Dems trigger "Nuclear Option"

[UncleBuck]

It's the reason our founders felt a need for a constitution in the first place. Parliamentary tricks here.

i just took a picture of my erection. would you like to see it?

 

[ginwilly]

[h=2]On April 13, 2005, then-Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) stood up on the Senate floor to oppose efforts to invoke the so-called "nuclear option"--the same strategy that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid implemented on Thursday.[/h] “Mr. President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to think about the implications of what has been called the nuclear option and what effect that might have on this Chamber and on this country,” Obama said. “I urge all of us to think not just about winning every debate but about protecting free and democratic debate.”
Obama added that if the nuclear option was invoked, partisanship would “get worse.”

The American people want less partisanship in this town, but everyone in this chamber knows that if the majority chooses to end the filibuster, if they choose to change the rules and put an end to democratic debate, then the fighting, the bitterness, and the gridlock will only get worse.
Right now we are faced with rising gas prices, skyrocketing tuition costs, a record number of uninsured Americans, and some of the most serious national security threats we have ever had, while our bravest young men and women are risking their lives halfway around the world to keep us safe.
These are challenges we all want to meet and problems we all want to solve, even if we do not always agree on how to do it. But if the right of free and open debate is taken away from the minority party and the millions of Americans who ask us to be their voice, I fear the partisan atmosphere in Washington will be poisoned to the point where no one will be able to agree on anything. That does not serve anybody's best interest, and it certainly is not what the patriots who founded this democracy had in mind. We owe the people who sent us here more than that. We owe them much more.
​

Obama was hardly the only Democrat in the Senate to oppose such measures. Then-Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) said his vote against the nuclear option was the “single most significant vote” cast in his 32 years in the U.S. Senate.
“Mr. President, my friends and colleagues, I have not been here as long as Senator Byrd, and no one fully understands the Senate as well as Senator Byrd, but I have been here for over three decades,” Biden said on May 23, 2005, on the Senate floor.

This is the single most significant vote any one of us will cast in my 32 years in the Senate. I suspect the Senator would agree with that. We should make no mistake. This nuclear option is ultimately an example of the arrogance of power. It is a fundamental power grab by the majority party, propelled by its extreme right and designed to change the reading of the Constitution, particularly as it relates to individual rights and property rights. It is nothing more or nothing less.
​

Biden added at the time that what Reid has now done was a “naked power grab” and that he “pray God when Democrats take back control [of the Senate]” they wouldn’t invoke the nuclear option.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the likely 2016 Democratic presidential candidate, spoke out against the nuclear option on May 23, 2005 in the U.S. Senate, when she said to “maintain the integrity” of the body, the Senate should not do what Reid is now doing.
“And I just had to hope that maybe between now and the time we have this vote there would be enough Senators who will say: Mr. President, no. We are sorry, we cannot go there,” Clinton said on the Senate floor. “We are going to remember our Founders. We are going to remember what made this country great. We are going to maintain the integrity of the U.S. Senate.”
Finally, on May 18, 2005, even Harry Reid spoke out against the very tactic that he has now enacted.
“The filibuster is not a scheme and it certainly isn't new. The filibuster is far from a procedural gimmick,” Reid said at the time.

It's part of the fabric of this institution we call the Senate. It was well-known in colonial legislatures before we became a country, and it's an integral part of our country's 214-year history. The first filibuster in the United States Congress happened in 1790. It was used by lawmakers from Virginia and South Carolina who were trying to prevent Philadelphia from hosting the first Congress. Since then, the filibuster has been employed hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of times. It's been employed on legislative matters, it's been employed on procedural matters relating to the president's nominations for Cabinet and sub-Cabinet posts, and it's been used on judges for all those years. One scholar estimates that 20 percent of the judges nominated by presidents have fallen by the wayside, most of them as a result of filibusters. Senators have used the filibuster to stand up to popular presidents, to block legislation, and, yes, even, as I've stated, to stall executive nominees. The roots of the filibuster are found in the Constitution and in our own rules.
​

 

[UncleBuck]

On April 13, 2005, then-Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) stood up on the Senate floor to oppose efforts to invoke the so-called "nuclear option"--the same strategy that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid implemented on Thursday.

“Mr. President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to think about the implications of what has been called the nuclear option and what effect that might have on this Chamber and on this country,” Obama said. “I urge all of us to think not just about winning every debate but about protecting free and democratic debate.”
Obama added that if the nuclear option was invoked, partisanship would “get worse.”

The American people want less partisanship in this town, but everyone in this chamber knows that if the majority chooses to end the filibuster, if they choose to change the rules and put an end to democratic debate, then the fighting, the bitterness, and the gridlock will only get worse.
Right now we are faced with rising gas prices, skyrocketing tuition costs, a record number of uninsured Americans, and some of the most serious national security threats we have ever had, while our bravest young men and women are risking their lives halfway around the world to keep us safe.
These are challenges we all want to meet and problems we all want to solve, even if we do not always agree on how to do it. But if the right of free and open debate is taken away from the minority party and the millions of Americans who ask us to be their voice, I fear the partisan atmosphere in Washington will be poisoned to the point where no one will be able to agree on anything. That does not serve anybody's best interest, and it certainly is not what the patriots who founded this democracy had in mind. We owe the people who sent us here more than that. We owe them much more.
​

Obama was hardly the only Democrat in the Senate to oppose such measures. Then-Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) said his vote against the nuclear option was the “single most significant vote” cast in his 32 years in the U.S. Senate.
“Mr. President, my friends and colleagues, I have not been here as long as Senator Byrd, and no one fully understands the Senate as well as Senator Byrd, but I have been here for over three decades,” Biden said on May 23, 2005, on the Senate floor.

This is the single most significant vote any one of us will cast in my 32 years in the Senate. I suspect the Senator would agree with that. We should make no mistake. This nuclear option is ultimately an example of the arrogance of power. It is a fundamental power grab by the majority party, propelled by its extreme right and designed to change the reading of the Constitution, particularly as it relates to individual rights and property rights. It is nothing more or nothing less.
​

Biden added at the time that what Reid has now done was a “naked power grab” and that he “pray God when Democrats take back control [of the Senate]” they wouldn’t invoke the nuclear option.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the likely 2016 Democratic presidential candidate, spoke out against the nuclear option on May 23, 2005 in the U.S. Senate, when she said to “maintain the integrity” of the body, the Senate should not do what Reid is now doing.
“And I just had to hope that maybe between now and the time we have this vote there would be enough Senators who will say: Mr. President, no. We are sorry, we cannot go there,” Clinton said on the Senate floor. “We are going to remember our Founders. We are going to remember what made this country great. We are going to maintain the integrity of the U.S. Senate.”
Finally, on May 18, 2005, even Harry Reid spoke out against the very tactic that he has now enacted.
“The filibuster is not a scheme and it certainly isn't new. The filibuster is far from a procedural gimmick,” Reid said at the time.

It's part of the fabric of this institution we call the Senate. It was well-known in colonial legislatures before we became a country, and it's an integral part of our country's 214-year history. The first filibuster in the United States Congress happened in 1790. It was used by lawmakers from Virginia and South Carolina who were trying to prevent Philadelphia from hosting the first Congress. Since then, the filibuster has been employed hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of times. It's been employed on legislative matters, it's been employed on procedural matters relating to the president's nominations for Cabinet and sub-Cabinet posts, and it's been used on judges for all those years. One scholar estimates that 20 percent of the judges nominated by presidents have fallen by the wayside, most of them as a result of filibusters. Senators have used the filibuster to stand up to popular presidents, to block legislation, and, yes, even, as I've stated, to stall executive nominees. The roots of the filibuster are found in the Constitution and in our own rules.
​

"democrat senator barack obama triggers nuclear option" is not the title of this thread.

try again.

and again.

and again.

eventually, some of the shit you throw will stick.

 

[echelon1k1]

i just took a picture of my erection. would you like to see it?

you should probably get a vet to check that out...

#justsayin

 

[ginwilly]

Opposition to the 'Nuclear Option' Grows
Obama: Oppose Nuclear Option, Protect "Free And Democratic Debate"
Obama: Nuclear Option Not What Founders Had In Mind, Will Poison Washington
Bush raps judicial filibuster
Biden: Nuclear Option Vote The "Single Most Significant ... In My 32 Years In The Senate"
Biden: "I Pray God" Democrats Never Use Nuclear Option
Majority Leader Bill Frist Threatens to Change Senate Filibuster Rules
Harry Reid: Filibuster Part Of Fabric Of Senate, Meant To Be Used For Executive Nominees
Harry Reid: Eliminating Filibuster Would Discard Two Centuries Of Senate History
Obama was for the filibuster in 2005
Clinton: If President Can't Get 60 Votes For Nominee, Should Rethink Nominee

 

[insid33]

you should probably get a vet to check that out...
View attachment 2903244
#justsayin

Stop..stop. lmao. Coffee out the nose.

 

[ginjawarrior]

Opposition to the 'Nuclear Option' Grows
Obama: Oppose Nuclear Option, Protect "Free And Democratic Debate"
Obama: Nuclear Option Not What Founders Had In Mind, Will Poison Washington
Bush raps judicial filibuster
Biden: Nuclear Option Vote The "Single Most Significant ... In My 32 Years In The Senate"
Biden: "I Pray God" Democrats Never Use Nuclear Option
Majority Leader Bill Frist Threatens to Change Senate Filibuster Rules
Harry Reid: Filibuster Part Of Fabric Of Senate, Meant To Be Used For Executive Nominees
Harry Reid: Eliminating Filibuster Would Discard Two Centuries Of Senate History
Obama was for the filibuster in 2005
Clinton: If President Can't Get 60 Votes For Nominee, Should Rethink Nominee

You missed a link
http://www.couleeconservatives.com/aggregator/sources/1

Do you not think republican obstructionism was poisoning the democratic process?

Any suggestion why they chose this presidency over the others?

 

[Winter Woman]

After 2014 they are going to hate themselves for doing this.

 

[ginjawarrior]

After 2014 they are going to hate themselves for doing this.

Yeah just like you guys showed them in 2012 for daring to pass that communist ACA

 

[Balzac89]

After 2014 they are going to hate themselves for doing this.

The Republicans will never win an election again. There extremism has splintered their constituents into multiple groups. The Libertarians are the new third party stealing votes from the Republicans

 

[Winter Woman]

The Republicans will never win an election again. There extremism has splintered their constituents into multiple groups. The Libertarians are the new third party stealing votes from the Republicans

The rise of the Libertarians would be just fine with me. I never was an R, but had to vote for a few.

 

[beenthere]

Yeah just like you guys showed them in 2012 for daring to pass that communist ACA

And how is Obamacare doing? LMAO

The Republicans will never win an election again. There extremism has splintered their constituents into multiple groups. The Libertarians are the new third party stealing votes from the Republicans

We all heard that after Obama was elected in 08, remember the 2010 mid terms?

 

[Balzac89]

And how is Obamacare doing? LMAO



We all heard that after Obama was elected in 08, remember the 2010 mid terms?

What is this obsession with Obama? The Tea Party has shown it's true lunacy and that fad is over for the Republicans.

What happened in 2012?

I would probably be an independent if the parties would allow Third parties to vote during primaries.

 

[ginjawarrior]

And how is Obamacare doing? LMAO

Some teething problems on start-up but it's well on its way to pissing you off for the rest of your life LMAO

 

[SCARHOLE]

The Republicanso will never win an election again. There extremism has splintered their constituents into multiple groups. The Libertarians are the new third party stealing votes from the Republicans

I remember How dems dealt with their Green Party guy ralph Nader trying to steal their votes.
They banned him from the national debates. Lol

Wait tell the republicans take away the democrats right to object to Supreme Court nominations when they win the White House an senate back.....

 

[ginwilly]

I would probably be an independent if the parties would allow Third parties to vote during primaries.

Yeah, this is what I face but it comes in handy sometimes. Had a doctor running for state Senate in a runoff and he was campaigning me hard. I got to tell him I couldn't vote in primaries and he left me alone.

Some states allow it, mine doesn't, I take it yours doesn't either.

I still wish we did our elections Idol style and just had the top 12 with 1 voted off every week until we have a winner. Every week they could make their case for why we should vote for them and make presidential political ads illegal. Sometimes the best 2 are from the same party.

 

[Sand4x105]

What ever goes around, comes around....
Breaking the Rules, to change the rules...
What else did any of you expect?
It doesn't matter that the Repub's will use this against the Dems in the future....
The Dems desperately needed a victory, so this will give them temporary peace of mind....
The future doesn't matter.... the Dems have their man in power, and he needs to use this power, before it's too late!
Bowing down to Obamagawd... he is all knowing and now all powerful....

 

[NLXSK1]

i wonder how the "nuclear option" for judicial nominees was invoked.

do you suppose it was done by some type of rule unique to the senate, like a senate rule?

I just watched videotape from 2005 where Barak Obama, Harry Reid and a host of others got up and described why the nuclear option was a horrible way to go. Now that they are in power they see it as perfectly reasonable rather than actually having to negotiate and compromise with the Republicans.

Barak Obama must have evolved on the issue eh?

Or maybe him and his political buddies are all hypocrites...

 

[greenlikemoney]

They really do hate the brown man in the US.

Not as much as we hate racist, anti-American Colombian trash.

 

[justanotherbozo]

..........