Reid goes nuclear and what it means

So the senate and Harry Reid went for the nuclear option today which means instead of
the GOP filibustering everything, you get an up and down vote on judges. The GOP was for
this nuclear option during the bush lite years, 2005 I believe when the DEMO’s tried to stop a small
number of judges instead of every single judge the GOP is doing today. The only way to get the government moving
today is to stop the GOP from stopping everything. Mister I will cry over everything, says this nuclear option
clears the way for President Rubio to make every single appointment he wants in 2016. Mitch was drinking a little
earlier than usual today. It is a chance that the DEMO’s will win both the house and senate in 2014, I said chance and
they have a better than good chance to win the presidency in 2016 given the GOP usual lineup of terrible choices.
My only problem with going nuclear is how long it took to do it. It should have happen a few years ago. Better late than never.

Kropotkin

The Reeps really didn’t give the Dems any other choice if we want to have a working government and judicial system.

Because we all know the GOP invented the idea of pointlessly blocking appointments for purely ideological reasons.

Sometimes it seems like the typical Democrat on the internet isn’t old enough to have voted for Clinton.

As a purely pragmatic matter, you guys know that there will be a Republican president appointing things some day, under a narrow GOP majority Senate, right? These things tend to change every decade or so.

Seriously, are you against the idea of giving the minority party (whoever it is) influence in Congress in principle, or do you just not want the minority party to have influence right now because you don’t like them?

Uccisore: Because we all know the GOP invented the idea of pointlessly blocking appointments for purely ideological reasons.

K: it is as old as the hills however with that said, the GOP took it to another level and a very destructive one.
The dem’s didn’t shut down the government, twice, and the dem’s didn’t fight every single presidential judge from
the GOP and it wasn’t the dem’s who have taken obstruction to a whole new level where government doesn’t even work anymore.
Remember your history.

U: Sometimes it seems like the typical Democrat on the internet isn’t old enough to have voted for Clinton.

K: I voted against ford in 76, so I am a little bit older than the average poster here.

U: As a purely pragmatic matter, you guys know that there will be a Republican president appointing things some day, under a narrow GOP majority Senate, right? These things tend to change every decade or so.

K:Yes the wheels will turn however I given the current state of the GOP and demographics, I don’t think they will
win the presidency for quite a while.

U:Seriously, are you against the idea of giving the minority party (whoever it is) influence in Congress in principle, or do you just not want the minority party to have influence right now because you don’t like them?
[/quote]
K: it is not about right now. It is about the coming civil war in America. Even my 78 year old mom believes
that the U.S is within a few years of a major, major civil war. Might not be as many dead as in the original, but
the death toll might be in the hundreds of thousands. The war will be won or lost in the years before the war begins and
so every victory is a step toward winning the civil war.

Kropotkin

Ucc, I voted for Clinton.

The bluedog Dems like Clinton and the DLCers are a problem, but nothing like the teaper and rightwing corporatist Reeps.

The Reeps will shut down government and use all kinds of euphemisms to disguise the corporatist whim of iron behind it.

I don’t think Reid was really given a choice. Judicial appointees have to be able to serve, and government really cannot be shut down.

Kropotkin,

The question is, does stripping away the powers of the minority party in the Senate make sense, is it good, just Governance independently of the immediate gains or losses to our favored parties? It scares me that you seem incapable of exploring this issue in a way other than “This will screw over Republicans in the short term and so therefore I am in favor of it.”

Agreed. And nowedays short term equals about 2 years, whereupon It may be assumed things will change according from whence political winds are coming from. And worse case scenario(or best) is, the majority solid Republican South can again changeing colors again, for expediency’s sake. Nothing is written in granite, maybe only funeral tombs.

Remember, this option is only for confirmations, not legislation. So, yes, it’s a good thing.

“It’s not as horrible as it could be” is not equal to “Yes it’s a good thing.” The only good thing I hear about it is that it screws Republicans and you don’t like Republicans.