Harry Reid’s “evolving” position on the filibuster
Harry Reid–who during the campaign said there was no way his Senate would work with Mitt Romney if he won the presidency–is now complaining that Republicans are unwilling to work with Barack Obama and because of this he is seriously considering changing the filibuster rules. This is an idea which now seems to be gaining steam within Democrat circles and in all honestly they have the right under Article 1 Section 2 of the constitution to determine the rules of proceedings so I am not going to complain about Harry Reid’s decision but rather point out his hypocrisy.
The Democrats are now calling this the “constitutional option” but it wasn’t all that long ago when George Bush was the president that they referred to the Republicans’ attempt at changing the filibuster rule for appointing judges as the “nuclear option.” Funny how attitudes change with the change of power, isn’t it?
And speaking of power, this is what Harry Reid had to say back in 2005 about the Republicans’ attempt at eliminating the filibuster for judicial nominees:
This is not about judges, it’s about the arrogance of power
Back then Harry Reid was upset with the Republicans for being arrogant and using this arrogance to assume more power (Remember how the Democrats claimed the rights of the minority party must be protected?) yet now he seems to have been seduced by that very same arrogance of power himself.
But it gets even better, this is part of what Harry Reid said back in 2005:
Rather than changing the Senate rules, shouldn’t we be concerned about the largest deficits in the history of the world?
Now that is priceless when looking at the deficits now, isn’t it? While I am not defending President Bush’s deficits or his out of control spending those deficits–which Barack Obama called unpatriotic when he was running for his first term–pale in comparison to the deficits now confronting the United States and yet Harry Reid isn’t heeding his own advice from 2005 and is instead concentrating his efforts on changing the Senate rules.
Apparently Harry Reid thinks there are two sets of rules to live by–one for Republicans and one for Democrats–either that or his position has “evolved” over they years and it just happens to coincide with which party is in power.
America's Watchtower 
Hmm.. that could so backfire on him and the Democrats, if by some miracle, the Republican’s regain control of the Senate. I’d enjoy watching that. I’m sure they’d never see the comparison and irony (that takes true intelligence), but it would still be enjoyable.
Of course, it could be in the continued development of their agenda, he simply isn’t concerned.
LikeLike
I would love to see this backfire on them if the Republicans gained back control of the Senate, but of course Reid would use the lame duck session to change the rules back before the new Senate took over and then would scream if Republicans turned the tables on him–but it sure would be fun to watch.
LikeLike
Harry doesn’t have the brightest burning wick around, but he is a shrewed politician and he has no morals or ethics. The spoils of war can be painfull for the defeated.
LikeLike
And the spoils of war will prove to be painful for us all before all this is said and done!
LikeLike
Horribly true.
LikeLike
All these things you’re saying are true, Steve, but the fact remains that the GOP used the threat of a filibuster to shut down hundreds of Senate actions, far more than either party in any previous Congress. And now, speaking or the arrogance of power, we hear Senator Ayotte suggesting that if Ms. Rice is nominated to be Secretary of State, she would place a hold on the nomination. Imagine that – a single Senator from the minority party can indefinitely stall action on a nomination.
Or perhaps not. The Senate votes on its rules soon, and before that happens, there are no rules at all. Perhaps the Majority Leader should give some thought to some of these other conventions that have long since outlived their usefulness.
Back to the “nuclear/constitutional option.” Leader Frist threatened it when the GOP held the majority and the Dems stalled a few of President GHW Bush’s nominations. The Dems never used the threat of a filibuster to stall hundreds of actions. The GOP must have knows that they were pushing the Dems to this point. And still, the filibuster option, apparently, is being left alone, except that Senators may no longer simply threaten a filibuster, they must actually conduct one. Conservatives should welcome the return of the good old days!
Take good care, and may God bless us all!
TGY
LikeLike
Don’t forget that the Republicans did recently actually approve of a bipartisan bill which took the approval process away from the Congress on many presidential appointees shortly before the election.
Also, I do think that if a party is going to filibuster a piece of legislation they should actually have to filibuster it, somehow I don’t think anyone in the Congress is nearly as capable or as gifted as those speakers from days gone by!
LikeLike
Ah, for the days of Robert Byrd, he was a master at the filibuster. You are right, about no one capable of it now!
LikeLike
It would be fun to listen to them try it though!
LikeLike