History was made yesterday when, for the first time since our nation became a nation, Democrats filibustered an exemplary Supreme Court Nominee because - and we've got plenty of political scientists and analysts to back us up on this - they're complete and total assholes.
The only way around this epic act of douchebaggery was for Senate Republicans to invoke the so-called "nuclear option," which - disappointingly - did not require inviting Democrats to "a picnic and special surprise" in the remotest corner of Nevada while a gleeful Donald Trump punched their coordinates into his suitcase nuclear launch device.
Rather, it involved changing Senate rules to allow a Supreme Court nominee to be confirmed with a simple majority of 51 votes, rather than requiring the 60 votes which has traditionally been the standard. And under this rule, we should see standout nominee Judge Gorsuch confirmed for the Supreme Court sometime today.
We would say that the Democrats are losing their freaking minds over this, only that ship sailed a long time ago.
And while we're not wild about this change in Senate rules (which will give additional power to the Democrats next time they're in charge), we think some form of "nuking the Democrats" (metaphorically speaking) might as well become our nation's default policy for the next four years.
Shut them up, shut them out, and shut them down.
And if they make a stink, we just put our blast goggles back on and ka-BLOOEY! Because if, within our own halls of government, we can't find a little peace in our time...we'll settle for little pieces.
Agree Mike. Bill Whittle suggests that from now on it be called "The Harry Reid Option".
ReplyDeleteI thought the nukie option would at least give the dims a nasty sunburn and a little hair loss. Dream on, I guess. I think I was also led to believe there might be an occasional appearance by the beautiful and intelligent Ms. Ross. If so, I seem to have missed it. Or else, like my relatives say; that old boy (me) has fallen asleep in the nut barn too many times.
ReplyDeleteI remember when Harry Reid warned Dems that if they used the nuclear option that if the GOP ever got power again the GOP would be able to use it because of the actions of the Dems, and that they might rue the day, and the Dems listened, and said "DO IT!!" and the Dems celebrated. I guess Harry Reid was right.
ReplyDeleteHow were the others confirmed with less than 60 votes with no nuclear option?
ReplyDeleteReply to REM1875: As I understand it, it took 60 votes to end a filibuster in the Senate. While confirmation only required a simple majority.
DeleteShakes head slowly from side to side, My,my,my, ain't that sumpin?
ReplyDeleteTraditionally, a simple majority was required. The super majority is a recent addition that was never intended by the founders,same with the filibuster.
ReplyDeleteAnd all of this time I thought they were saying "the nude option"...
ReplyDeleteI'm glad i don't have cable or satellite television. Just sayin' . . .
ReplyDeleteNext step in this process is to repeal the 17th amendment and get back to legislatures appointing senators to represent the people.
The Republicans finally got around to turning the Senate Dems own weapon on them - it was a long time coming - but they need to make sure that it is now and forever referred to as the "Harry Reid Option".
ReplyDeleteIf this is what it takes to get our country back on track, good on 'em. At last, McConnell is willing to engage in a modicum of leadership.
ReplyDeleteI heart this edition so much, Stilt!
What Dr. Strangelove said. Super majority's apply to overriding a veto or ratifying an amendment. Dems need to check out the Constitution.
ReplyDeleteGot one, three to go. I will never understand that nitwit Schumer grandstanding on a battle that could not be won. He was well aware of the consequences and this has just decimated any political power he held to gum up the Senate agenda. Now he is about as close as one can be to irrelevant. Love it. Certainly for one instance he could not believed President Trump would reinstate the previous administration's choice for SCJ,
ReplyDeleteIn addition, with last night's action I suppose the Russian election thing also becomes irrelevant. Can you imagine a democrat taking such action without first giving six months warning?
I have never seen so many "adults" act like children. The dims remarks about the nominee had little to do with his character or capabilities but those nasty repubs would not confirm Obumma's nominee so don't care if those nasty repubs put JC up we will not confirm him. Johnie hit me so I am going to hit him back, na na na. The morons on both sides of the isle still do not understand what the voters were telling them when we elected a total outsider to the presidency. Wake up fools your non re-election is coming. Term limits by ballot box please and I mean both sides of the isle.
ReplyDeleteYes, term limits for EVERYONE including the supreme court.
ReplyDeleteWould love to see term limits!
DeleteI have to admit that I'm a bit surprised and greatly delighted that the GOP have the testicular fortitude to push the "nucular" button. I was almost certain that Mitch McConnel would cave to the Dems and make some kind of a deal. It's been amusing to watch the likes of "Chuck you" Schumer and Fauxcahontas Warren lose their pea sized minds over Judge Gorsuch, all to no avail. I just hope that Trump's next pick for the Supreme Court will be as good as this one.
ReplyDeleteRe: tfhr said...- it was a long time coming - but they need to make sure that it is now and forever referred to as the "Harry Reid Option".
ReplyDeletePerfect! Especially after his black eye healed up...BAM!!
Now to get rid of the three dizzy broads (OH, God, I LOVE being sexist!) who are sleeping on the bench and put some respectable Constitutionalists in there ... Men or women.
ReplyDelete@Mike aka Proof- I agree, it should be called the "Harry Reid" option. However, for the purpose of cartooning it's a LOT more fun to use mushroom clouds.
ReplyDelete@drjim- And when Bill Whittle speaks, I listen.
@Sortahwitte- Busty Ross will still be appearing here at Stilton's Place, as will Lefty Lucy and likely some new faces.
@TMay- The Dems have never really been good at showing restraint or playing by the rules. Or, now that I think of it, much else.
@REM1875- 60 votes weren't always required. Plus, there was a time in this country (sigh) when people from both parties would vote in favor of outstanding nominees like Gorsuch. What's new is the degree of partisan obstructionism from the Left.
@Granny- Even now, I'm using a fluttering hand fan from the funeral home to give myself a breeze to keep from swooning.
@Dr. Strangelove- Exactly.
@Bruce O'Hara- That would be an act of naked aggression.
@Jim Irre- On TV, this was the subject of endless (and pointless) spin...until the whole story got upended when Trump sent Syria a calling card to let them know that some US Presidents take "red lines" seriously.
@tfhr- The Republicans should always refer to it as the "Harry Reid Option," but the media will never follow suit.
@Bobo the Hobo- This morning, I'm celebrating both the "nuclear option" to confirm Gorsuch, and the "cruise missile option" to tell Syria, Russia, China, and North Korea that the United States is a serious power again. Both were responses to "in your face" provocation that doubled back on the perpetrators.
@Judi King- But, but, the Constitution is a living document...! It means whatever you want it to mean, right? Unless, say, Judge Gorsuch gets on the Supreme Court (grin).
@James Daily- Schumer has no schame (sorry, couldn't resist). A genuinely dreadful man, and I look forward to seeing him stew in his own vile, ineffectual juices.
Regarding Syria and Russia, Trump's actions do make a joke out of the idea that he is somehow Putin's puppet. And if anything, the relentless badgering by the Left on this point may have actually made Trump more willing to launch an attack. It's something of a chicken and egg quandry: will the Left end up creating the Trump they most fear?
@Just Me- I completely agree. There are plenty of things for the opposing parties to argue about, but Gorsuch's qualifications shouldn't be one of them. Then again, I have no doubt that the Dems' opposition was sincere: they hate the Constitution and sure as hell don't want a Supreme Court which defends it.
@Judi King- In general, I like the idea of term limits...though the actual implementation is always the dicey part. We don't really want to further empower the "deep state" types who keep their jobs when political officeholders come and go.
@FlyBoy- As nearly as I can tell, the only reason NOT to use the nuclear option was to "set a good example" of statesmanship in hopes that, in the future, Democrats wouldn't act like complete scum. Since that clearly is a fantasy, I fail to see any downside.
@Barbar Cat- I still say there's no way in blazes that Reid got beaten black and blue by a rubber exercise band.
@Fred Ciampi- At the very least, let's see if Ginsburg can fog up a mirror with her breath. I'm beginning to suspect taxidermy.
To Judi King, Be careful for what you ask. Simple requests have many crannies in which little vipers hide.
ReplyDeleteThe Harry Reid Option is very apropos. He brought about the 60 vote threshold; prior a majority vote sufficed. Until Thomas, a person's creds were the major consideration with the exception of Abe Fortas. You youngsters can look up his problems.
But even Thomas and Alito arrived on the bench with a simple majority vote, a shame since both are amply qualified to sit there. That however was the beginning of the partisan division leading to todays toxic Government.
This arrangement is as the Scot Claymore sword, it cuts on the backswing too
As Dr. Stragelove stated above: The Founding Fathers would have been aghast at the idea of a filibuster, and they also made it quite clear that a supermajority was required for only a few circumstances such as amending the Constitution or impeaching a president.
ReplyDeleteThe "Nuclear Option" was very appropriate.
Invoking the Reid/Schumer option will not come back to bite the Republicans, at least if history is an indicator. The only time in the history of our republic a SCOTUS nominee was filibustered was......wait for it......two days ago!
ReplyDelete"And if they make a stink, we just put our blast goggles back on and ka-BLOOEY!"......How do you almost always know exactly what I'm thinking?
ReplyDeleteI'm quite certain that when Dirty Harry went nuclear, he did so knowing he'd be congratulating himself many times over, from that day in 2013, right thru to the end of the Clinton administration in 2024.
ReplyDeleteAnd as Gomer Pyle often said, "Surprise! Surprise! Surprise!"
-------------------------
And in related hypocrat news:
In 1992, then-Senator Joe Biden said, “It is my view that if a Supreme Court Justice resigns tomorrow, or within the next several weeks, or resigns at the end of the summer, President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not — and not — name a nominee until after the November election is completed."
In 2007, Senator Charles Schumer said, ”We should reverse the presumption of confirmation… we should not confirm any Bush nominee to the Supreme Court except in extraordinary circumstances. They must prove by actions not words that they are in the mainstream rather than we have to prove that they are not.”
And in between, in 2005 on the Senate floor, Senator Harry Reid said, "The duties of the United States Senate are set forth in the Constitution of the United States. Nowhere in that document does it say the Senate has a duty to give presidential nominees a vote. It says appointments shall be made with the advice and consent of the Senate. That's very different than saying every nominee receives a vote.” Reid underscored his point by saying, "The Senate is not a rubber stamp for the executive branch."
What it really boils down to is this. Democrats LOVE to cite protocol. But they hate when Republicans have the audacity to actually adhere to the protocols that Democrats earlier cited.
Good one!
ReplyDeleteFYI - going a little bit off-topic with this one. I'll presume that most of us are paying a little more attention to Syria this week. I'll also presume that you've heard a LOT about "false flags" and other opinions on the dominant news channels about how Assad and the Russians actually did not launch a chemical weapon attack. In that light, I thought I'd share this story from bell¿ngcat that illustrates some of the difficulties in hanging the blame on the alleged rebels.
ReplyDeleteI'm not really all that familiar with the bell¿ngcat site, so can't speak to their reliability. However, it was interesting info at the least - much of which seems to be in line with what you can find about Sarin online at other sites.
Sooo.... the Republicans have finally discovered their cajones. I hope they wake up from their 8 year sleep, and finally realize they do not need the friggin Democrats to pass stuff! Reid and Pelosi shoved crap down our throats for years while the Republicans cowered in the basement hoping somebody would toss them a crumb.
ReplyDeleteYes, as Ed G. Mann alluded, the pendulum will swing, so we need to strike while the iron is hot. Dare we now hope for a meaningful Obamacare repeal?
As far as the situation in Syria, here's hoping Assad, ISIS, Hezbollah, the Mulsim Brotherhood, Kim Jong Il, and Putin took the hint. But, I suspect they won't.
And a note to ex-prez O'Liar.... THIS is what you do when the bully ignores your warnings.
@txGreg,
ReplyDeleteWhat does it say about our so called media, that they would sooner defend a monster like Assad than applaud Trump for doing what O'Liar wouldn't do. Even in the extremely unlikely event that Assad didn't murder masses of his own people, he has the power to stop the carnage and refuses to do so.
In my opinion, should he ignore this warning, the next round of Tomahawks need to land squarely upon his fat head.
@Fred Sciampi: I dunno. Perhaps Mr. Trump should have one of his cronies invite Ginsburg, Kagan, Sotomayer and, perhaps, Roberts to their private hunting ranch to create a few openings. You know - like Øbama did with Scalia...
ReplyDelete@Colby Muenster,
ReplyDeleteAs long as Republicans buy into the "repeal and replace" rhetoric, there is no hope. "Replace" in healthcare parlance means continued big-government presence. We either need simple repeal, or maybe "repeal and repair." Repair meaning to try to redirect us towards the free-market system that we've not had for many decades. Many of our pre-Øbamacare problems were already due to government interference IMO. Continuing to pile more gov't on top is never going to be a real solution.
The really sad bit about Syria is that they don't argue that he didn't murder masses of his own people. The media and politicians (including Trump) have known for a long time that he's slaughtered thousands during this war. They just didn't care when he was "only" doing so with conventional weapons. A few have now gotten upset since he has killed a handful with a "bad" weapon... but you're right - many more continue to defend him ever after that.
Gorsuch: He was as "moderate" a nomination that the Democrats could hope to get. So moderate, in fact, that they overwhelmingly loved the guy when he was originally nominated to the federal court. Their resistance to him was purely payback for the GOP's refusal to hold hearings on Obama's Garland. The Democrats had every expectation that the GOP would fold, as it pretty much usually does. But surprise, they didn't. So by going to war over Gorsuch, the Democrats have now guaranteed that the next nomination is going to be much more decidedly to the right. Good work guys!
ReplyDeleteSyria: Although I'm no big fan of a deepening engagement in the festering sink-hole that is the Middle East, yesterday's action by Trump was pretty much win-win, for Trump:
o Sets expectations for how he will act in the future - no more phony "red lines".
o People don't overlook or forgive people who gas little babies. (My guess is that Trump saw pictures far more gruesome than the ones that made it into the media) Overall, people will approve.
o The whole thing literally goes down while Trump is dining with the Chinese President with misbehaving North Korea as a topic. That's pretty bad-ass if you ask me.
o Sticks a fork in that whole "Trump is Putin's puppet" thing.
o Whiny Progressives upset about how expensive Tomahawk cruise missiles are. How many did Obama launch? Perhaps we could afford to buy more by shutting down HUD, which seems to have misplaced a half-trillion dollars.
Not a bad day, really.
I am so relieved that McConnell didn't buy into that silly argument that if they eliminate the filibuster now, the Democrats will do the same thing when they get back in power. Do you think for one minute they wouldn't do it anyway? Republicans' actions would have zero bearing on that decision. Maybe those establishment types are beginning to get it.
ReplyDeleteMaybe instead of calling it the "nuclear option" or the "Dirty Harry" Reid option, we can just combine the two and call it the "Dirty Nuke" option. That's the only politics the Dimwitocrats know how to play, with emphasis on, "dirty." Good to see one of their antics finally come around to bite them in the ass for once.
ReplyDeleteEither way, the children taking up space at the country's most expensive day care center (CON-gress) will continue their crying, squabbling and punching at each other over their toys and cookies. Some adult in the room needs to give them a good spanking. I will be wielding my own personal paddle in 2018 (tiny as it may be) to vote out all their worthless incumbent asses as much as possible. If all of us will collectively use our "tiny paddles" on them during the next election cycle, maybe it can become a big paddle, just as we used it against Broom Hilda last November.
Unfortunately, Trump is becoming an ever increasing disappointment to me and is not governing up to the expectations I had of him, especially after the cruise missile attack on Syria yesterday (Chem weapons "attack" was a false flag event!) Granted he is under constant attack from all sides, but it appears he is being compromised more and more each day by the "Deep State" perpetual NWO war machine. Maybe they dug up things on him during all their illegal surveillance of him that they are now able to use against him to force him into going along with their agenda. Just wondering.
Noteworthy that ol'Harry "nuclear option" Reid is from NV :)
ReplyDeleteSeems like the Democrat Party better start NOW to try to find, prepare, groom, & advertise a few people of integrity, moral compass, & patriotic spirit who are not complete fools or nut-cakes to run in the next elections. They sure don't have many now. And several of those who currently think they may be chosen ones may learn one cannot run for such high office from prison. I'm loving this.
ReplyDelete@Rod said "...the Democrat Party better start NOW to try to find, prepare, groom, & advertise a few people of integrity, moral compass, & patriotic spirit who are not complete fools or nut-cakes to run in the next elections."
ReplyDeleteWhy would a party that is now totally owned by billionaires and oligarchs and managed by transparently corrupt cronies like the Clintons wish to do that?
My friends on the left are still reveling in the seeming discombobulation of the GOP, and are still totally blind or are in denial of the implosion taking place all around them.
WE didn't start the fire...
ReplyDeleteDingy Harry Reid started it, was told (by Uncle Chucky,no less) that it would come back to haunt/bite the Democraps, but did Harry care? Noooooooooooooooooo.
...and here we are.
Nuclear Option my ass. This is all media & political drama at its best, intended for the uniformed. As I understand it this so-called "nuclear option" of 2017 simply undid a change which Democrats did several years ago when it was to THEIR advantage; and it return the rules of the Senate to the way the Senate used to work for over 100 years of history before that. Close to 100% of what Chuck Schumer etal Democrats are saying about this now are pure lies & deception. It's supposed to be a chamber of Ladies & Gentlemen. How about they throw out some of their worst liars.
ReplyDeletePardon me... "Uninformed" above. Funky fingers;sorry.
ReplyDeleteCorrection. Confirmation has always been a simple majority. Invoking cloture took sixty by precedent, not by rule. The Reid option is simply to have a senator object to the precedent followed by a vote by simple majority to sustain the objection. No senate rule was changed, nor was a rule change necessary.
ReplyDelete