A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry

Flashback - Senate democrats make case against nuclear option

Posted: Nov 22, 2013

These are clips from C-Span. They were arguing against what they are now doing. I guess it's not okay for republicans, but it is okay for them. Very interesting.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/2859380230001/flashback-senate-democrats-make-case-against-nuclear-option/

;

Yes, I remember it well. What has changed now is (sm) - Abby

[ In Reply To ..]
the Democrats must pass through their "progressive" i.e., radical agenda at all costs, even at the expense of the founding fathers, We the People, the Constitution, whatever. You want it, just ram it through. You don't like what we have?, change the rules. It's really simple for them. They have no scruples or morals, but they get re-elected, so that tells you a lot about the scruples and morals of the citizenry, doesn't it. It's sad.

Both parties are corrupt - Republicans rammed

[ In Reply To ..]
just as much through when Bush was in. They all need to be thrown out of office.

Name a few things Bush rammed through. - Refresh my poor little Conservative memory.

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

Two wrongs don't make a right - Sticking to the issue at hand

[ In Reply To ..]
I didn't post about the corruption in the republican party or Bush or Cheney, Regan, etc. Believe me I can find plenty of corruption there (along with equal on the democrats side). But that is not the issue here. That is not what my post was about. Not corruption, hypocrisy. Instead of staying on topic you are trying to lessen the severity of what is going on with the antecdote of "well the republicans this or that". I'd like to hear people's view points on this specific issue I posted. Not about republicans, not about Bush, not about Cheney shooting his friend or his gay daughter or Bush kids or anything else. That is not what my post is about.

Your post was trying to change the subject so that you wouldn't have to address this particular subject.

What is so radical about approving judicial appoinments? - Pubs threatened to reject all

[ In Reply To ..]
appointments made by Obama, sight unseen. That doesn't seem reasonable and definitely warrants some kind of action.

What radical agenda are you speaking of?

What does at the expense of the founding fathers mean? Do you think they would approve of appointments being denied before they are named?

Morals and scruples and re-election. Sanford. Enough said.

"Now, folks, the simple fact is when the majority - Best Answer from Rush Limbaugh

[ In Reply To ..]
in any group of people, when the majority can change the rules at any time, then there aren't any rules. This is a point that I've been making repeatedly all week long.

Carl Levin voted against it. There are three Democrats who voted against it. He was one of them, 'cause he recognizes this is bad, and it is.

Let's forget the Senate for a minute. Let's say there are 10 people in a room and they're a group, and the room is made up of six men and four women. Okay? The group has a rule that the men cannot rape the women. The group also has a rule that says any rule that will be changed must require six votes of the 10 to change the rule. Every now and then some lunatic in the group proposes to change the rule to allow women to be raped. But they never were able to get six votes for it. There were always the four women voting against it, and they always found two guys. Well, the guy that kept proposing that women be raped finally got tired of it and he was in the majority, he was one of the men, said, "You know what, we're gonna change the rule. Now all we need is five."

And the women said, "You can't do that."

"Yes, we are. We're the majority, we're changing the rule." Then they vote. Can the women be raped? Well, all it would take then is half the room. You could change the rule to say three. You could change the rule say three people want it, it's gonna happen. There's no rule. When the majority can change the rules, there aren't any. I have to think, if Sheets Byrd were still alive -- of course, Sheets Byrd was senile in the old days. I don't know how he'd come down on this. But for everything else he was, this guy, the Senate was church to him. It was inviolate. At least for a while. But it really is a fundamental discarding of hundreds of years of tradition, and for one reason only. Barack Obama can't get what he wants democratically. There's no other reason for this.

Barack Obama cannot get his nominees. He can't pack the DC court of appeals. He wants three additional judges, and he wants to be able to appoint Democrats. It will be a permanent Democrat majority on that court. He's been denied here, he's been denied there. His labor secretary was denied. His EPA secretaries have been denied, and he's fit to be tied. So he can't win by appointing people that appeal to a majority, so he got together with Dingy Harry and they just changed the rule.

The rule now is, the practical meaning of the rule is that there are no rules, and the Republicans' votes mean nothing. Whatever is proposed, the Republicans, if they stay unified, 45 votes against it means nothing. There's nothing they can do unless they can convince some Democrats to join 'em and deny the Democrats 51 votes. If that happens, Dingy Harry might change the rule again to say all we need 50 on this particular issue. Once you start changing the rules as the majority -- the Founders were terrified of the tyranny of the majority. One of the reasons that the Senate was structured and founded the way it is, as opposed to the House, it was designed for gridlock. It was designed to stop massive new laws being passed and voted on daily. It was designed to stop the growth of government.

A number of checks and balances were built in to prevent a tyranny from forming. And the only way a tyranny can form is if the majority throws the rules out. And it is a Democrat majority who has chosen tyranny here. Now, the people in the media love it, and the people on the left love it because they don't care how they win. They're not worried if they only have 20% of the people behind 'em. They don't care. They have no concern whatsoever for the democratic process, obviously not. But in terms of the nuclear option impacting Republican elections elsewhere, no. But the nuclear option gives the Senate the power to mean whoever is elected to the Senate as a Republican doesn't matter if they're in the minority. God could be a Republican senator and not matter.

My point is, it doesn't matter. The Republicans may as well not vote. Their votes mean nothing. The people that elected them have absolutely no representation in the Senate at all, other than their senator maybe getting to participate in hearings and ask questions of witnesses, you know, whoop-de-doo. It just means that the Senate no longer does advice and consent. It's simply consent. This is a rubber stamp for Barack Obama, what has happened. Whatever Obama wants that requires Senate approval has now just been rubber-stamped. It's not the House where all these judges have to be interviewed and pass muster and so forth, or cabinet appointees. It's the Senate."

What does this have to do with the above post? - ...

[ In Reply To ..]
In your own words, please.

It has everything to do with the above post - OP

[ In Reply To ..]
Not the poster you replied to, but her post is talking exactly about what I originally posted. Changing the rules.

"Forget the Senate" prefaced the argument that suggests it's okay to vote - whether or not to rape women

[ In Reply To ..]
Rape is against the law.

The Senate, BTW, is allowed to change the rules. The founding fathers did not specify anything about a super majority. The post I responded to originally (http://general.mtstars.com/368964.html) alluded to the fact that they did, incorrectly, but I guess interjection of the founding fathers "sounds" intelligent.

And it's okay to hold the opinion that rape and approving judicial appointments have something in common. My mind would never go there. I'm not surprised Rush's did. Many other analogies could have been made, if there really was a point to be made (but since there wasn't he had to mask his lack of a point with the shock factor-something his RW audience loves about him, but I'm very surprised rape was so widely accepted by so-called conservatives) Anyhow, I guess rape is the first thing that surfaced in his mind.

And obviously it's anyone's right to condone that line of thinking, especially those of a like mind.

More from Rush... poor thing can't make up his - mind!!

[ In Reply To ..]
"LIMBAUGH: This filibuster, as you know, they're filibustering these nominations which requires essentially 60 votes for a judge to be confirmed. The Constitution says nothing about this. The Constitution says simple majority, 51 votes. But because they're invoking the filibuster, which, you know, the Senate can make up its own rules but not when they impose on the Constitution and not when they impose on the legislative branch. Separation of powers here. But if nobody stops them, they're going to keep getting away with it. It's up to the Senate Republicans to stop them.

Now, this is Point 2. There's a so-called "nuclear" option, which I don't like that term. Call it the Constitutional Option. It would end the use of the filibuster for judicial nominations. The Democrats are warning that if the Republicans change the filibuster rule on them, then all hell will break loose. I can't think of anything worse than what they've done and will continue to do, which is prevent the president from appointing judges in federal court, so let them break out their new version of hell. What more can they do on this? And let them try it. They don't have the political standing in the country to do this. They don't have the love and devotion of a majority of the American people, so if they're going to claim all hell will break lose, let's see what their hell is. But don't call this the nuclear option. Call it the constitutional option."

That's a disgusting analogy that Rush made. - Wow

[ In Reply To ..]
There's an implication that all men are potential rapists and the only thing that stops them from doing it are "the rules."

What has happened to him? He seems to love to use degrading sexual imagery against women.

He was so lighthearted and funny during the 80s. I loved his show. He seemed happy. I almost feel sorry for him now. Something bad is going on with him, I think.

I love it. I think it's right on. - MT2

[ In Reply To ..]
x

I love the way Rush is like the Ghost Rider, - he shows the opposition's

[ In Reply To ..]
tactics in a sometimes provocative way.

Funny question. What has happened to him?? (sm) - msg

[ In Reply To ..]
The same thing that has happened to those of us who see what is coming down the pike. The country is being destroyed right before our eyes by a charismatic (I just about choke when I say that, at the very least I retch), leader who wants to take us down, and the people are letting him. Rush is mad. Just like some of the rest of us.

Mad? - NK

[ In Reply To ..]
As in insane? That would certainly explain his preoccupation with "bending over" for people, making sex tapes available on-line for his viewing if he has to pay for all the sluts' birth control pills, and now rape.

Funny how you guys pick out the "good" stuff and focus on that. - LMAO here

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

"good" stuff - NK

[ In Reply To ..]
Must be in the eye/ear of the beholder. I would hope not too many people would consider a rape analogy "good" stuff. Laugh on.

Rush should change his name to Traffic Jam - his anology is inept and beyond stupid

[ In Reply To ..]

Similar Messages:

Jul 27, 2016
Remember the old conservative charge that many of the Democrats here in America were playing footsie with the Soviets? Some Republicans even said the Russians viewed the Democrats as their favorite party. Now bombshell revelations prove these accusations beyond a shadow of a doubt. Peter Schweizer, a Hoover Institution research fellow, has just written a new book, "Reagan's War: The Epic Story of His Forty-Year Struggle and Final Triumph Over Communism." This book may well fo ...

Feb 25, 2010
lie that it is the same as reconciliation. why oh why would ANYONE given credence to people that are demonstrably untruthful so consistently? I dont get it. ...

Nov 07, 2012
Of course, if a dysfunctional do-nothing plan continues on the right, they will use their power to continue gridlock as before. ...

Nov 06, 2014
"Senate Democrats lost their majority on Harry Reid's watch, but they're closing ranks about him anyway. Most Democrats have Reid's back, prepared to stand by him as minority leader through a tumultuous 2 years as he simultaneously runs for reelection in Nevada." It seems these above-stated Democrats are on another suicide mission. Most of the Dems also tried to distance themselves from Obama before the midterms and even truly felt that Bill and Hillary Clinton were b ...

Jan 10, 2017
Immensely satisfying. www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xht96t6K9Hw ...

Nov 06, 2015
preventing appropriations from going forward. The Democrats did this for one simple reason: they want leverage to push their liberal priorities in all the other spending bills. In short, they are using military funding as a hostage. Just last week, the Senate passed the Bipartisan Budget Act, a budget deal that raised the legal spending caps for both defense and non-defense discretionary spending. This deal, which was opposed by many Republicans, gave President Obama and Democrats in Cong ...

Dec 03, 2014
In one of their final acts before losing their majority to Republicans, Senate Democrats confirmed as ambassadors on Tuesday two big donors to President Barack Obama’s reelection campaign, despite a controversy overtheir qualifications. David Bryson Mamet won confirmation as envoy to Argentina in a 50-43 vote, while senators agreed 52-42 to send Colleen Bell on her way to Hungary. No Republicans voted for either nominee, and several senators misse ...

Dec 27, 2016
scathing statements against President Barack Obama and his administration’s decision to break with longstanding tradition to veto anti-Israel resolutions, choosing, instead, to abstain from voting in a United Nations Security Council vote. The vote called for a halt to Israeli construction in the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem. Among the Democrats are Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Joe Manchin (D-WV), Bob Casey (D-PA), Richard Blumenthal (D-VT), Mark Warner (D-VA), and Chris Coons (D-DE), ...

Mar 09, 2011
that was the pubs $61 billion spending bill. Now Reid just put an amendment in #149. Haven't read it but now they're voting on the dem version which only cuts $6.5 billion. Ya know that will pass since the pubs are outvoted. ...

Nov 09, 2016
....If he nominates somebody in the image of Antonin Scalia, let me tell you what's gonna happen. Chuck Schumer, who will be the leader of the Democrats in the Senate -- and whoever the leader of the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee is -- will immediately call a press conference and say that the nominee is unacceptable, that he's too far outside the mainstream. "We can't put up with this. We can't tolerate this," and they will begin to smear this nominee and smear Tru ...

Jul 22, 2017
This is from CNN. Don't know if it's true or not, but it does mention ABC and WaPo, so it must be true. ...

Dec 05, 2012
Obama 2011: We can get $1.2 trillion in revenues without raising tax rates "This video of Obama in 2011 is making the rounds online. In it he argues that up to $1.2 trillion in revenues could be raised by closing loopholes and limiting deductions in the tax code. More importantly, he signals that it can all be done without raising tax rates. "That’s a far cry from the proposals he is putting out after his re-election." http://washingtonexaminer.com/obama-2011-we-can-get-1.2-trillion ...

Jan 24, 2017
A lot of people were very upset in 2000 when Obama was elected. (However, I don't recall any limos attacked and destroyed, windows smashed, people assaulted, fires set, etc. in the wake of it.) Your meme was MOVE ON, in honor of Billoinaire International Financier and Criminal George Soros' organization. So now it's our turn to tell you: MOVE ON! YOU LOST! GET OVER IT!! ...

Apr 04, 2017
Susan Rice, former President Barack Obama's national security adviser, reportedly requested on several occasions the identities of "masked" U.S. persons in intelligence reports linked to President Trump's transition and campaign. The revelation contradicts Rice's past comments on March 22, when she claimed she knew "nothing" about the intelligence reports. White House lawyers discovered Rice's dozens of requests last month, during a National Security Council review of the ...

Jul 28, 2017
This is from his own You Tube acct! ...

Aug 12, 2016
have allowed Islamic terrorists to gain a better footing in the Middle East, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said this week. Clinton, a potential 2016 presidential contender, told The Atlantic in an interview published Sunday that the failure to build up Syrian rebels battling President Bashar Assad "left a big vacuum, which the jihadists have now filled." Some have criticized Obama for not helping Syrian rebels early on in the rebellion in order to combat al Qaeda-inspired terrori ...

Oct 07, 2016
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2603837/ ...

Oct 05, 2016
RICHMOND, Virginia, Sept. 25 /Christian Newswire/ -- Virginia Governor Tim Kaine is defending why his administration forced the sudden resignation of five Virginia State Police Chaplains because they prayed publicly "in Jesus' name." Police Superintendent Col. W. Steven Flaherty single-handedly created then enforced a strict "non-sectarian" prayer policy at all public gatherings, censoring and excluding Christian prayers, then accepted the resignation of five chaplains who refused to deny J ...

May 10, 2017
on Monday fired FBI Director William Sessions, saying he was "unable to effectively lead" the agency. Also see Bill Clinton’s 1993 Purge of U.S. Attorneys ...

Jun 29, 2017
With mainstream media reporters telling their audiences that the end is nigh over the Trump White House decision to hold fewer press briefings on camera, few are mentioning that the move is not without precedent — with President Bill Clinton’s White House turning off the cameras in the ’90s because they weren’t “necessary.” The Trump administration has been reducing the number of press briefings available to cameras in recent weeks, triggering horror from many in anti-Trump press ...

Jan 29, 2017
While Trump’s executive action marks a significant shift in decades of U.S. immigration policies, it isn't the first time the U.S. has restricted immigration from specific countries. Pierce of the Migration Policy Institute pointed to three past instances -- the banning of Chinese immigration in the 1880s, national origin immigration quotas and restrictions in the 1920s, and a brief 1980 halt of new visas for Iranian immigrants. <snipped> Jimmy Carter Restricts Iranian I ...

May 07, 2011
April 23, 2010, Joe Biden declares, "We'll be creating 250,000 to 500,000 jobs per month." YET MORE LIES from this administration. What a SHOCK!! <sarcasm off> LINK: Reuters story. ...

Mar 18, 2011
So, I've been obsessing over what's going on in Japan because my sister-in-law's family live about 200 miles from where the big stuff happened and we're worried. I found an interesting and informative news article about the radiation cloud already having reached California and a real-time map showing the progression of the cloud. It was just kind of a FYI thing, mostly for my sake, but since the rest of my family is following the news too, we have another too ...

Sep 09, 2016
Relying on Trump to "get up to speed" on learning to be president actually would be about as stupid as relying on my hair stylist to take out my gallbladder. Yup. I will be voting for the intelligent and experienced Hillary Clinton. I know that she has had to work twice as hard as any man to break through this glass ceiling and our country NEEDS her. GO HILLARY! "Several months ago, a foreign policy expert on the international level went to advise Donald Trump. And three ti ...

Mar 05, 2013
John Kerry Concedes Iran Is Moving Closer to Possessing Nuclear Weapon At the end of his first overseas trip as Secretary of State, John Kerry acknowledged that despite the continued diplomacy and tough sanctions being leveled against Iran, the regime continues to get closer to possessing a nuclear weapon. "Lines have been drawn before and they've been passed," Kerry said. "That's why the president has been so definitive this time. This is a very challenging moment with great ri ...

Oct 12, 2009
The group, America's Health Insurance Plans, released a report claiming that the new health care reform bill will drive up insurance premiums because not everyone will be forced into the system. Without a very large pool that includes healthy people, the insurance companies insist, they will have to pay out too much. (I'm crying crocodile tears here.) This might bring the public option back strongly if the dems finally say, "Enough of this crap!" We can only hope. NJ ...

Oct 25, 2009
If you want to send Obama a message to fight for the public option, MoveOn.org has a way. Go to this page and see how. You will need a printer (or make a sign of your own). Wear your Obama gear (shirt, button, whatever) and take a picture of yourself. Upload it at the site and they will send it along for you. It's a great way to remind him why we elected him ^^ NJ ...

Jul 24, 2010
Here we go again! Hopefully, tensions will cool. This is a long article (4 pages). North Korea threatened Saturday to mount a powerful nuclear response to upcoming joint U.S.-South Korean military drills, calling the exercises an "unpardonable" provocation on top of wrongly blaming Pyongyang for the sinking of a South Korean warship. North Korea's powerful National Defense Commission, led by leader Kim Jong Il, warned that its troops would counter the move to hold military maneuve ...

Oct 14, 2016
It might be that Putin is bluffing, of course, but if so it would seem very foolish on his part if he had to back down - and I don't think he'd paint himself into that kind of a corner. He's not a fool. Even so, it still shouldn't be a back-page story IMHO, because this goes along with the polls showing that the Russian populace has been "educated" by their government to believe that the United States is their greatest enemy. We haven't had this kind of overt ...

Jun 13, 2017
to thwart terrorist financing operations. As Obama pressed ahead with the Iran deal, those operations lost funding and were “systematically disbanded,” according to former U.S. State Department official Dr. David Asher. Asher’s stunning testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee last Thursday was ignored by the MSM. Now the biggest sponsor of terrorism in the world is on the brink of a nuclear weapon thanks to Obama. ...