Posted on 03/23/2017 8:16:55 PM PDT by jthomas21
This morning, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) announced the Democrats will filibuster Neil Gorsuch's nomination to the Supreme Court. If you listen to the media, Republicans will have to use the "nuclear option" to confirm Gorsuch with 51 votes. But the media, as usual, misses the point: Harry Reid already pushed the button and the Senate is a nuclear wasteland.
Read more here: http://thefederalist.com/2017/03/23/time-republicans-embrace-nuclear-option-neil-gorsuch/
Reid was a black eye on the Senate...
Zactly.
They’ll then reply “But, Harry Reid is no longer in the Senate”.
“True but, as a long time leader and strategist, he expected Hillary to win and his tactic in process and legacy was to put a democratic Congress and president in position to win on issues important to then by leaving a simple majority of 51 votes to ensure they would prevail.
Well, he left his will basically intestate and we are the inheretents of his legacy.
We intend to pick up were he left off, to insure we make progress in representing the people’s work.”
Something like that. (Hope I hear Levine say something like that in the next week and the laugh his ass off on air...
LOL
“This is the heritage of Harry Reid, a good man and esteemed senator, who sought to improve the efficiency of the senate and we would, as inheritants, be irresponsible not to continue his legacy”.
Present it in a way that cannot be defined as mere obstinate ancestry or a device of friction.
Praise him for his foresight to improve the efficiency of the Senate.
Exactly. I read up on the history of the filibuster and the intent was apparently for the Senate to take the edge of things coming out of the House that were too radical. Presumably they wanted to pass less extreme legislation out of the Senate by making it necessary for the majority party to moderate legislation enough so that they could convince enough of the opposition party Senators to vote for it.
The current crop of Democrat Senators has totally sabotaged that process by simply opposing all Republican-authored legislation without thought or any willingness to compromise. They are subverting the intent of the filibuster. If the Dems are going to be that blindly partisan, the Republican majority may as well end the filibuster altogether by a simple-majority rules vote. Then let the Dems slowly twist in the wind and see how they like that.
Then we can put together a single Obamacare replacement package covering phases 1, 2 and 3 and get that passed by simple-majority votes, confirm Gorsuch and the next conservative nominees, and quickly fix a whole bunch of other insane left-wing crap put in place over the last 8 years.
I was surprised at the unanimous SC vote to support special needs kids in school.
Yeah. Don't give the Republicans in the US Senate whose only goal is to undermine the Trump presidency any time or excuse to be won over to the dark side. Who knows what trivia and outright lies the evil ones will come out with if they keep talking?
Reid promised to go nuclear, but more importantly, Tim Kaine, who fully expected to be VP, he also promised to go nuclear on justices - watch.
Most of the GOP consented to BHO picks , can anyone point to quotes where the most Conservative of them explain/ justify this?
I wonder if Obama was surveilling Gorsuch...?
Reid implemented the “nuclear option” for lower court judges. He would have for the Supreme Court too if he had ever needed it.
There is nothing sacred about a rule that exists only on the senate rulebook and not in the constitution.
In my opinion it has hurt the nation far more than it has helped it.
A simple majority in congress should be the method for moving and changing legislation. After all, that is the constitutional method.
It allows us to quickly fix old legislation and to quickly respond to important events. If those are off target, then as already said, things can be quickly fixed
It is not in the Constitution in any fashion. A bill ( or appointment), according to the Constitution, only needs majority to pass.
The Democrats must think that they have Trump backed into a political-corner over the Russia thing, else forcing a confrontation over the Gorsuch nomination involving senate rules makes no sense at all. It would seem that they are overplaying a very weak hand. It’s time for McConnell to create a few “facts on the ground” by changing the senate rule. I suspect that we’ve allowed it to get this far because the Republican-majority in the senate is small and a few defectors (McCain & Graham) could make a mess of things even after a rule change. So we have to sit thru all this political theater so McConnell can prove a point to Juan & Linda.
He’ll get his 60. Because if he doesn’t, the next pick is going to be Ted Cruz.
The senate no longer serves it's original constitution purpose anyway -- which was to represent the interests of the states. So you have to ask what purpose the fillibuster serves except to make today's version of the senate a kind of super-House-of-Representatives. I'd be for keeping the filibuster if we went back to individual senators being elected by their respective state houses, but since we're not headed in that direction, get rid of the rule.
I flat out agree with you about putting senators back under their state legislatures.
Exactly, so there’s no reason to feel guilty about a majority vote...
But, but, there has got to be some racism, or bigotry, or some other impurity lurking somewhere in just a majority vote, if it is Republicans.
The Borking of Gorsuch continues. So long as there are anti-American Democrats’’and quisling Republicans and a
people content with their bondage the status quo will remain.But then Robert Bork sold a lot of worthy books after the other side refused his nomination .
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.