Posted on 11/22/2013 6:13:42 AM PST by Night Hides Not
Harry Reid just made President Obama a lame duck. With his triggering of the "nuclear option", he nuked any chances for any of Obama's legislative priorities through the 2014 elections.
Immigration "reform" -
Tax reform -
Any other Democrat priority - 
How? The House plays no part in presidential appointments.
On that he is correct. They [Republicans] are banded together to protect and preserve obamacare.
let’s play HARDball
Can House not fund the courts?
Everyone except high ranking party members and selected favorites.
Four legs good. Two legs better.
You are dreaming Night Man.
They have the presidency, the senate, the courts and the slavish press.
You have John Boehner.
Agreed, but I was referring to legislation, such as immigration reform.
If not, the Tea Party caucus will make his life miserable.
Usually he looks like a constipated undertaker.
That's my take. Everyone's doing the same old chatter, "Oh they've really done it now", "Lame duck","The people have awakened". and so on.
But the game has changed since those types of consequences applied. Races that should be GOP end up in squeakers and are pulled out by Dems (VA most recent). We can't trust polls pre-election, too many stated libs running them, can't depend on the media, not even poll-watchers (GOP thrown out in Philly 2012) so how can we win?
I've been saying for a while that the Dems were too cocky about 2014, saying "Let's just wait and see what the people say". They'll cheat, the media will get all breathless about the horse races yet call elections hours before they're actually over, and the Democrats will stay in power.
They aren’t undoing a two century precedent, they are undoing their own ten-year-old precedent.
It was the Democrats starting when they went back to the minority in 2003 who adopted the filibuster as a systemic tool to block nominees when the President had a majority in the Senate. This was unheard of when Clinton had a majority (1993 and 1994) and for the long stretch (1977 to 1987) after the adoption of the modern filibuster.
Strategically it makes sense. Obama is willing and able to appoint judges far more outside the mainstream than a President Cruz or Christie would likley to with a Republican Senate in 2017.
Reid just voted for the end of ObamaCare.
The only court defined by the Constitution is the Supreme Court.
If by some miracle Conservatives can win all three branches in 2016, the new Congress has in it's Constitutional powers the ability to just dissolve any District Court.
It would be Constitutional for the Congress to dissolve any court filled with blatantly anti-Constitutional Marxists.
Sorry.
bfl
Are you saying they defund the Supreme Court?
This is a desperation move. They WANT the focus of the next year to be partisan bickering. And not Obamacare. It’s their one remaining option to possibly hold enough Senate seats to keep a minimal majority.
The vast majority of the public has no idea how the filibuster works or how important it is. Thank the implosion of civics in public school education over the last 50 years.
The house want's lots of amnesty votes:
Vote 1: Defense of Borders Act.
Vote 2: Workplace Security Act.
.
.
Vote n: You get the picture
No matter what the Dems try, they won't be able to get Obamacare shunted to the sidelines. I'm also betting that Obama has completely pi$$ed off the insurance companies, who will send cancellation notices on millions of employer-provided policies to customers a few weeks before the November 2014 mid-terms.
The website will never be fixed, nor will the security issues ever be resolved.
He’ll be using EOs (Executive Orders) by the file cabinet-load now, to get done what he wants, over the next 3 years, to bypass the US Congress.
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.