The Briefing Room

General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 03:44:29 pm

Title: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 03:44:29 pm
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=478277FC-6E54-46C0-B2C1-7E59A3AF96B1 (http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=478277FC-6E54-46C0-B2C1-7E59A3AF96B1)

 Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
By: Burgess Everett
November 21, 2013 09:32 AM EST

Senate Republicans’ ability to filibuster President Barack Obama’s nominees could soon be history.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid may move toward a historic change in the Senate rules to eliminate the filibuster on most nominations as soon as Thursday, according to senior Democratic aides.

Reid is strongly considering calling up one in a group of blocked nominees to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals for another round of votes, furious that Republicans have thwarted the nominations of Robert Wilkins, Nina Pillard and Patricia Millette. If a second go-round fails on that judicial pick, Reid would likely unilaterally move to change the rules of the Senate by a majority vote — the “nuclear option,” Senate sources said.

Privately, Senate Democratic leaders insist they prefer confirmation of Obama’s nominees rather than a rules change. And lawmakers have been at this point before.


The rules change being discussed among top Democrats would eliminate filibusters on all executive nominees as well as all judicial nominees, except those to the Supreme Court. Such a rules change would pave the path toward smoother confirmation for two more key Obama nominees: Janet Yellen to lead the Federal Reserve and Jeh Johnson to helm the Department of Homeland Security.

Republicans are publicly warning that the change would simply be a path to eliminating the filibuster on everything, even on legislation — which would mean when the GOP takes the majority, Democrats will regret pushing the nuke button.

“You always have to take it seriously. I just think it would be incredibly short-sighted,” said Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, the Republican whip. “It just seems to be something they keep coming back to when [Democrats] don’t get their way.”



A change to Senate’s age-old rules still could be headed off by a last-minute deal with Republicans, but a leadership source was bearish on such a breakthrough. The Senate came to the brink of a more narrow rules change that would have affected only executive nominees this summer but longtime lawmakers like Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) were able to agree to help move a series of stalled nominations and avoid diluting the minority’s power.

This time around there hasn’t been as strong an effort to head off the rules change. McCain made an offer on Wednesday that Democrats found insufficient because it didn’t include all three judges; Reid says he won’t settle for less than filling out the 11-seat court’s three vacancies.

But not all Democrats are wedded to a rules change, and some are proactively working to figure out if the “nuclear option” can be avoided. One of those, Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), helped avoid the “nuclear option” in 2005 when Republicans were trying to change the rules to circumvent Democratic filibusters of George W. Bush’s judicial nominees.


“Democrats and Republicans are talking, that’s always good. I’m one of those talking, no breaking news, just talking to see where people are on things,” Pryor said in an interview Wednesday.

Several other centrist Democrats, like Sens. Max Baucus of Montana and Joe Manchin of West Virginia, also say publicly they are undecided. But Manchin blasted Republicans’ reasoning for blocking the judges under the argument that the court isn’t busy enough and that President Barack Obama is trying to “pack” the powerful D.C. Circuit.

“You’re saying just because they’re being presented from a Democrat president? That’s not a good enough reason,” Manchin said.

In addition to Wilkins, Pillard and Millette, Republicans also blocked the elevation of Rep. Mel Watt (D-N.C.) to head the Federal Housing Finance Agency and a fourth D.C. Circuit nominee in March, Caitlin Halligan. A fifth nominee, Sri Srinivasan, was confirmed to the court unanimously in May.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 03:44:57 pm
Reid is on the floor now. looks like he's gonna do it
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 03:45:35 pm
Byron York ‏@ByronYork 1m

 Can't wait until the GOP's turn to strip minority rights…..there are no rules anymore, total war.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 03:46:58 pm
Carrie Dann ‏@CarrieNBCNews 39s

Reid says GOP in Senate has "turned 'advise and consent' into 'deny and obstruct.'"




Amanda Carpenter ‏@amandacarpenter 1m

Given the horrendous poll number Democrats are suffering for Obamacare, Reid is going to regret this. Very quickly. Bet on it.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 03:49:27 pm
David Freddoso ‏@freddoso 1m

Rs shouldn't complain about this change. Embrace it, start talking about how you'll use it to repeal Obamacare.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 03:56:26 pm
JohnCornyn ‏@JohnCornyn 38s

Senate majority leader Harry Reid's temper tantrum unfolding now on Senate floor




Jonah Goldberg ‏@JonahNRO 7m

Reid nuking senate to draw eyes from crashing ObamaCare. It's sorta like torching your house to distract burglar.




Manu Raju ‏@mkraju 2m

McConnell now accusing Senate Ds of changing the subject away from Obamacare by moving on nuclear option



Stew ‏@StewSays 2m

Sen. McConnell: So yeah, I’d probably be running for the exits too if I had supported this law. #Obamacare #NuclearOption
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 03:58:18 pm
John Hayward ‏@Doc_0 49m

This is not a good time for the party that dumped ObamaCare on America to be talking about "nuclear options" in the Senate.



Molly Ball ‏@mollyesque 1m

McConnell says Dems are "cooking up a fake fight over judges" to distract from Obamacare.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 04:07:01 pm
J Rollins ‏@crimsonblessed 1m

@amandacarpenter  Demo to use hyper-speed tactics to usher in their socialist programs & appointees before the next election.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 04:08:04 pm
Stew ‏@StewSays 2m

before current Democrat gambit, Senate confirmed 215 judicial nominees and rejected a grand total of 2---a confirmation rate of 99%.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 04:09:18 pm
Chad Pergram ‏@ChadPergram 1m

McConnell says Dems could regret nuclear option "a lot sooner than you think."





Melissa Clouthier ‏@MelissaTweets 1m

RT @freddoso: The precedent here is not the filibuster. It's that you can change senate rules w 51 votes.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 04:10:43 pm
The Dems are worried they will lose the Senate in 14 thereby they will have to push through all their socialist ideas asap
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: rangerrebew on November 21, 2013, 05:16:27 pm
In 2005 Reid was vehemently against what he is now proposing.  Of course then the republicans controlled the senate.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 05:19:46 pm
Voting on it now...
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 05:20:43 pm
Guy Benson ‏@guypbenson 40s

Senate Democrats currently voting to do something they called "un-American" and a "Constitutional crisis" a few years ago.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 05:23:50 pm
McConnell: Reid's Filibuster Threat Doesn't Distract People From ObamaCare - It Reminds Them Of It (Video)

McConnell: Reid's Filibuster Threat Doesn't Distract People From ObamaCare - It Reminds Them Of It (Video)
by Debra Heine 21 Nov 2013, 9:18 AM PDT View Discussion
Share This:
In response to Harry Reid Threatens to Go Nuclear - In 2005 He Felt Differently (Video):

US Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell took to the Senate floor, this morning to blast Democrats for attempting to change the subject from the devastating consequences of Obamacare to changing the Senate rules regarding filibusters.

He reminded the chamber how the Obama administration and Democrats were willing to do and say anything in order to force ObamaCare on the public.

"The president and his Democratic allies were so determined to force their vision of healthcare on the public, 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 use the doctors and hospitals they were already losing. But of course, we know, that rhetoric doesn't match reality," McConnell said.

After making note of the unmitigated disaster ObamaCare has become, he taunted "I'd be running for the exits, too, if I'd supported this law. I'd be looking to change the subject!"

He continued, "it doesn't distract people from ObamaCare - it reminds them of ObamaCare. It reminds them of all the broken promises, it reminds them of the power grabs, it reminds them of the way Democrats set up one set of rules for themselves, and another, for everybody else.

One set of rules for them - and another for everybody else. Actually, this is all 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."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=UUIauYUJw6YVOJ7_6olem62w&v=ovN0BoJsHgk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=UUIauYUJw6YVOJ7_6olem62w&v=ovN0BoJsHgk)
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 05:24:40 pm
Sean Agnew ‏@seanagnew 40s

"@guypbenson: Senate Democrats currently voting to do something they called "un-American" and a "Constitutional crisis" a few years ago."
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: Bigun on November 21, 2013, 05:26:26 pm
Anything to get attention off Obamacare!
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 05:32:47 pm
John Harwood ‏@JohnJHarwood 2m

Duck under desks! @ryangrim: Boxer votes, followed by Reid, which makes 51. Nuke is detonated.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 05:33:45 pm
Dingy Harry Reid out there threatening to use nuclear option. This is an attempt to distract from Obamacare...-- Rush L
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 05:36:35 pm
@jpodhoretz Should the GOP have caved on the DC Circuit fight? Accepting 2 of the 3 Dem nominees would have fractured Reid's caucus
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 05:37:19 pm
jimgeraghty ‏@jimgeraghty 2m

So, repealing whatever's left of Obamacare in January 2017 will take 218 GOP House members, 51 GOP senators, and a GOP president.



Mike Memoli ‏@mikememoli 1m

@jimgeraghty no. this is only on nominations. Senate Rs, if in majority, would have to move to extend to legislation
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: Right_in_Virginia on November 21, 2013, 05:54:56 pm
David Freddoso ‏@freddoso 1m

Rs shouldn't complain about this change. Embrace it, start talking about how you'll use it to repeal Obamacare.

So the simple majority applies to every bill now????
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 06:02:08 pm
So the simple majority applies to every bill now????

No just court nominees...excluding SCOTUS
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 06:05:02 pm
WASHINGTON — The Senate went nuclear on Thursday, changing the Senate rules for confirming judicial and executive nominees and significantly curbing the power of the minority party.

Under the new rules, only a simple majority would be needed to clear a procedural hurdle in the approval process for executive nominees and judicial nominees. Currently, 60 votes are required to clear that hurdle, which gives the minority the party the power to filibuster and block nominees of whom they disapprove. For Supreme Court nominees, the 60-vote requirement would remain in effect.

In the past several weeks, Republicans have used that power to block three nominees to the District of Columbia Circuit Court, prompting Reid to call for an end to the “gridlock” and move forward with the rules change.


“The need for change is so very, very obvious,” Reid said on the Senate floor Thursday, as almost every senator sat at his or her desk in recognition of the significance of the moment. “It’s clearly visible. It’s manifest we have to do something to change things.”

Fifty-two senators voted for the rules changes — all Democrats and Independents. Three Democrats joined Republicans in opposing the change: West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, Arkansas Sen. Mark Pryor, and Michigan Sen. Carl Levin, who has openly opposed the rules change.

Twice earlier this year, Democrats had threatened to move on the nuclear option in the face of Republican opposition to nominees, but both times an agreement was reached to avert the move. Republican Sen. John McCain told reporters Thursday that he had been working “night and day” to find an agreement this time, but that he had thus far had “no success.”

Republicans have repeatedly argued, as Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell did Thursday morning, that Democrats will rue the day they changed the rules if they lose the majority.

“I realize this sort of wishful thinking might appeal to the uninitiated newcomers in the Democratic conference who served exactly zero days in the minority, but the rest of you guys should know better,” McConnell said in a floor speech Thursday, saying that Democrats would inevitably come to “regret” the rules change, possibly, he said, “a lot sooner than you think.”


Still, Reid said that the gridlock made it necessary for the Senate to “evolve.”

“It’s time to change,” Reid said. “It’s time to change the Senate before this institution becomes obsolete.”



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/21/reid-moves-forward-with-change-to-filibuster-rules/#ixzz2lIwjgXIr
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: happyg on November 21, 2013, 06:08:43 pm
Republican Senators might as well go back to their districts and do like Obama, campaign for the next election.  They will have no voice in the Senate, so why bother. I am royally po'd.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 06:09:21 pm
Advise and Consent is now dead...Rush
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 06:13:23 pm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/senate-poised-to-limit-filibusters-in-party-line-vote-that-would-alter-centuries-of-precedent/2013/11/21/d065cfe8-52b6-11e3-9fe0-fd2ca728e67c_print.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/senate-poised-to-limit-filibusters-in-party-line-vote-that-would-alter-centuries-of-precedent/2013/11/21/d065cfe8-52b6-11e3-9fe0-fd2ca728e67c_print.html)

Reid, Democrats trigger ‘nuclear’ option; eliminate most filibusters on nominees

By Paul Kane, Updated: Thursday, November 21, 12:02 PM

The partisan battles that have paralyzed Washington in recent years took a historic turn on Thursday, when Senate Democrats eliminated filibusters for most presidential nominations, severely curtailing the political leverage of the Republican minority in the Senate and assuring an escalation of partisan warfare.

The rule change means federal judge nominees and executive-office appointments can be confirmed by a simple majority of senators, rather than the 60-vote super majority that has been required for more than two centuries.

The change does not apply to Supreme Court nominations. But the vote, mostly along party lines, reverses nearly 225 years of precedent and dramatically alters the landscape for both Democratic and Republican presidents, especially if their own political party holds a majority of, but fewer than 60, Senate seats.

[See the latest updates.]

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) accused Democrats of a power grab and suggested that they will regret their decision if Republicans regain control of the chamber.

“We’re not interested in having a gun put to our head any longer,” McConnell said. “Some of us have been around here long enough to know that the shoe is sometimes on the other foot.” McConnell then addressed Democrats directly, saying: “You may regret this a lot sooner than you think,” he said.

Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, warned Democrats against the rule change on Wednesday, saying that if the GOP reclaimed the Senate majority, Republicans would further alter the rules to include Supreme Court nominees, so that Democrats could not filibuster a Republican pick for the nation’s highest court.

The vote to change the rule passed 52-48. Three Democrats – Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) – joined with 45 Republicans in opposing the measure. Levin is a longtime senator who remembers well the years when Democratic filibusters blocked nominees of Republican presidents; Manchin and Pryor come from Republican-leaning states.

Infuriated by what he sees as a pattern of obstruction and delay over President Obama’s nominees, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) triggered the so-called “nuclear option” by proposing a motion to reconsider the nomination of Patricia Millet, one of the judicial nominees whom Republicans recently blocked by a filibuster, to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

The Senate voted 57-40, with three abstentions, to reconsider Millett’s nomination. Several procedural votes followed. The Senate Parliamentarian, speaking through Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), the chamber’s president pro temp, then ruled that 60 votes are needed to cut off a filibuster and move to a final confirmation vote. Reid appealed that ruling, asking senators to decide whether it should stand.

Senators began voting about 12:15 p.m. The final vote was 52 in favor of changing the rule, 48 against.

The Democratic victory paves the way for the rapid confirmation of Millett and two other nominee to the D.C. appeals court. All have recently been stymied by GOP filibusters, amid Republican assertions that the critical appellate court simply did not need any more judges.

But the impact of the move is be more far-reaching. The means for executing this rules change — a simple-majority vote, rather than the long-standing two-thirds majority required to change the chamber’s standing rules — is more controversial than the actual move itself.

Many Senate majorities have thought about using this technical maneuver to get around centuries of parliamentary precedent, but none has done so in a unilateral move on a major change of rules or precedents. This simple-majority vote has been executed in the past to change relatively minor precedents involving how to handle amendments; for example, one such change short-circuited the number of filibusters that the minority party could deploy on nominations.

Reid has rattled his saber on the filibuster rules at least three other times in the past three years, yielding each time to a bipartisan compromise brokered by the chamber’s elder statesmen.

But no deal emerged by the time debate started Thursday morning. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the main negotiator who brokered recent deals to avert such a showdown, as well as one in 2005, met with Reid on Wednesday, but neither side reported progress.

The main protagonists for the rules change have been junior Democrats elected in the last six or seven years, who have alleged that Republicans have used the arcane filibuster rules to create a procedural logjam that has left the Senate deadlocked. Upon arriving in 2009, Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) said, he found that “the Senate was a graveyard for good ideas.”

As he recounted in a speech this week, Udall said, “I am sorry to say that little has changed. The digging continues.”

As envisioned earlier this week, Democrats would issue a new rule that would still allow for 60-vote-threshold filibusters on legislation and nominees to the Supreme Court.

Republicans, weary from the third rules fight this year, seemed to have adopted a resigned indifference to this latest threat, as opposed to the heated rhetoric in mid-July when the issue last flared up. Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, mocked the idea that the Democrats would leave in place the filibuster rule for Supreme Court nominations, in the event that a GOP nominee wins the White House in 2016.

He made clear that if that occurred, and the GOP reclaimed the Senate majority, the Republicans would then alter the rules so that Democrats could not filibuster a Republican pick for the Supreme Court. “If [Reid] changes the rules for some judicial nominees, he is effectively changing them for all judicial nominees, including the Supreme Court,” Grassley said Wednesday.

Reid’s move is a reversal of his position in 2005, when he was minority leader and fought the GOP majority’s bid to change rules on a party-line vote. A bipartisan, rump caucus led by McCain defused that effort.

At the time, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) was the No. 2 GOP leader and helped push the effort to eliminate filibusters on the George W. Bush White House’s judicial selections. Eight years later, McConnell, now the minority leader, has grown publicly furious over Reid’s threats to use the same maneuver.

Democrats contend that this GOP minority, with a handful of senators elected as tea party heroes, has overrun McConnell’s institutional inclinations and served as a procedural roadblock on most rudimentary things. According to the Congressional Research Service, from 1967 through 2012, majority leaders had to file motions to try to break a filibuster of a judicial nominee 67 times — and 31 of those, more than 46 percent — occurred in the last five years of an Obama White House and Democratic majority.

Republicans contend that their aggressive posture is merely a natural growth from a decades-long war over the federal judiciary, noting that what prompted the 2005 rules showdown were at least 10 filibusters of GOP judicial nominees. To date, only a handful of Obama’s judicial selections have gone to a vote and been filibustered by the minority.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 06:14:18 pm
(http://cdn.breitbart.com/mediaserver/Breitbart/Breitbart-TV/2013/11/21/rei.jpg?w=200)
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 06:15:24 pm
*temporary solution*..only when the Dems are in power per Rush
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 06:17:37 pm
daveweigel ‏@daveweigel 53s

Filibuster rule change also means that Obama could replace Sebelius without worrying about GOP filibuster. HINT. HINT.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 06:18:21 pm
Chad Pergram ‏@ChadPergram 1m

McConnell: The solution to this problem is an election. At the ballot box. we look forward to next election.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 06:19:14 pm
Senator Roy Blunt ‏@RoyBlunt 54s

Dems decided on their own to involve govt in every American’s health care & now they want to make decisions on their own abt every fed judge
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 06:20:36 pm
Its the DC Court of Appeals..... Harry Reid breaks the rules to get Obama's "RADICAL" Judges on the DC Court of Appeals.....
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 06:22:51 pm
Chad Pergram ‏@ChadPergram 23m

Senate now voting to reconsider Patricia Millett nomination to serve on DC Circuit. Now only needs 51 votes instead of 60.




they are wasting no time
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 06:23:40 pm
@BretBaier @TheFiveFNC FLASHBACK:Reid Calls What He Did Today To Sen's Filibuster Rules “Un-American” And “Illegal
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 06:46:21 pm
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/191057-mcconnell-youll-regret-this (http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/191057-mcconnell-youll-regret-this)

November 21, 2013, 11:38 am
McConnell: ‘You’ll regret this’

By Ramsey Cox

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) warned Democrats Thursday that they’d regret using the “nuclear option.”

“You’ll regret this, and you may regret this a lot sooner than you think,” McConnell said on the Senate floor.


Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Thursday started the process of invoking the nuclear option, saying he wanted to change Senate rules to prevent the minority from filibustering any nominations other than those to the Supreme Court.

McConnell opposes the effort and argues Democrats are just trying to distract the public from ObamaCare's botched rollout.

In a bid to prevent the move, he offered a motion that would have the Senate adjourn.

Reid has threatened to use the nuclear option several times this year. But each time lawmakers gathered to discuss alternatives.

At the beginning of the year, Republicans vowed not to filibuster any of President Obama’s nominees unless there were “extraordinary circumstances.” Democrats say the GOP has reneged on that promise.

Reid has been frustrated with the Senate's inability to move forward with three of Obama's judicial nominees to the country's second most powerful court.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: katzenjammer on November 21, 2013, 06:50:37 pm
Quote
The means for executing this rules change — a simple-majority vote, rather than the long-standing two-thirds majority required to change the chamber’s standing rules — is more controversial than the actual move itself.

This.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: happyg on November 21, 2013, 06:59:00 pm

zerohedge ‏@zerohedge  6m 
Obama Explains Why "Even If You Like Your Filibuster, You Can't Keep It" - Live Webcast http://tinyurl.com/nu4gfdv




 Angie ‏@Artist_Angie  9m 
In other news @SenatorReid is proposing a bill to make it illegal for Conservatives to run for office... #nuclearoption

   
 Ryan Tyler ‏@LFS7  5m 
we have been in deep shit all along its just now the smell is filling the nostrils

Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 07:02:28 pm
Noah Rothman ‏@NoahCRothman 2m

Chuck Todd gets honesty points: Activist Dem base, depressed about health care, demanded this move to feel better about themselves
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 07:03:02 pm
White House Live ‏@WHLive 1m

Obama: "They have defeated action to help women fight for equal pay. To help striving young immigrants earn their citizenship."


Obama: 'All too often, we have seen a single senator or a handful of senators choose to abuse arcane procedures
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 07:05:03 pm
Buck Sexton ‏@BuckSexton 10m

Harry Reid passing nuclear option is straight out of the statist playbook. Public has turned on Obama, so now it's time to pack the courts.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: happyg on November 21, 2013, 07:09:50 pm
The House better hang onto the purse strings, and to hell with giving dems everything they want. What's next after appointing far left, radical judges to the DC circuit courts? Amnesty for all immigrants? Citizenship?
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: happyg on November 21, 2013, 07:19:24 pm
Derek Hunter ‏@derekahunter  6m 
When Republicans get back a majority in the Senate they should immediately call on the House to impeach all Obama judges made here on out.

FloridaJayhawk ‏@HouseCracka  4m 
Phone Call "we gotta get the ___ out of here" as he is watching ObowMao seize power.

RB ‏@RBPundit  5m 
Shorter Obama: "This 'working across the aisle' thing is too hard. That's why we nuked the Senate. Work is hard."

RNC Research ‏@RNCResearch  13m 
FILIBUSTER FLASHBACK: In 2005, Obama Said The Filibuster Protected “Free And Democratic Debate

RNC Research ‏@RNCResearch  13m 
FILIBUSTER FLASHBACK: Obama: Nuclear Option Will Increase "Fighting" And "Bitterness

Ed USA Wrather ‏@EdUSAWrather  43m 
Senate Dems with implementation of nuclear option are trying

♥♥♥A♥♥♥ ‏@Flower_Power_Us  1m 
The Obama regime just sowed its hand.TOTAL CONTROL is the aim.Now I knowYObama refused2go Lincolns Address ceremony. He plans nation divide

Chuck Nellis ‏@ChuckNellis  9m 
Obama & the Democrat Congress are attempting an unConstitutional coup on America!

Tammy Bruce ‏@HeyTammyBruce  2m 
Obama's comments supporting the change in Senate rules declare the rights of the minority do not matter. We see that in everything he does

Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: Rapunzel on November 21, 2013, 07:21:57 pm
Obama doesn't care what we the people think, his Democratic senators are going to go the distance for him and he knows Republicans like McCain and Graham are going to dance on the head of a pin for him -- he is king donchaknow...  and Boehner doesn't have the spinal fortitude to do anything about it in the congress.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: xfreeper on November 21, 2013, 07:41:25 pm
The GOP should exit in mass. Let the senate lose whatever legitimacy it has left
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: Rapunzel on November 21, 2013, 07:43:44 pm
The GOP should exit in mass. Let the senate lose whatever legitimacy it has left

I agree....... but they won't.  The GOP is like an abused wife where the Democrats and Obama are concerned...
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: Rapunzel on November 21, 2013, 07:50:40 pm
DanRiehl ‏@DanRiehl 5m

Don't worry, this GOP will get all bi-partisan and remove the nuclear option if they ever get the majority just to feel the media love..
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: happyg on November 21, 2013, 07:52:03 pm
Flashback Hillary ’05: If President Can’t Get 60 Votes For Nominee, Then He Should Rethink Whom He Is Nominating

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dvLGZReSTDA
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: rb224315 on November 21, 2013, 07:54:11 pm
McConnell: ‘You’ll regret this’

“You’ll regret this, and you may regret this a lot sooner than you think,” McConnell said on the Senate floor.

D*mn straight, the gloves are off now.  With the way 0bamacare was passed, the subsequent cluster foxtrot of its implementation, and now this, the GOP would be absolutely foolish not to run roughshod over the Democrats if they can ever figure out how to get back into power.  Gut or disband the EPA, Education Dept., and a few others, and do whatever is necessary to make SS solvent--means testing, private accounts, raise the retirement age, etc.  Term limits . . . the list is endless.

Of course, if we're going to act like Democrats, we have to really act like Democrats.  No giving away the game beforehand--we may have to lie about our positions on controversial issues in order to get elected but it's for the good of the country.  :-|
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: olde north church on November 21, 2013, 07:55:25 pm
@jpodhoretz Should the GOP have caved on the DC Circuit fight? Accepting 2 of the 3 Dem nominees would have fractured Reid's caucus

1 would have been enough.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: Rapunzel on November 21, 2013, 08:14:39 pm
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/democrats-vote-curb-filibusters-appointees

snip........

Quote
The move was backed by all but three Democrats and opposed by all the Senate's Republicans. Democratic dissidents were Sens. Carl Levin of Michigan, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Mark Pryor of Arkansas.

Pryor issued a statement saying the Senate "was designed to protect_not stamp out_the voices of the minority."

The change is the most far-reaching since 1975, when a two-thirds requirement for cutting off filibusters against legislation and all nominations was lowered to 60 votes.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: xfreeper on November 21, 2013, 08:18:42 pm
Democratic dissidents were Sens. Carl Levin of Michigan, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Mark Pryor of Arkansas.

all that means is their votes weren't needed and it's their turn to be able to talk out of both sides of their mouths
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: happyg on November 21, 2013, 08:39:25 pm
There's still a glimmer of hope that it might backfire. Now, republicans only need a simple majority to pass ACA. 39 have already defected.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: andy58-in-nh on November 21, 2013, 08:45:28 pm

“You’ll regret this, and you may regret this a lot sooner than you think,” McConnell said on the Senate floor.


I feel like Sean Connery's character, officer Jim Malone in The Untouchables, speaking to Kevin Costner (Eliot Ness): "And what are you prepared to do about it???!!!"
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: xfreeper on November 21, 2013, 09:01:29 pm
There's still a glimmer of hope that it might backfire. Now, republicans only need a simple majority to pass ACA. 39 have already defected.

I think harry's action was specific to the judges
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: flowers on November 21, 2013, 09:07:23 pm
Havent read all the post on this thread.......for any who think the GOP will get payback when they retake the senate........................when will that be? how many years from now? they will get all undocumented democrats for at least a generation as voters.  :chairbang:
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mystery-ak on November 21, 2013, 09:09:25 pm
 More on Senate Democrats Going Nuclear
By  Andrew C. McCarthy
November 21, 2013 1:50 PM
Comments
119

Print
Text 

From David’s keyboard to God’s ears. But meantime, two other quick thoughts:

1. Courts cannot function unless Congress funds them — meaning both houses of Congress approving spending on them.

2. The Constitution vests in Congress decisions about what federal circuit and district courts we need. It does not say that once courts and the judgeships on those courts are established, these must be maintained forever.

If senate rules are now to be changed on the dime by the majority, all kinds of seemingly impossible things become possible. 
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mountaineer on November 21, 2013, 09:10:18 pm
Democratic dissidents were Sens. Carl Levin of Michigan, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Mark Pryor of Arkansas.

all that means is their votes weren't needed and it's their turn to be able to talk out of both sides of their mouths
That's exactly what it means. DO NOT believe any of the nonsense about Joe "Mojo" Manchin ever standing up to BHO. It's all an act.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: flowers on November 21, 2013, 09:11:49 pm
Havent read all the post on this thread.......for any who think the GOP will get payback when they retake the senate........................when will that be? how many years from now? they will get all undocumented democrats for at least a generation as voters.  :chairbang:
Oh another thing for any of you who think we will re-take congress in the midterms..................no way. They stole the last re-election for him many ways, they have taken notes and will do so again for the 2014 midterms. I pray I am wrong......I seriously doubt it.  8888crybaby **nononono*
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: xfreeper on November 21, 2013, 09:18:57 pm
Doesn't matter. If you like your filibuster, you can keep it, period
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mountaineer on November 21, 2013, 09:25:44 pm
Havent read all the post on this thread ... for any who think the GOP will get payback when they retake the senate........................when will that be? how many years from now? they will get all undocumented democrats for at least a generation as voters.  :chairbang:
I fear you're right. The GOP, even if it could overcome the election fraud and hold both the House and Senate, has an annoying habit of not acting like the party in power. It's 1932, and we are Germany.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: flowers on November 21, 2013, 09:29:37 pm
I fear you're right. The GOP, even if it could overcome the election fraud and hold both the House and Senate, has an annoying habit of not acting like the party in power. It's 1932, and we are Germany.
As a young flower pod I used to wonder how those in Germany got away with it? Now I know.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: katzenjammer on November 21, 2013, 09:32:16 pm
Oh another thing for any of you who think we will re-take congress in the midterms..................no way. They stole the last re-election for him many ways, they have taken notes and will do so again for the 2014 midterms. I pray I am wrong......I seriously doubt it.  8888crybaby **nononono*

Yes, it is a hard thing to stomach, and many will fight you tooth and nail on the voter fraud issue simply because it is so hard to stomach (because of the completely dark and sweeping implications of it).  But I believe that you are correct, and I also share your hope/prayer that we are both WRONG!!!
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: collins on November 21, 2013, 09:41:39 pm
Yes, there's no way Hairy Reed's move can be called anything but a statist power grab. I also think the GOP will keep the House but won't win the Senate next year, but in case I'm wrong about the Senate, the GOP really needs to wise up about what they're up against. The ends always justify the means to the left.
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: Cincinnatus on November 21, 2013, 09:44:18 pm
Harry Reid, 2005:
Quote
But now, in order to break down the separation of powers and ram through their appointees to the judicial branch, President Bush and the Republican leadership want to eliminate a two-hundred-year-old American rule saying that every member of the Senate can rise to say their piece and speak on behalf of the people that sent them here."

Barack Obama, 2005:
Quote
I rise today to urge my colleagues to think about the implications the nuclear option would have on this chamber and this country. I urge you to think not just about winning every debate, but about protecting free and democratic debate.

Quote
What they [the American people] don't expect is for one party - be it Republican or Democrat - to change the rules in the middle of the game so that they can make all the decisions while the other party is told to sit down and keep quiet

http://www.examiner.com/article/obama-and-harry-reid-were-against-the-nuclear-option-before-they-were-for-it

That complete POS Obama also said today of the 60 vote requirement
Quote
today’s pattern of obstruction . . . just isn’t normal; it’s not what our founders envisioned
. This rule has been in force since 1789. The first US Congress convened in that very year. Do you suppose with Washington as President, Adams as Vice-President, and Madison in the House at that time our beloved Constitutional scholar has his head up his rectum?
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: Rapunzel on November 21, 2013, 10:08:23 pm
Is there ANYONE here who actually believes O taught Constitutional law - I mean the Constitution as written, not his socialst revisionism???
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: xfreeper on November 21, 2013, 10:14:17 pm
I don't know about teaching but he is certainly a constitutional scholar. Just ask Joe Biden
Title: Re: Harry Reid may go 'nuclear' Thursday
Post by: mountaineer on November 22, 2013, 12:05:34 am
Is there ANYONE here who actually believes O taught Constitutional law - I mean the Constitution as written, not his socialst revisionism???
He taught that the Constitution was a flawed document which wasn't relevant and should be discarded, and that the law is whatever the Marxists in power say it is.

That's almost like teaching Consitutional law.