AM

How about the GOP filing Articles of Impeachment to keep the Senate distracted….

hillsoftx on November 21, 2013 at 9:38 AM

Ok, so let’s say Reid goes ahead and does away with the filibuster. The Republicans retaliate by withholding unanimous consent.

Mohonri on November 21, 2013 at 9:37 AM

One problem: McConnell

The one thing he won’t do is shut off the pork spigot.

ElectricPhase on November 21, 2013 at 9:39 AM

He is deseperately trying to change the narrative isn’t he?

gophergirl on November 21, 2013 at 9:40 AM

Reid to propose the nuclear option today?

Tune in today for another episode of:
“Harry Reid gives America the middle finger”

ToddPA on November 21, 2013 at 9:41 AM

Why are you showing two pictures of the same guy?

kcewa on November 21, 2013 at 9:42 AM

Not to worry. The Stupid Party will find a way to support Reid without retribution.

HiJack on November 21, 2013 at 9:44 AM

Do it Mr. Reid. The chances are better than ever that the Senate will flip. And you’ve irritated enough people that the R’s may just use it on you.

oldroy on November 21, 2013 at 9:23 AM

Yeah but the emperor will be disbanding the Senate in 2015 after he is given emergency powers to contain the tea party.

Dr. Frank Enstine on November 21, 2013 at 9:46 AM

Bring. It. On.

Cruz is locked and loaded.

TXUS on November 21, 2013 at 9:46 AM

Why didn’t they fill these vacancies between Specter’s switch and January 2011? Instead of passing 404Care, they could have stacked every agency and court. Too late, Harry.

blammm on November 21, 2013 at 9:46 AM

Not to worry. The Stupid Party will find a way to support Reid without retribution.

HiJack on November 21, 2013 at 9:44 AM

And then when the senate does flip they will be sure to undo it in a show of bipartisan support.

Dr. Frank Enstine on November 21, 2013 at 9:48 AM

I still think it’s doubtful Reid does this before Chuck Schumer drags him into a back room and mentions the current polling trends.

The Democrats may actually believe with the help of the media they can turn the filibuster rule on and off like a light switch, getting it restored if they lose control of the Senate in the same way Obama’s arbitrarily delaying parts of his health care law as to whatever best suits him at the moment. But it’s going to be hard to pull that argument off if the guy who killed the filibuster in 2013 is still there as Senate Minority Leader in 2015 and isn’t the most appealing personality to begin with.

jon1979 on November 21, 2013 at 9:48 AM

Don’t back down GOP

McCain or McConnell will probably cave

cmsinaz on November 21, 2013 at 9:50 AM

Harry Reid is one most vile people to ever been elected to the US Senate… The man is pure evil… The country was very unfortunate that he survived his car accident last year…

mnjg on November 21, 2013 at 9:51 AM

How about the GOP filing Articles of Impeachment to keep the Senate distracted….

hillsoftx on November 21, 2013 at 9:38 AM

What? Articles of Impeachment can be filed only in House and the Senate only gets the case if the House votes to impeach the official. The Senate then votes on whether to “convict” him or her and, if convicted, the official is immediately removed from office.

TXUS on November 21, 2013 at 9:51 AM

The libs on the wapo site are thrilled about this, natch

cmsinaz on November 21, 2013 at 9:53 AM

One problem: McConnell

The one thing he won’t do is shut off the pork spigot.

ElectricPhase on November 21, 2013 at 9:39 AM

It won’t be up to McConnell. Any Senator can withhold unanimous consent by voice objection at any time. That means that the majority will be at the mercy of each individual in the minority. It doesn’t take an organized effort as long as one Senator wants to stay in the chamber all day long and object.

Ed Morrissey on November 21, 2013 at 9:55 AM

Does Reid do anything more than block votes and play his manipulative games? I know that some of that goes on and I’m okay with that, but this clown needs a new bag of tricks. He has to be the worst Senate Majority Leader in my lifetime of 58 years. Hands down the worst.

NavyMustang on November 21, 2013 at 9:59 AM

when Republicans bore the brunt of a short-term political failure on the shutdown.

Short-term? Are you kidding? Americans are outraged at the shutdown. Look at how many lives it affected. That anger is going to carry the Dems in 2014!

/wishcasting

mankai on November 21, 2013 at 10:01 AM

Results for #filibuster
******* **********
***********************

https://twitter.com/search?q=%23filibuster&src=hash

canopfor on November 21, 2013 at 10:04 AM

Having inflicted Harry Reid on the rest of the nation, Nevada deserves to be a national nuclear waste dump.

GarandFan on November 21, 2013 at 10:09 AM

I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again.

Good. do it. Get rid of the filibuster. The filibuster is anti-democratic. And, it helps the liberal cause far, far more than it does the conservative cause.

Plus, the GOP will never make this move because the press would kill the GOP for using the “nuclear option”, while the DNC can get away with it. So, let the Dems do it and then when the GOP takes over the Senate, it will already be done.

the filibuster does not work nearly as well for the GOP as it does for the dems. The GOP may filibuster the most seriously deranged liberal nominees – but it lets most liberals get appointed. McCain, Graham, et al never allow filibuster of most liberal nominees that need to be filibustered. In contrast, the DNC filibusters tons of fairly moderate GOP nominees successfully all the time.

And, aside from Obamacare (which filibuster didn’t really end up working out) how many pieces of liberal legislation does the GOP really successfully filibuster?

The filibuster is also a useful tool for Dem senators in conservative states. It works likes this – the dems filibuster something popular in a conservative state. they have 46 Senators. They let 5 or 6 Senators from a conservative state vote for cloture knowing that the filibuster will continue. Then that senator can go back and say about that person not getting appointed (or legislation not enacted) “I voted against the filibuster” when it is his party doing the filibustering. It allows Senators to take multiple conflicting stands on the same issue.

It’s a parlor trick that needs to go. Elections have consequences and sometimes that means we won’t be able to stop really bad legislation/nominees (not that the GOP does it nearly as much as the DNC anyway). But, in reverse, when the GOP wins, it won’t be stymied by the filibuster either. And Senators will actually have to vote yes/no on issues instead of “being for ‘x’ before being against ‘x’” as Gore famously put it.

And – to those who think the filibuster is some kind of enshrined founding principal – it isn’t. It was not created used until well after the founding fathers. It isn’t mentioned anywhere in the constitution, the declaration of independent, the federalist papers or any other founding documents. So, it can be done away with without harming any conservative constitutional principles.

Conservatism wants to roll back the gov’t. Almost NO federal program has ever been repealed once instituted no matter how big of a failure the program or how far past its usefulness – and a big part of this is the filibuster. You only need 51 votes to start a massive new federal entitlement/program/agency, but for all practical purposes you need 61 votes to repeal anything. That favors – in a big way – liberalism and growing the federal gov’t.

Conservatives, IMHO, should be 100% behind getting rid of the filibuster. Yes, I realize that some really bad liberal nominees that might (emphasis on might) have been prevented will get through and some really bad liberal legislation that might (again, strong emphasis on might) have been prevented will pass. But the reality is that the filibuster is used far more effectively in support of big gov’t than it is in support of conservative goals and it needs to go.

Monkeytoe on November 21, 2013 at 10:12 AM

Do it, Nazi pig, it’s not like you haven’t wiped your ancient crack with the Constitution on a regular basis anyway. The Founders are all dead, it’s time to progress into a bright future and leave their old ideas behind.

Bishop on November 21, 2013 at 10:13 AM

Monkeytoe
+1

crash72 on November 21, 2013 at 10:28 AM

Do it, Nazi pig, it’s not like you haven’t wiped your ancient crack with the Constitution on a regular basis anyway. The Founders are all dead, it’s time to progress into a bright future and leave their old ideas behind.

Bishop on November 21, 2013 at 10:13 AM

I can’t stand Reid, but this mistakenly implies that the Founders created the filibuster and included it in the Constitution. That is wrong.

this from Wikipedia (I don’t pretend that Wikipedia is correct on all things, but this is a quick, easy summary of how the U.S. Senate filibuster came into existence):

In 1789, the first U.S. Senate adopted rules allowing the Senate “to move the previous question”, ending debate and proceeding to a vote. Aaron Burr argued that the motion regarding the previous question was redundant, had only been exercised once in the preceding four years, and should be eliminated.[2] In 1806, the Senate agreed, recodifying its rules, and thus the potential for a filibuster sprang into being.[2] Because the Senate created no alternative mechanism for terminating debate, the filibuster became an option for delay and blocking of floor votes.

The filibuster remained a solely theoretical option until the late 1830s. The first Senate filibuster occurred in 1837.[3] In 1841, a defining moment came during debate on a bill to charter the Second Bank of the United States. Senator Henry Clay tried to end debate via majority vote. Senator William R. King threatened a filibuster, saying that Clay “may make his arrangements at his boarding house for the winter”. Other senators sided with King, and Clay backed down.[

Nothing in the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, Federalist papers or other writings of the founders discusses the need for or existence of a U.S. Senate filibuster.

So, clinging to the filibuster just because it was created by the founders is not a real thing.

Monkeytoe on November 21, 2013 at 10:29 AM

Just as an intellectual exercise, can anyone name some really important conservatives accomplishments via filibuster?

And, I’m asking in reality – not to be snarky. I can’t actually think of any myself and am wondering if there are in fact some such accomplishments that I am overlooking.

Monkeytoe on November 21, 2013 at 10:35 AM

The totalitarian impulses of progressives is just mind-boggling.

Flange on November 21, 2013 at 9:27 AM

As is their delusion eliminating the filibuster that is helpful to them. The Senate filibuster is how government spending is always ratcheted up. Without the filibuster, we can cut spending and easily improve free enterprise in America by eliminating the Consumer Financial Protection Agency of Elizabeth Warren and Sarbannes Oaxley and so forth!

thuja on November 21, 2013 at 10:45 AM

Senate filibuster rules debate, 2013
17s
===

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.: We’re burning wasted hours and wasted days between filibuster. I could say we’re burning wasted days and wasted weeks – @ChadPergram
read more on twitter.com
=========================

Chad Pergram ‏@ChadPergram 1m

Reid says R’s have turned advise and consent into “deny and obstruct.”

Reply
Retweet
Favorite

Expand

Chad Pergram ‏@ChadPergram 22s

Reid: the need for change is so very obvious

Reply
Retweet
Favorite

Expand
Chad Pergram ‏@ChadPergram 3m

Reid: It’s time to change the Senate before it becomes obsolete.

Reply
Retweet
Favorite

Expand

Chad Pergram ‏@ChadPergram 2m

Reid: Gridlock has consequences and they’re terrible…it’s time to get the Senate working again..for the good of the United States..

Reply
Retweet
Favorite

Expand
Chad Pergram ‏@ChadPergram 4m

Reid: We’re burning wasted hours and wasted days between filibuster. I could say we’re burning wasted days and wasted weeks..

Reply
Retweet
Favorite

Expand
Chad Pergram ‏@ChadPergram 5m

Here we go. Reid talking about the Congress being “broken.”

Reply
Retweet
Favorite

Expand
Chad Pergram ‏@ChadPergram 7m

Reid says Senate must be prepared to move forward on a bipartisan, Iran sanctions bill after the recess, pending the Geneva talks.

Reply
Retweet
Favorite

Expand
Chad Pergram ‏@ChadPergram 13m

Senate now meeting. Buckle your seatbelts for nuclear option on filibuster rules.

Reply
Retweet
Favorite

Expand
Chad Pergram ‏@ChadPergram 20m

Senate Dems say on March 5, ’80, ML Robert Byrd used similar maneuver to eliminate filibusters on motions to proceed to nominations.

canopfor on November 21, 2013 at 10:47 AM

Squirrel. Period.

fogw on November 21, 2013 at 10:47 AM

Senate filibuster rules debate, 2013
3m
Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev.: Republicans ‘seek to undermine the very government in which they were elected to serve’ – @DomenicoNBC
read more on twitter.com
========================

6m
Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev.: ‘For the good of the United States of America, it’s time to change. It’s time to change this institution before it becomes obsolete’ – @mpoindc
read more on twitter.com
========================

http://www.breakingnews.com/

canopfor on November 21, 2013 at 10:49 AM

Nothing in the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, Federalist papers or other writings of the founders discusses the need for or existence of a U.S. Senate filibuster.

Monkeytoe on November 21, 2013 at 10:29 AM

Just wondering, where is abortion mentioned?

fogw on November 21, 2013 at 10:51 AM

Live Streaming:

1m
==
Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., says Democrats engaging in ‘fake fight’ over ‘judges that aren’t needed’ to distract from Obamacare woes – live video
see original on nbcnews.com

http://www.breakingnews.com/#53623732

canopfor on November 21, 2013 at 10:59 AM

https://twitter.com/ChadPergram

Chad Pergram ‏@ChadPergram 2m

McConnell says Reid said, if you like the Senate rules, you can keep them. #nuclearoption #Obamacare

Reply
Retweet
Favorite

Expand
Chad Pergram ‏@ChadPergram 5m

McConnell: Once again, #Senate Democrats are threatening to break the rules of the Senate in order to change the rules of the Senate.

Reply
Retweet
Favorite

Expand
Chad Pergram ‏@ChadPergram 6m

McConnell says Reid’s proposed rules change “reminds people of #Obamacare.”

canopfor on November 21, 2013 at 11:02 AM

…there existed a variety of opinions as to a Legislature of one or two houses. It is said that when Jefferson returned from France he was breakfasting with Washington, and asked him why he agreed to a Senate.

“Why,” said Washington, “did you just now pour that coffee into your saucer before drinking it?”

“To cool it,” said Jefferson; “my throat is not made of brass.”

“Even so,” said Washington, “we pour our legislation into the Senatorial saucer to cool it.”

Filibusters cool the tyranny of the majority party.

From and NPR interview with Sen. Harkin yesterday.

SIEGEL: Another objection to changing the rule is one that’s been voiced by Senator Carl Levin, your Democratic colleague in the Senate who, as we’ve heard, says, if you resort to the so-called nuclear option, you’re breaking the rules which require a two-thirds majority to change the rules. I mean, wouldn’t that open the door to a variety of rules changes that a party could make with a simple majority?

Wait ’til you read the answer…

HARKIN: Well, with all respect to my friend Carl Levin, that is one of the rules of the Senate. Even Senator Byrd, who was a fierce protector of the rules of the Senate…

SIEGEL: The late Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia.

HARKIN: The late Senator Robert F. Byrd. He actually said that, yes, the Senate can change the rules with a simple majority. He admitted that. And it shouldn’t even be called a nuclear option. That’s not – there’s nothing nuclear about it. Now, here’s what I say to people, Robert. Why is it so sacred that you have to have 67 votes to change a rule in the Senate?

Let’s just say, for example, that one party elected 90 senators one time. Let’s say they change the rule to say, from here on out, it takes 90 senators to change the rules. Would that be acceptable? If that’s not, why is 67 acceptable? It should be that eventually 51 senators ought to be able to decide what we’re going to do here.

Sounds a little like the arbitrary minimum wage argument.

Fallon on November 21, 2013 at 11:04 AM

Its going to be great when the GOP is back in power in the Senate, and the Dems have to deal with their nutered fillabuster powers…

Critic2029 on November 21, 2013 at 11:06 AM

The Associated Press ‏@AP 53s

Senate starts debating Democrats’ drive to change rules, curb GOP’s ability to block nominees. http://apne.ws/1aTOiIN -MM
======================================================

Senate debates Dems’ plan to curb filibusters
By ALAN FRAM
— Nov. 21, 2013 10:58 AM EST
****************************

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate has started a showdown debate over a Democratic effort to curb the power of minority Republicans to block the president’s nominations.

The Democratic proposal seems likely to succeed. It would change the number of votes needed to end filibusters from 60 to a simple majority of the Senate’s 100 members.

It would apply to executive branch and most judicial nominations, but exclude Supreme Court justices and legislation.

It would be the most sweeping change in decades in the filibuster, a delaying tactic designed to protect the rights of the party in the minority.

While the change would weaken the ability to block President Barack Obama’s nominees, Republicans have warned that Democrats will regret the change when the GOP regains control of the White House and the Senate.
===============

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/senate-nears-possible-vote-curbing-filibusters

canopfor on November 21, 2013 at 11:06 AM

He is deseperately trying to change the narrative isn’t he?

gophergirl on November 21, 2013 at 9:40 AM

+1

Khun Joe on November 21, 2013 at 11:10 AM

They will go home for two weeks and are scared of the constituent’s wrath on obama’care’.

Reid forgets that totalitarianism can turn on him. Oh wait…it w/b gentlemanly McConnell. No fear, Harry.

Schadenfreude on November 21, 2013 at 11:11 AM

Still, may something very bad overcome Harry, the Mortician.

Schadenfreude on November 21, 2013 at 11:11 AM

“but if Reid does pass this, expect Republicans to retaliate”

Only if they are conservative Republicans like Cruz and Lee will that happen. The corrupt Bush Mafia are EUNUCHS!

Jayrae on November 21, 2013 at 11:13 AM

I got thru to my Dem senator’s office… I encourage others to call — they are not happy about walking the plank on this and a little pressure will spoil Dirty Harry’s plans.

Pick up the phone.

matthew8787 on November 21, 2013 at 11:16 AM

Constitutional azzhole in chief

Schadenfreude on November 21, 2013 at 11:17 AM

Chad Pergram ‏@ChadPergram 2m

McConnell says Reid said, if you like the Senate rules, you can we’ll keep them in 2015. #nuclearoption #Obamacare

FIFY

blammm on November 21, 2013 at 11:21 AM

Cloture on Millett nomination failed.

blammm on November 21, 2013 at 11:31 AM

Go ahead, Reid, you guys have screwed everything else up since dear leader has assumed power, might as well fubar this up, too.

Kissmygrits on November 21, 2013 at 11:32 AM

I think the chances are good the Senate will flip next election so Dirty Harry should be careful of what he wishes for.

Take a look at the number of seats up for grabs and there is a really good chance for a flip. It only takes 5 and that could very easily happen given the sentiment in the country.

Here in Colorado, Udall is ahead, but he’s only got 41% of the population saying he deserves to be re-elected. I don’t even count him in my estimate of the 5 that could flip.

COgirl on November 21, 2013 at 11:47 AM

Let them do it. The only way the Democrats can legislate is through the courts. They plan on using the D.C. circuit to get in rules, created without legislation, codified into law. I didn’t trust Democrats before Obama, I trust them even less now. So, if they want to play games with the filibuster, which people say you shouldn’t do this way, let them. Then, when the Republicans have the majority, they can impeach the judges appointed through this process, which people will say shouldn’t be done, but who listens to those people any. The Democrats can pass laws, which should be bi-partisan in nature, with only Democrat votes, they can change the rules of the Senate with only a majority, rather than a super majority, so let them do it, but make them pay for doing it.

bflat879 on November 21, 2013 at 11:59 AM

“BREAKING: Reid Going Nuclear On Filibuster In Senate Right Now. McConnell’s Rebuttal: If I Were Responsible For Obamacare’s Path Of Destruction, I’d Change The Subject Too
—DrewM.

Here’s the opening of McConnell’s statement (it was sent via email). When he’s good, he’s really good.

“Over the past several weeks, the American people have been witness to one of the most breathtaking indictments of big-government liberalism in memory. And I’m not just talking about a web site. “I’m talking about the way in which Obamacare was forced on the public by an administration and a Democrat-led Congress that we now know was willing to do and say just about anything to pass it into law. “The President and his Democrat allies were so determined to force their vision of health care on the public that they assured them up and down that they wouldn’t lose the plans they had, that they’d save money instead of losing it, and that they’d be able to keep using the doctors and hospitals they were already using. “But of course now we know that rhetoric just doesn’t match reality. “And the stories we’re hearing on a near-daily basis now range from heartbreaking to comic. “Just yesterday I saw a story about a guy getting a letter in the mail saying his dog had qualified for insurance under Obamacare. So yeah, I’d probably be running for the exits too if I had supported this law. “I’d be looking to change the subject just as Senate Democrats have been doing with their threats of going nuclear and changing the Senate rules on nominations. If I were a senator from Oregon, which hasn’t enrolled a single person yet for its Obamacare exchange, I would probably want to shift the focus too. “But here’s the problem with this latest distraction. It doesn’t distract people from Obamacare. It reminds them of it. It reminds them of all the broken promises. It reminds them of the power grab. It reminds them of the way Democrats set up one set of rules for themselves and another for everybody else. “It’s basically the same debate. “And rather than distract people from Obamacare, it only reinforces the narrative of a party that is willing to do and say just about anything to get its way. Because that’s just what they’re doing all over again. “Once again, Senate Democrats are threatening to break the rules of the Senate in order to change the rules of the Senate. And over what? Over a court that doesn’t even have enough work to do. “Millions of Americans are hurting because of a law Washington Democrats forced upon them – and what do they do about it? They cook up some fake fight over judges that aren’t even needed. “Look: I get it. As I indicated, I’d want to be talking about something else too if I had to defend dogs getting insurance while millions of Americans lost theirs. But it won’t work. And the parallels between this latest skirmish and the original Obamacare push are just too obvious to ignore. “Think about it: The Majority Leader promised over and over again that he wouldn’t break the rules of the Senate in order to change them. On July 14 he went on ‘Meet the Press’ and he said: ‘We’re not touching judges.’ “He may as well just have said ‘If you like the rules of the Senate you can keep them.’

He then went on to talk about judges, Reid’s hypocrisy and how this will come back to bite the Democrats in the ass some day. And then he closed by talking about…ObamaCare.

And this Democrat strategy of distract, distract, distract is getting old. Because the American people aren’t fooled. “If our colleagues want to work with us to fill judicial vacancies that actually need to be filled, then let’s do it. “If our colleagues want to work with us to spare the American people from the pain of Obamacare, then let’s do that. “But if they want to play games and set yet another precedent that they will no doubt come to regret, well…that’s a choice only they can make. “Let me be clear: the Democrat playbook of broken promises, double standards, and raw power…the same playbook that got us Obamacare…it has to end. “That’s why Republicans are going to keep their focus where it belongs: on the concerns of the American people. “It means we’re going to keep pushing to get back to the drawing board on health care – to replace Obamacare with real reforms that do not punish the middle class. And we’ll leave the political games to our friends on the other side.”

That’s how you do it…” – Drew M. ASHQ

http://ace.mu.nu/

workingclass artist on November 21, 2013 at 12:03 PM

Dingy Harry Reid, reinforcing his place as the worst Senate Majority Leader in US History.

I suppose if you can’t be competent, celebrated, and respected, you might as well be reviled and notorious.

Athos on November 21, 2013 at 12:36 PM

Just wondering, where is abortion mentioned?

fogw on November 21, 2013 at 10:51 AM

It isn’t. Roe v. Wade is a terrible decision and should be overturned.

If you have seen any of my posts on this or other blogs, you would know I’m a conservative, so not sure what this is meant to demonstrate?

My point is merely that some people are arguing that getting rid of the filibuster somehow violates the constitution or the founders’ intent. My point was that isn’t true.

Monkeytoe on November 21, 2013 at 1:21 PM

Just another move to strengthen the grip of the left ‘s dictatorial powers. A very sad day for the Republic.

rplat on November 21, 2013 at 1:22 PM