Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30

Thread: Harry Reid is set to go nuclear

  1. #1
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,909

    Harry Reid is set to go nuclear

    Senator Harry Reid appears set to go nuclear — before Thanksgiving.

    With Senate Republicans blocking a third Obama nomination to the powerful D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, a senior Senate Democratic leadership aide tells me Reid is now all but certain to move to change the Senate rules by simple majority — doing away with the filibuster on executive and judicial nominations, with the exception of the Supreme Court – as early as this week.

    ...But now, Dems have already agreed not to change the rules once, and the filibustering continues, even though Republicans admitted when the last deal was reached that they were wrong to block Obama from staffing the government. And now, the GOP position is not grounded in an objection to Obama’s nominees or to the function of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals; it’s grounded in the argument that Obama should not have the power to fill these vacancies on the court at all. As Jonathan Chait argues, Republicans may not have even thought through the full implications of the position they’ve adopted. But Dems have, and taking it to its logical conclusion, they believe Republicans have presented them with a simple choice: Either they change the rules, or they accept those limits on Obama’s power. And that really leaves only one option.

    Harry Reid is set to go nuclear

    I'm not sure either that Republicans have thought this through. Can someone explain why they're being so intransigent?

    In the linked article, Chaich argues that both sides are guilt of "hypocritically flip-flopping on the procedural question" but then says that the Republicans' attempts to diminish the President's appointment influence are a "constitutional affront."

    Senate Republicans: All Obama Judges Are Bad -- Daily Intelligencer

    What is the benefit to Republicans of Reid's exercising the "nuclear option"? I just don't see it...or how this playing of politics benefits "We, the people."

  2. #2
    The Dude
    Kobie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Western NY
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    42,890

    Re: Harry Reid is set to go nuclear

    The nuclear option has been kicking around for a while now. I don't like it when either party uses what is supposed to be reserved for "the big stuff" to block judicial nominations simply for petty partisan gain. The filibuster (or even the threat of it) is not intended for that purpose.

    The threat alone of a filibuster can be used to scuttle all sorts of things without actually going through the procedure. I think they should go back to how it used to be, where if you wanted to filibuster something, you actually have to get up there and run your yap until you drop prostrate from exhaustion.
    Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism.

  3. #3
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    10-28-16 @ 07:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,526

    Re: Harry Reid is set to go nuclear

    Reid is getting played. Pretty dumb to bring this out when potentially in a year, he may not be in the majority anymore.

  4. #4
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    18,265

    Re: Harry Reid is set to go nuclear

    Judicial appointments: A lesson in packing | The Economist If the hyper-partisanship remains as it is in the Senate, this ground will be plowed again and again for years to come.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Harry Reid is set to go nuclear

    Reid keeps threatening this, but I doubt it will happen. It's more sabre rattling than anything else IMO.

    I just hope the GOP doesn't put up another candidate like Angle in 2016 so we can finally get rid of him in Nevada.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
    Last Seen
    09-14-14 @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,700

    Re: Harry Reid is set to go nuclear

    Going nuke might take the focus off the obamacare fiasco so bombs away.

  7. #7
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,091

    Re: Harry Reid is set to go nuclear

    our government doesn't work anymore, and a lot of it is our fault. the most vocal elements of the electorate don't just disagree with policies; they paint the other site as a demonic caricature whose sole intent is evil. the politicians just play to the audience. they are manifestations of the collective us.

    as for the nuclear option, i don't like it. i will point out, though, that the Republicans have tried to block almost everything this president has proposed in a way that is almost unprecedented. when the tables are turned, the Democrats will most likely do the same thing with revenge as a motive. i wish there was a strong public demand to redraw the districts in order to flush a lot of these hyperpartisan idiots out, but the public can't be bothered to give a ****. it's more fun to root for a team, apparently. meanwhile, the ship is taking on water, and people would rather fistfight on the deck. it's really unfortunate.

  8. #8
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,113

    Re: Harry Reid is set to go nuclear

    Quote Originally Posted by Kobie View Post
    The nuclear option has been kicking around for a while now. I don't like it when either party uses what is supposed to be reserved for "the big stuff" to block judicial nominations simply for petty partisan gain. The filibuster (or even the threat of it) is not intended for that purpose.

    The threat alone of a filibuster can be used to scuttle all sorts of things without actually going through the procedure. I think they should go back to how it used to be, where if you wanted to filibuster something, you actually have to get up there and run your yap until you drop prostrate from exhaustion.
    This has always struck me as the better compromise. We need a functioning judiciary, and we need a check - but we need that check to actually cost something.

  9. #9
    Sage
    Unitedwestand13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Sunnyvale California
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    14,973

    Re: Harry Reid is set to go nuclear

    Quote Originally Posted by humbolt View Post
    Judicial appointments: A lesson in packing | The Economist If the hyper-partisanship remains as it is in the Senate, this ground will be plowed again and again for years to come.
    the three seats that obama nominated judges for were vacant seats, they were empty. how is appointing someone to replace a judge who retired "packing the courts"?. court packing is when you create new seats, not fill empty ones!
    "If you can't stand the way this place is, Take yourself to higher places!"
    Break, By Three days grace

    Hilliary Clinton/Tim Kaine 2016

  10. #10
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    18,265

    Re: Harry Reid is set to go nuclear

    Quote Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13 View Post
    the three seats that obama nominated judges for were vacant seats, they were empty. how is appointing someone to replace a judge who retired "packing the courts"?. court packing is when you create new seats, not fill empty ones!
    True, they are empty. Court packing, however, is a partisan effort to slant the court in one particular direction and not another, and has nothing to do at all with what's vacant and what isn't - something that been around as long as the republic. The big difference now is the partisanship attached to every single appointment, and especially the DC appeals court. Exactly how this came to be is a matter of endless blame and conjecture, but it looks as if this is an issue that's here to stay regardless of how this particular event is settled unless more reasonable minds hold sway.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •