Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Peak wingnut was a lie.

They’re not red states to be hated; they are voter suppression states to be fixed.

Narcissists are always shocked to discover other people have agency.

đŸŽ¶ Those boots were made for mockin’ đŸŽ”

Thanks for reminding me that Van Jones needs to be slapped.

Don’t expect peaches from an apple tree.

They think we are photo bombing their nice little lives.

The poor and middle-class pay taxes, the rich pay accountants, the wealthy pay politicians.

The revolution will be supervised.

The willow is too close to the house.

“Cheese and Kraken paired together for the appetizer trial.”

Insiders who complain to politico: please report to the white house office of shut the fuck up.

Let’s delete this post and never speak of this again.

Teach a man to fish, and he’ll sit in a boat all day drinking beer.

Putin must be throwing ketchup at the walls.

The words do not have to be perfect.

Russian mouthpiece, go fuck yourself.

Glad to see john eastman going through some things.

This isn’t Democrats spending madly. This is government catching up.

Republicans in disarray!

Come on, media. you have one job. start doing it.

“I never thought they’d lock HIM up,” sobbed a distraught member of the Lock Her Up Party.

if you can’t see it, then you are useless in the fight to stop it.

Hot air and ill-informed banter

You are here: Home / A nuclear era but I have no fear

A nuclear era but I have no fear

by | 128 Comments

This post is in: ,

I was getting a little concerned by the lack of Village caterwauling about the the assassination of the filibuster by the coward Harry Reid. To paraphrase George Costanza, if every instinct they have is wrong, then the opposite would have to be right. Thus I breathed a sigh of relief when I saw this over at the Bezos Post:

Screen Shot 2013-11-21 at 10.23.42 PM

I’d feel better if Bobo came back from vacay to wax Burkean — more in sorrow than in anger — about this, but this is a good start at least.

Reader Interactions

128Comments

  4. 4.

    srv

    Harry Reid has destroyed our the Founder’s nation and has brought us the tyranny of rule by the mob majority.

    We have to take our country back.

  5. 5.

    Villago Delenda Est

    Oh, Ruth Marcus is outraged.

    There goes my Schadenfreude meter, again.

    As for the Dick Whisperer, Satan will need to build new subbasements in Hell to facilitate Villager scum like him.

  7. 7.

    eemom

    Milbank belongs in a fucking zoo. And so do they all, now that I think of it.

    If the animals in Woodley Park and the press corpse switched places, this town would suck infinitely less.

  11. 11.

    Keith P

    I guess we’ll have Harry Reid to blame when the GOP starts nominating Federalist Society members to the nation’s courts. Curses!

  13. 13.

    PsiFighter37

    Wingnut tears combined with Villagers wailing and clutching their pearls is like a liberal blogger’s wet dream. I am loving it.

  14. 14.

    srv

    “In my view this is the most important and most dangerous restructuring of Senate rules since Thomas Jefferson wrote them at the beginning of our country,” Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee says
    …
    Questioned repeatedly in the press conference, McConnell wouldn’t show his hand. “I don’t think this is a time to be talking about reprisal. I think it’s a time to be sad about what’s been done to the United States Senate. The greatest deliberative body in the world,” he said..

    The communists have overthrown The Constitutional Republic without firing a shot.

  15. 15.

    Villago Delenda Est

    @Hill Dweller:

    Did these assholes serious gentlemen of the press ever say a word about the Republicans’ obstructionism/nihilism principled opposition?

    Translated into Broderese for you. You’re welcome!

  19. 19.

    Mike E

    Rachel Maddow pointed out the asshole Repubs (redundant, I know) couldn’t allow 3 appointments, so now they’ll get rolled for 93. Heh.

  20. 20.

    Mike in NC

    Who’ll think of the delicate fee-fees of Dana Milwank? Not to mention JRub and Chuck Kabbagehead.

  21. 21.

    jl

    As I said in previous thread, I don’t like this approach to filibuster reform. I think there should be some form or weak filibuster.

    On other hand, after Grassley gave the game away, and basically said ‘aint it awful what the Dems did, that is so ruthless, but you want ruthless, get a load of we GOPers will do when we win”

    OK fine. After that, I thought maybe if the GOP has promised more nukes when they get power, maybe Reid should just change the rules so that the Senate makes the House look like a Sunday picnic, and ram through every damned appointment Obama wants for anything, go on a showdown, threatdown nuke-athon standoff fest with the House and get every scrap you can to win the damn midterms.

    I dunno. What Grassley said made me so pissed, and shows what a-holes the whole GOP have turned into, just go Medieval on them. Just because….

  22. 22.

    Kay

    I think peoples eyes glaze over when they hear the word “filibuster.” “Filibuster reform” is even worse.

  24. 24.

    Poopyman

    The “Editorial Board” at the WaPo haz a sad:

    Both parties have been guilty of delaying and blocking qualified judicial nominees of presidents from the opposing side, particularly for this important appeals court. We believe a filibuster should be rarely invoked. But now that it is not an option, the result is likely to be that the partisanship of Congress will seep increasingly into the judiciary, as presidents feel no obligation to search for balance or moderation in their nominations. As Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) warned before Thursday’s vote, “When we have the majority, when we have a Republican president, we put more people like Scalia on the court.”

  26. 26.

    Villago Delenda Est

    The filibuster has been perverted from what it once was (a public demonstration protesting some piece of legislation) into a means of sabotaging every move the chief executive makes, because he’s first, a Democrat, and second, blah.

  32. 32.

    Violet

    Republicans are free to campaign on reinstating the filibuster and then doing so if they regain a majority. I think that would be an excellent idea for them.

  33. 33.

    Bill E Pilgrim

    The Gray Lady comes through:

    Democracy Returns to the Senate

    [Republicans] tried to nullify entire federal agencies by denying them leaders. They abused Senate rules past the point of tolerance or responsibility. And so they were left enraged and threatening revenge on Thursday when a majority did the only logical thing and stripped away their power to block the president’s nominees.

    If Bill Keller had anything to say about it he’d be Marcusing up the place to be sure, but fortunately he’s not on the editorial board.

  34. 34.

    jl

    @Mike E:

    Obviously I am conflicted. But winning more Democrat Senate seats will be a better solution than any filibuster reform, of any kind, and the dreary topic can fade back into the obscurity that it had for awhile.

  36. 36.

    Mike in NC

    So can we conclude that Dancin’ Dave Gregory will have McCain, Grassley, Paul, Cruz, McConnell and Graham as his only guests on Sunday?

  37. 37.

    scav

    aaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh The nuclear pea in the floofy repub feather bed. Do. Show us your owies and bruises dears. A bit more to the left for the cameras. yesssssss. They’ll love you in the advertising stock shots.

  38. 38.

    Anya

    Village caterwauling about the the assassination of the filibuster by the coward Harry Reid.

    Total win! Also, too, Dana Milbank is a tool.

  43. 43.

    jl

    @Violet: Maybe Gregory will let them talk nonstop, to make up for their awful unfair treatment in the Senate, where they are gagged and oppressed.

    But, what a minute, how would anyone tell? Maybe Gregory should announce the new policy is the same as the old policy, except different.

  44. 44.

    Cacti

    The filibuster was given to us by the founding fathers!

    Year of first senate filibuster: 1837

    Death of the last founding father: June 28, 1836

  45. 45.

    Kay

    @Poopyman:

    “When we have the majority, when we have a Republican president, we put more people like Scalia on the court.”

    As opposed to the moderates like Roberts and Alito. The problem with the threat is, it’s empty. No one thinks Roberts is a moderate. No one. We’re well past the “balls and strikes” bullshit and the fawning biographical sketches.

    He has an actual record. He kicked off the year by gutting the voting rights act, an agenda he has been pursuing since Reagan. He did that despite watching state after state restrict voting rights.

  47. 47.

    Violet

    @Cacti: Considering that according to teabaggers the founding fathers gave us Jesus riding a dinosaur, I’m not sure dates have much relevance to them.

  49. 49.

    beltane

    @Hill Dweller: Of course. They said both sides did it. In order to be a member of the Village in good standing one must take a blood oath to never criticize a Republican without equally implicating a Democrat.

    The best thing that could happen to this country would be for the entire beltway media establishment to be put on a luxury cruise ship for the remainder of their natural lives. They could have their vapid little cocktail party scene on the high seas for all eternity without causing harm to any other living thing.

  51. 51.

    Cacti

    @Kay:

    As opposed to the moderates like Roberts and Alito. The problem with the threat is, it’s empty. No one thinks Roberts is a moderate. No one. We’re well past the “balls and strikes” bullshit and the fawning biographical sketches.

    As Elon mentioned on the twitters, Republicans are threatening to act like arseholes?

    Short of proposing a bill to re-legalize slavery, how could they be any bigger pricks than they have been?

  53. 53.

    kc

    I have a dumb question. Please don’t yell at me.

    Does Reid’s move eliminate actual filibusters, or just the current practice of holding up nominations by threatening to filibuster, or whatever that thing is they do that doesn’t involve actually getting up and speaking?

  54. 54.

    Belafon

    @Bill E Pilgrim: Gonna tattoo this inside the eyelids of everyone that calls themselves a Democrat:

    From now on, voters will have to understand that presidents are likely to get their way on nominations if their party controls the Senate.

  55. 55.

    Suffern ACE

    @Kay: yep. But he’s like Scalia, only much younger and will be on the bench for 30 more years. See how that filibuster has saved us from that.

  56. 56.

    beltane

    @Kay: What they will do is appoint some very young, manifestly unqualified Regents University graduates ( or drop-outs) to the federal bench. The ethics scandals surrounding these people will ensure that the GOP will never be able to rid itself of the aroma of a backed-up septic tank in July.

  58. 58.

    ? Martin

    @kc:

    Does Reid’s move eliminate actual filibusters, or just the current practice of holding up nominations by threatening to filibuster, or whatever that thing is they do that doesn’t involve actually getting up and speaking?

    It eliminates the ability to filibuster executive appointments (like the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau) and judges with the exception of SCOTUS. SCOTUS have not been subject to filibusters due to a longstanding gentleman’s agreement, which is probably out the window now. But it’s not like the filibuster ever helped Dems keep guys like Scalia off the court in the past.

    But there’s no change to the filibuster rules for legislation. Yet.

  59. 59.

    Origuy

    @Cacti:

    The filibuster was given to us by the founding fathers!

    Yes, the ones that Michele Bachmann said fought tirelessly against slavery.

  60. 60.

    Cacti

    @Suffern ACE:

    yep. But he’s like Scalia, only much younger and will be on the bench for 30 more years. See how that filibuster has saved us from that.

    If not for the filibuster, we might have gotten a real pair of wingnuts on the SCOTUS.

    Shit, even Rehnquist wasn’t on board with “unlimited corporate cash” = protected speech under the First Amendment.

  61. 61.

    mdblanche

    @Mike in NC: Milbank and Marcus can use comity to come to an agreement with their Republican colleagues that whatever the Democrats do is wrong; why can’t Senate Democrats do the same?

    @Villago Delenda Est:

    The filibuster has been perverted from what it once was (a public demonstration protesting some piece of civil rights legislation) into a means of sabotaging every move the chief executive makes, because he’s first, a Democrat, and second, blah.

    Fixed.

  62. 62.

    hitchhiker

    @Kay:

    I think peoples eyes glaze over when they hear the word “filibuster.” “Filibuster reform” is even worse.

    Me too. We should all just keep making them explain exactly why they’re so mad. They look truly crazy when they start trying to explain the details.

    And, normal people might be surprised to learn that it’s because they think they shouldn’t have to actually vote. That’s what this is about. Senate Republicans don’t think they should have to vote if they don’t want to.

    It’s amazing when you think about it.

  63. 63.

    beltane

    @Cacti: They might decide to invade some random country, potentially causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians, just for a little entertainment value. Oh wait…

  64. 64.

    David in NY

    @Belafon: @kc: Yes. I gather for example that on the Millett appointment they voted today, 50 something to 40 something, to cut off debate and tomorrow will hold the vote whether or not to confirm.

  68. 68.

    Mike E

    @Belafon: But the actual talking filibuster remains in effect, and will be there when senators must stand astride the Road of Progress and yell, “Stop!”

  69. 69.

    Splitting Image

    The scale of the problem in the two situations is obviously completely different, but it strikes me that Harry Reid did to the GOP senators what the Toronto City Council did to Rob Ford – for much the same reasons – and the local concern trolls here reacted in much the same way as the Villagers.

    (“Won’t someone please think of the comity?”)

  71. 71.

    mai naem

    I saw Ruth Marcus on with Mona Charen on CSPAN a few years ago. It was one of those left/right discussions. Charen was ripping Marcus a new one with her alligator smile and Marcus was just sweetly pulling the let’s get together. kumbaya krap. Ugh.

  72. 72.

    catclub

    @hitchhiker: “Senate Republicans don’t think they should have to vote if they don’t want to.”

    Haven’t they seen “A Man for All Seasons”? Silence implies consent. Unless the senate votes to oppose a nomination, it consents to it.

  74. 74.

    Redshift

    @jl: I’m having a hard time to see what there is to be conflicted about. I wish modern Republicans weren’t nihilist obstructionists with no interest in governing so this wasn’t necessary, but since they’re not, I’m not at all conflicted.

    Electing a supermajority of Democrats would obviously be a good thing, but it’s not a “better” solution any more than getting a supermajority of votes is “better” than trying to abolish voter-suppression laws.

  76. 76.

    handy

    London is burning, I live by the river.

    Oh, lookie here:

    Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison
    “They have gotten away with obstructing by exploiting the filibuster and denying Justice Owen a direct vote. Now, unfortunately, we must take action to ensure President Bush’s nominees are getting the up-or-down vote they deserve.” (4/21/05 statement)

    Sen. Orrin Hatch
    “…I think we should bind both Democrats and Republicans that presidential nominees for the judiciary deserve an up-and-down vote once they reach the floor…” (Orrin Hatch discusses debate in Senate…, NPR, 5/19/05)

    Sen. Jon Kyl
    “All we seek is a return to 214 years of tradition in allowing presidential nominees the courtesy of an up-or-down vote.” (Kyl Calls for `Up or Down’ Vote on Judicial Nominees,’ Capitol Hill Press Releases, 5/18/05)

    Sen. Rick Santorum
    “The time has come for the Senate to reestablish that tradition, to end these destructive judicial filibusters and to give all judicial nominees the up-or-down vote they deserve.” (Should the Senate end Filibusters When Considering Judicial Appointments, Duluth News Tribune, 4/25/05)

    Sen. Trent Lott
    “…I felt they deserved up-or-down votes. It was not a popular action with my colleagues, but I didn’t think it was right to filibuster judicial nominees then. And it’s not right now.” (Lott Sets the Record Straight on Judicial Confirmation Issue, 4/26/05)

    Sen. John Cornyn
    “And we need to get a fresh start. And that means, I believe, an up-or-down vote for all presidents’ nominees whether they be Republican or Democrat.” (U.S. Senator John Cornyn Holds a News Conference on Judicial Nominees, CQ Transcriptions, 5/9/05)

    Sen. Mitch McConnell
    “Let’s get back to the way the Senate operated for over 200 years, up or down votes on the president’s nominee, no matter who the president is, no matter who’s in control of the Senate. That’s the way we need to operate.” (Senators Durbin & McConnell Discuss Issues Facing the Senate, CNN, 5/22/05)

    Sen. Jeff Sessions
    “This past election in large part hinged, as George Allen said, on a debate over the judiciary and whether or not obstruction was justified. I think the American people sent a clear message and I believe it’s time for this Senate to make sure that judges get an up-or-down vote.” (U.S. Sen. Allen & Other Senate Republicans Hold a Media Availability on the Possibility of a Democrat Filibuster, CQ Transcriptions, 3/15/05)

    Sen. Richard Burr
    “But denying these patriotic Americans, of both parties, who seek to serve this country an up-or-down vote is simply not fair, and it certainly was not the intention of our Founding Fathers when they designed and created this very institution.” (Sen. Burr Speaks Out on Judicial Nominations, 4/20/05)

    Sen. Sam Brownback
    “All of the president’s nominees-both now and in the future-deserve a fair up or down vote, regardless of whether some members of the Senate feel they can be filibustered based on whatever they define to be extraordinary circumstances.” (Sen. Brownback Issues Statement on Judicial Nominees, 5/24/05)

    Sen. John Thune
    “However, I still believe that all judicial nominees with majority support deserve the fairness of an up or down vote on the Senate floor… Something is broken when you can’t get a fair up or down vote, not because of qualifications or character, but because of politics.” (Senators Find Good in Filibuster Agreement, AP, 5/24/05)

    Sen. George Allen
    “They want Senators to do their jobs and hold a straight up-or-down vote on nominees based on their qualifications, not the baseless negative rhetoric of the left…In summation, Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown, and all of the President’s nominees, deserve a fair up-or-down vote.” (U.S. Senator George Allen Deliver Remarks on the Senate Floor on Judicial Nominations, CQ Transcriptions, 5/18/05)

    Sen. Chuck Hagel
    “I am disappointed that the agreement reached by 14 senators does not guarantee up-or-down votes on all of the president’s nominees…That is a basic principle that should have anchored any agreement.” (Hagel Calls Senators’ Pact Inadequate, Omaha World-Herald, 5/25/05)

    Sen. Pete Domenici
    “Since the day I came to the U.S. Senate in 1973, I have believed strongly that every nominee deserves an up or down vote. That is why over all these years, I have never once voted to filibuster any nominee, even the ones that I ended up opposing. I am truly saddened that the Senate has reached this point. We should resume our long-standing tradition of giving judicial nominees who reach the floor an up or down vote.” (Sen. Domenici Laments Continued Judicial Filibusters, 5/19/05)

    Sen. Charles Grassley
    “The current obstruction led by Senate Democratic leaders threatens that balance. Priscilla Owen and Janice Rogers Brown deserve an up or down vote. It’s high time to make sure all judges receive a fair up or down vote on the Senate floor.” (Grassley: Give Judges a Fair Up or Down Vote, CQ, 5/23/05)

    Sen. Wayne Allard
    “I’d made my position clear. I wanted to have an up- or-down vote on the judges.” (Freshman Salazar Stands with his Seniors, The Denver Post, 5/24/05)

    Sens. Larry Craig and Mike Crapo
    “We are pleased that three of the President’s judicial nominees will receive fair up-or-down votes – it is about time. However, we continue to stress that the Constitution requires the Senate to hold up-or-down votes on all nominees. We will continue to work to ensure that is the case.” (Craig, Crapo React to Judicial Nominees Deal, 5/25/05)

    Sen. Ted Stevens
    “I may not have always agreed with a judicial nominee pick, but I’ve never voted against cloture on a judicial nomination. There have been some petitions. And I’ve always agreed that we should allow an up-or-down vote on judicial nominations on the Senate floor. These nominees deserve our vote.” (Press Conference on Judges, Federal News Service, 5/19/05)

    Sen. Jim DeMint
    “My goal is to confirm highly qualified judges by ensuring timely up-or-down votes for all nominees… Every nominee, no matter if the President is Democrat or Republican, deserves an up-or-down vote,” (Sens. DeMint, Freshman GOP Call for end to Judicial Filibusters, 4/20/05)

    Sen. Elizabeth Dole
    “I think that it’s very important that we reinstate the tradition, the Senate tradition, of 220 years, throughout the entire history of the United States. We’ve had a system that worked, that, when a nominee on the floor has a clear majority of the senators in favor, that they’re going to get that up-or-down vote.” (Interview with Senator Elizabeth Dole, The Big Story with John Gibson, 4/21/05)

  77. 77.

    Suffern ACE

    I thought the great judicial hope was Roy Moore. Nameless federalist society wusses aren’t scary. Threaten us with Roy Moore so we know you’re serious about destroying us through the courts. And whatshisname Phoenix Sherriff for DoJ.

  83. 83.

    jonas

    @Mike in NC:

    So can we conclude that Dancin’ Dave Gregory will have McCain, Grassley, Paul, Cruz, McConnell and Graham as his only guests on Sunday?

    Oh, don’t be ridiculous! He’ll have Carl Levin or Mark Pryor on for balance.

  84. 84.

    Cacti

    @jonas:

    This is pissing off so many of the right people, especially the Villagers. FSM bless Harry Reid!

    And all they can do is sputter.

    The filibuster is inside baseball stuff for political nerds. Your average Joe or Jill isn’t going to give two shits about it.

  86. 86.

    danielx

    I’d feel better if Bobo came back from vacay to wax Burkean — more in sorrow than in anger — about this, but this is a good start at least.

    Let’s not lose hope, it’s a fairly safe bet that Brooks will be on one (or more) of the talking head shows on Sunday morning. He won’t be able to resist.

  88. 88.

    jonas

    @Cacti: Pretty much. 95% of the public has no clue/no care what the filibuster is. On the other hand, they may start noticing that stuff seems to be getting done in Congress for some bizarre reason.

  89. 89.

    mdblanche

    Whenever people complain that the Democrats have a lousy messaging strategy, this post is what I’m going to link to. This day was much too long in coming and made necessary by the unilateral and unprecedented abuse of the filibuster by Republicans, and this is the response of the alleged liberals in the media. I don’t know which theory about why they act this way is correct, but it doesn’t matter. The media have made it their mission to tear down Democrats and build up Republicans. Their actions are not neutral, not even in a faux balance sense. It’s been dialed up to eleven as the Republicans have dialed themselves up to eleven, but from the Clinton impeachment to the 2000 election to the Iraq War, their mission is nothing new. Democrats cannot get their messaging into the media like Republicans can because the media will not let them: it would go against their mission.

  92. 92.

    Elizabelle

    @beltane:

    The best thing that could happen to this country would be for the entire beltway media establishment to be put on a luxury cruise ship for the remainder of their natural lives. They could have their vapid little cocktail party scene on the high seas for all eternity without causing harm to any other living thing.

    I saw a Twilight Zone about that very scenario.

    It was about older people past their prime, but same difference.

  94. 94.

    fuckwit

    @Cacti: Quite the contrary, Joe and Jill are both probably smiling broadly, as they are often wont to do:
    http://i.i.cbsi.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/2013/01/21/pol_0121_joebidendance_480x360.jpg

    As for the media, there are no words in the English language to convey the level of FUCK YOU I feel towards them. There really are no words. Fuck the fucking media. I hate the fucking media, almost more than I hate the Rethugs. Wait, no that’s not right. The Kochs, Monsanto, Chevron, the NRA– truly there are institutions way more worthy of an emotion as strong as hate.The cowardly, simpering, obsequious media merely dote on those truly hate-worthy motherfuckers. I guess contempt, disgust, might be better suited feelings about the media.

  95. 95.

    David Koch

    My favorite is when Harry Reid became Majority Leader he called Bush “a loser”. This infuriated Broder, who proceed to call for Reid’s resignation.

    HA!

  97. 97.

    mclaren

    Dana Milbank’s tweet is great news. The more the inside-the-beltway villager pundits hate what the Democrats do and claim it’s making everything in Washington worse, the more the Democrats need to do it.

    Remember the villagers’ reaction to what Clinton did for the middle class and the economy? They went berserk with hatred, foaming and frothing that “This is OUR town, this is not his town!” and they fellated the thugs who impeached him.

    We need much more of this. I want to see Dana Milbank have a severe embolic infarct over what Obama and the Democrats in congress are doing. Then we’ll be on the right track.

  98. 98.

    Joseph Nobles

    Now the Senate will be just as dysfunctional (as the House).

    Oh, so a vast improvement over before. Thanks, Dana!

  99. 99.

    David Koch

    @? Martin:

    SCOTUS have not been subject to filibusters due to a longstanding gentleman’s agreement

    In the 237 history of the United States only one SCOTUS nominee has ever been filibustered and that was done by….. wait for it.. the repuks in 1968 when they filibustered Abe Fortas.

  100. 100.

    Omnes Omnibus

    @jl: Why shouldn’t the Senate function by majority rule? The Republicans were using the filibuster to require a supermajority on everything. This rule change is actually a minor change that will simply allow judges and administration officials to be appointed. You know what I think, fuck the GOP senators; they didn’t know how to play with their toy and there access to was limited.

  101. 101.

    Elizabelle

    Milbank’s actual column is more nuanced. He agrees the Republicans have abused the filibuster.

    Democrats were fully justified in stripping Republicans of their right to filibuster President Obama’s nominees — yet they will come to deeply regret what they have done.

    Certainly, Republicans have abused the dilatory tactics that Senate minorities have, for centuries, used with greater responsibility; they seem intent on bringing government to a halt. And the Senate in 2013 is hardly a healthy institution.

    … Reid was right that Republican obstruction has been intolerable; half of the 168 filibusters of executive and judicial nominations in the nation’s history, he noted, have come during the Obama presidency.

    But Reid’s remedy — calling a simple-majority vote to undo more than two centuries of custom — has created a situation in which the minority leader, Mitch McConnell (Ky.), is expected to use the minority’s remaining powers to gum up the works, and to get revenge when Republicans regain the majority.

    FFS. Isn’t McConnell already doing that? Reid did not make McConnell and his party act as they are doing. Republicans could put the interest of the American people first. They choose not to. Theirs is the power grab.

    And Grassley is an awful, awful man.

  106. 106.

    David Koch

    @Omnes Omnibus: Right, Not only that, when Reagan appointed Bork to the DC Circuit in 1982, the Dems didn’t filibuster. Same thing when Scalia and Thomas and Roberts were appointed to the DC bench. The Dems never blocked their appointments, and in Bork’s case, even though everyone knew Bork was nutz if only from the Saturday Night Massacre.

  108. 108.

    Omnes Omnibus

    @David Koch: The old rules were that if a person was qualified, they didn’t get filibustered. The Dems have abided by that rule. The GOP has not.

  109. 109.

    Suffern ACE

    @Elizabelle: So what are we supposed to do, Dana? Our major polticial institutions aren’t working at all and won’t work until the Republicans win control of the House, Senate, Courts and the Presidency? Yes, we will regret the day that Republicans win all those again. But then we will be regretting a lot of things when that happens.

  110. 110.

    Citizen_X

    @Poopyman:

    As Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) warned before Thursday’s vote, “When we have the majority, when we have a Republican president, we put more people like Scalia on the court.”

    Putting people like Scalia on the Supreme Court? Oh gosh, that would be terrible!

    Wait: how did he get there, again?

  111. 111.

    Suffern ACE

    @Omnes Omnibus: The Democrats have responded very weakly to attacks on Democrats. Criminies. Didn’t Clinton need to nominate two different attorneys general before he got Reno through and two Surgeons General before he finally got one that was acceptable for a vote. And that was when the Dems were still in control of the legislature.

  112. 112.

    Suffern ACE

    @Citizen_X: At least he admits that Scalia is a nutcase. But they’ll give us more of them because?

    The best thing Liberals can do right now is proclaim that Scalia is what they have in mind as the ideal justice. Maybe Rachel Maddow can offer to spend a week writing him love letters and blowing him kisses on the air.

  113. 113.

    Omnes Omnibus

    @Suffern ACE: One of the downsides to not being an authoritarian party is that one must accept differences of opinion. Sometimes those differences cause problems, but it is better than the alternative.

  114. 114.

    danielx

    @Suffern ACE:

    Yes, we will regret the day that Republicans win all those again.

    That presumes that Republicans ever win a presidential election again, which is questionable. I’ve been thinking for a while now that anyone who can get through the Republican primary circus is unelectable in a general election.

  115. 115.

    Bjacques

    For bonus lulz, if the Senate flips next Movember, the Dems should reinstate the mom filibuster. “You all gave us so much grief for taking it away. FINE! We’ll put it back!”

  116. 116.

    JWR

    @handy: Thank you so much for the list. Great for ice-breakers at parties!

    @danielx: For the foreseeable future, I suspect you’re right. But who knows? America ‘elected’ George Bush. Twice! But today, I am happy.

  117. 117.

    pseudonymous in nc

    the result is likely to be that the partisanship of Congress will seep increasingly into the judiciary

    coughScaliacoughThomas

    In FredHiattWorld, there’s a grandfather clause if you’re already a partisan wingnut judge.

  118. 118.

    David Koch

    Something really sick about the beltway media.

    The Times is butthurt:

    News Analysis

    Partisan Fever in Senate Likely to Rise
    By JONATHAN WEISMAN

    Republicans will no doubt try to exact revenge against the Democrats who humiliated them with the strong-arm move to limit filibusters.

    Likely to rise? Strong arm? Humiliated?

    Really?? Really, NYT?? Really??

    The strong arm tactics were the one the republicans used to mount unprecedented number of filibusters. Oh, but of course, IOKIYAR

  119. 119.

    Elizabelle

    FWIW, nonscientific WaPost poll next to Milbank’s “Power Grab” column:

    Do you agree with Senate Democrats’ decision to strike down filibuster rules for most presidential nominations?

    yes, 67%

    no, 33%

    Noes are presumably the reliable 27%, Villagers, NPR totebaggers, people with nostalgia for the good old days, Senate scholars, people who don’t see too good and hit the wrong box.

    Please note this polling result would have passed a filibuster.

    (3913 responses total)

  122. 122.

    Matt McIrvin

    @jl:

    On other hand, after Grassley gave the game away, and basically said ‘aint it awful what the Dems did, that is so ruthless, but you want ruthless, get a load of we GOPers will do when we win”

    “Well, my little pretty, I can cause accidents TOO!”

  124. 124.

    Lurking Canadian

    @Citizen_X: seriously! What the hell kind of weak-ass threat is that? “If you do this, we’ll retaliate by continuing to do exactly what we’ve been doing! Then you’ll be sorry!”

  125. 125.

    dww44

    @Elizabelle: Over the last few days the problem with the media is that their headlines are NOT NUANCED and pretty much fall in line with the GOP messaging. That’s been our problem for at least a couple of decades. There was the article at the Times a couple of days ago and now Milbank’s. It’s why countering media messaging on Obamacare is so important. Democratic and progressive groups ought to be bombarding all the media outlets for a space to get the truth out. It shouldn’t be Obama just on his own. It won’t succeed if they are only on MSNBC and liberal blogs.

    If ever an objective and fair-minded person needed to be convinced who it is that controls the media, the hue and cry about the failed roll out of Obamacare proves it once and for all. 2 nights ago the lead story on the CBS Evening News was Obama’s historically low poll ratings. It is indeed ironic that that very network’s broadcasting from November 1963 has become the most iconic. How truly low they’ve fallen. Fox wannabe’s, all of them.

  126. 126.

    GRANDPA john

    @handy: So when can we expect to see this front paged at NYT or WP and how soon will it be the lead story on,
    CBS,NBC ABC and CNN evening news shows

  127. 127.

    Tomolitics

    @Poopyman: Respomse to Grassley, et al; Scalia, Thomas, Alito are on the fucking court. Dems rarely use the filibuster for appointments so eliminating it (tho not for Supremes) is really just a rebalancing in response to unprecedented GOPer obstruction. All the talk about power grab & overreach, as well as playing into McConnel’s hands, is delusional.

Comments are closed.