Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sen. Barack Obama [now President]: …”hasn’t gotten his way. And that is now prompting a, you know, change in the Senate rules that really, I think, would change the character of the Senate forever… Uhh, and, what I worry about would be you essentially have still two chambers — the House and the Senate — but you have simply majoritarian absolute power on either side, and that’s just not what the founders intended.”
Sen. Hillary Clinton: “So this president (George W. Bush) has come to the majority here in the Senate, and basically said, ‘change the rules.’ Do it the way I want it done. And I guess there weren’t that many voices on the other side of the aisle that acted the way previous generations of Senators have acted, and said, Mr. President, we’re with you, we support you, but that’s a bridge too far. We can’t go there. You have to restrain yourself, Mr. President. ” {Note: Mrs. Clinton is no longer in the Senate.]
Sen. Chuck Schumer: “We are on the precipice of a crisis, a Constitutional crisis. The checks and balances, which have been at the core of this Republic [finally, a Democrat who understands basic political philosophy - ed.], are about to be evaporated, by the nuclear option. The checks and balances say that if you get 51% of the vote, you don’t get your way 100% of the time. It is amazing, almost a temper tantrum…”
Sen. Harry Reid: “Mr. President [of the Senate] the right [sic] to extend the debate is never more important than when one party controls the Congress and the White House. In these cases, the filibuster serves as a check on power and preserves our limited government.”
Sen. Dianne Feinstein: “The nuclear option, if successful, will turn the Senate into a body that could have its rules broken at any time by a majority of Senators unhappy with any position taken by the minority. It begins with judicial nominations. Next, will be executive appointments. And then, legislation.”
Sen. Joseph Biden [now, Vice President]: “This nuclear option is ultimately an example of the arrogance of power. It is a fundamental power-grab.”
Sen. Harry Reid: “But no, we are not going to follow the Senate rules. No. Because of the arrogance of power of this Republican administration.”
Sen. Chris Dodd [no longer in the Senate]: “I’ve never passed a single bill worth talking about that didn’t have as a lead co-sponsor a Republican. And I don’t know of a single piece of legislation that’s ever been adopted here that didn’t have a Republican and a Democrat in the lead. [Wait until ObamaCare - ed.] That’s because we need to sit down and work with each other. The rules of this institution have required that. That’s why we exist. Why have a bicameral legislative body? Why have two chambers? What were the Framers thinking about – 218 years ago? They understood, Mr. President, that there is a tyranny of the majority. ”
Sen. Dianne Feinstein: “If the Republican leadership insists on forcing the nuclear option, the Senate becomes, ipso facto, the House of Representatives, where the majority rules Supreme [note - ed.], and the party in power can dominate, and control the agenda with absolute power.”
Sen. Hillary Clinton: “You’ve got majority rule. You’ve got the Senate over here, where people can slow things down, where they can debate, something called the filibuster… you know, it seems like it’sa little less than efficient. Well, that’s right, it is. And deliberately designed to be so.”
Sen. Joe Biden: “I say to my friends on the Republican side, ‘you may own the field right now, but you won’t own it forever.’ And I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don’t make the kind of naked power grab you are doing.”
Sen. Chuck Schumer: “They want their way every single time, and they will change the rules, break the rules, misread the Constitution, so that they will get their way.”
Sen. Hillary Clinton: “The Senate is being asked to turn itself inside-out to ignore the precedent, to ignore the way our system has worked, the delicate balance that we have obtained, that has kept this Constitutional system going, for immediate gratification, of the present President.” [Note: I thought Obama had copyrighted that one. - ed.]
Sen. Max Baucus [an ObamaCare architect]: “This is the one way democracy ends – not with a bomb, but with a gavel.”
Additional quote: Sen. Barack Obama: “You know, the Founders designed this system, as frustrating it is, to make sure that there’s a broad consensus before the country moves forward.”
In 2005, the nuclear option was halted when a precisely bipartisan group of 14 senators cut a deal: the minority Democrats promised not to filibuster presidential nominees except in “exceptional circumstances,” and the GOP promised not to strip the filibuster unless they believed the Democrats were filibustering appointees on grounds that were not “exceptional.”
Today’s Democrat Party is apparently unable to come to any deal with the minority of Republicans, and are just throwing a “temper tantrum” (in the words of Chuck Schumer) to further its “naked power grab.”
The reason all these quotes are irrelevant in November 2013 has been explained dozens of times on this thread. Try reading it.
Sen. Barack Obama [now President]: …”hasn’t gotten his way. And that is now prompting a, you know, change in the Senate rules that really, I think, would change the character of the Senate forever… Uhh, and, what I worry about would be you essentially have still two chambers — the House and the Senate — but you have simply majoritarian absolute power on either side, and that’s just not what the founders intended.”
Sen. Hillary Clinton: “So this president (George W. Bush) has come to the majority here in the Senate, and basically said, ‘change the rules.’ Do it the way I want it done. And I guess there weren’t that many voices on the other side of the aisle that acted the way previous generations of Senators have acted, and said, Mr. President, we’re with you, we support you, but that’s a bridge too far. We can’t go there. You have to restrain yourself, Mr. President. ” {Note: Mrs. Clinton is no longer in the Senate.]
Sen. Chuck Schumer: “We are on the precipice of a crisis, a Constitutional crisis. The checks and balances, which have been at the core of this Republic [finally, a Democrat who understands basic political philosophy - ed.], are about to be evaporated, by the nuclear option. The checks and balances say that if you get 51% of the vote, you don’t get your way 100% of the time. It is amazing, almost a temper tantrum…”
Sen. Harry Reid: “Mr. President [of the Senate] the right [sic] to extend the debate is never more important than when one party controls the Congress and the White House. In these cases, the filibuster serves as a check on power and preserves our limited government.”
Sen. Dianne Feinstein: “The nuclear option, if successful, will turn the Senate into a body that could have its rules broken at any time by a majority of Senators unhappy with any position taken by the minority. It begins with judicial nominations. Next, will be executive appointments. And then, legislation.”
Sen. Joseph Biden [now, Vice President]: “This nuclear option is ultimately an example of the arrogance of power. It is a fundamental power-grab.”
Sen. Harry Reid: “But no, we are not going to follow the Senate rules. No. Because of the arrogance of power of this Republican administration.”
Sen. Chris Dodd [no longer in the Senate]: “I’ve never passed a single bill worth talking about that didn’t have as a lead co-sponsor a Republican. And I don’t know of a single piece of legislation that’s ever been adopted here that didn’t have a Republican and a Democrat in the lead. [Wait until ObamaCare - ed.] That’s because we need to sit down and work with each other. The rules of this institution have required that. That’s why we exist. Why have a bicameral legislative body? Why have two chambers? What were the Framers thinking about – 218 years ago? They understood, Mr. President, that there is a tyranny of the majority. ”
Sen. Dianne Feinstein: “If the Republican leadership insists on forcing the nuclear option, the Senate becomes, ipso facto, the House of Representatives, where the majority rules Supreme [note - ed.], and the party in power can dominate, and control the agenda with absolute power.”
Sen. Hillary Clinton: “You’ve got majority rule. You’ve got the Senate over here, where people can slow things down, where they can debate, something called the filibuster… you know, it seems like it’sa little less than efficient. Well, that’s right, it is. And deliberately designed to be so.”
Sen. Joe Biden: “I say to my friends on the Republican side, ‘you may own the field right now, but you won’t own it forever.’ And I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don’t make the kind of naked power grab you are doing.”
Sen. Chuck Schumer: “They want their way every single time, and they will change the rules, break the rules, misread the Constitution, so that they will get their way.”
Sen. Hillary Clinton: “The Senate is being asked to turn itself inside-out to ignore the precedent, to ignore the way our system has worked, the delicate balance that we have obtained, that has kept this Constitutional system going, for immediate gratification, of the present President.” [Note: I thought Obama had copyrighted that one. - ed.]
Sen. Max Baucus [an ObamaCare architect]: “This is the one way democracy ends – not with a bomb, but with a gavel.”
Additional quote: Sen. Barack Obama: “You know, the Founders designed this system, as frustrating it is, to make sure that there’s a broad consensus before the country moves forward.”
In 2005, the nuclear option was halted when a precisely bipartisan group of 14 senators cut a deal: the minority Democrats promised not to filibuster presidential nominees except in “exceptional circumstances,” and the GOP promised not to strip the filibuster unless they believed the Democrats were filibustering appointees on grounds that were not “exceptional.”
Today’s Democrat Party is apparently unable to come to any deal with the minority of Republicans, and are just throwing a “temper tantrum” (in the words of Chuck Schumer) to further its “naked power grab.”
Yep.
Good luck getting a single voter to give a s**t about the filibuster in the next election.
The refusal to confirm highly qualified judicial nominees and executive branch appointees was engineered by the America-haters to hurn our country and to obstruct in a way not intended by our laws. Yes, remembering "history" is important. Equally and more important may be living in the present and reacting to the present ... when what's been happing is unprecidented.
For every vote from now till the election... Every republican senator should refuse to vote. Walk out on the vote. Their vote doesnt matter so why vote at all. Let all votes show just like obamacare that not one republican supported the bill.
The reason all these quotes are irrelevant in November 2013 has been explained dozens of times on this thread. Try reading it.
Why in the world would you consider those quotes "irrelevant?" Is there a reason that the steaming pile of obvious hypocrisy is able to fly over your head without an ounce of care or concern? If so, you should lay out it out for us if you're so confident in your position. I have yet to see an argument that complements your dubious comment.
Sen. Barack Obama [now President]: …”hasn’t gotten his way. And that is now prompting a, you know, change in the Senate rules that really, I think, would change the character of the Senate forever… Uhh, and, what I worry about would be you essentially have still two chambers — the House and the Senate — but you have simply majoritarian absolute power on either side, and that’s just not what the founders intended.”
Sen. Hillary Clinton: “So this president (George W. Bush) has come to the majority here in the Senate, and basically said, ‘change the rules.’ Do it the way I want it done. And I guess there weren’t that many voices on the other side of the aisle that acted the way previous generations of Senators have acted, and said, Mr. President, we’re with you, we support you, but that’s a bridge too far. We can’t go there. You have to restrain yourself, Mr. President. ” {Note: Mrs. Clinton is no longer in the Senate.]
Sen. Chuck Schumer: “We are on the precipice of a crisis, a Constitutional crisis. The checks and balances, which have been at the core of this Republic [finally, a Democrat who understands basic political philosophy - ed.], are about to be evaporated, by the nuclear option. The checks and balances say that if you get 51% of the vote, you don’t get your way 100% of the time. It is amazing, almost a temper tantrum…”
Sen. Harry Reid: “Mr. President [of the Senate] the right [sic] to extend the debate is never more important than when one party controls the Congress and the White House. In these cases, the filibuster serves as a check on power and preserves our limited government.”
Sen. Dianne Feinstein: “The nuclear option, if successful, will turn the Senate into a body that could have its rules broken at any time by a majority of Senators unhappy with any position taken by the minority. It begins with judicial nominations. Next, will be executive appointments. And then, legislation.”
Sen. Joseph Biden [now, Vice President]: “This nuclear option is ultimately an example of the arrogance of power. It is a fundamental power-grab.”
Sen. Harry Reid: “But no, we are not going to follow the Senate rules. No. Because of the arrogance of power of this Republican administration.”
Sen. Chris Dodd [no longer in the Senate]: “I’ve never passed a single bill worth talking about that didn’t have as a lead co-sponsor a Republican. And I don’t know of a single piece of legislation that’s ever been adopted here that didn’t have a Republican and a Democrat in the lead. [Wait until ObamaCare - ed.] That’s because we need to sit down and work with each other. The rules of this institution have required that. That’s why we exist. Why have a bicameral legislative body? Why have two chambers? What were the Framers thinking about – 218 years ago? They understood, Mr. President, that there is a tyranny of the majority. ”
Sen. Dianne Feinstein: “If the Republican leadership insists on forcing the nuclear option, the Senate becomes, ipso facto, the House of Representatives, where the majority rules Supreme [note - ed.], and the party in power can dominate, and control the agenda with absolute power.”
Sen. Hillary Clinton: “You’ve got majority rule. You’ve got the Senate over here, where people can slow things down, where they can debate, something called the filibuster… you know, it seems like it’sa little less than efficient. Well, that’s right, it is. And deliberately designed to be so.”
Sen. Joe Biden: “I say to my friends on the Republican side, ‘you may own the field right now, but you won’t own it forever.’ And I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don’t make the kind of naked power grab you are doing.”
Sen. Chuck Schumer: “They want their way every single time, and they will change the rules, break the rules, misread the Constitution, so that they will get their way.”
Sen. Hillary Clinton: “The Senate is being asked to turn itself inside-out to ignore the precedent, to ignore the way our system has worked, the delicate balance that we have obtained, that has kept this Constitutional system going, for immediate gratification, of the present President.” [Note: I thought Obama had copyrighted that one. - ed.]
Sen. Max Baucus [an ObamaCare architect]: “This is the one way democracy ends – not with a bomb, but with a gavel.”
Additional quote: Sen. Barack Obama: “You know, the Founders designed this system, as frustrating it is, to make sure that there’s a broad consensus before the country moves forward.”
In 2005, the nuclear option was halted when a precisely bipartisan group of 14 senators cut a deal: the minority Democrats promised not to filibuster presidential nominees except in “exceptional circumstances,” and the GOP promised not to strip the filibuster unless they believed the Democrats were filibustering appointees on grounds that were not “exceptional.”
Today’s Democrat Party is apparently unable to come to any deal with the minority of Republicans, and are just throwing a “temper tantrum” (in the words of Chuck Schumer) to further its “naked power grab.”
Today is very different, the number of filibusters is historical and in many cases there have been more filibusters under Obama's presidency than in our entire history. How many times in history has an appointment to the secretary of defense been filibusters, what is their reason for disapproval of the DC Circuit Court Judges, why not just allow an up and down vote. This is just obstructionism plain and simple, no one thinks this is a good thing to start down this path but the republicans are being totally unreasonable.
The refusal to confirm highly qualified judicial nominees and executive branch appointees was engineered by the America-haters to hurn our country and to obstruct in a way not intended by our laws. Yes, remembering "history" is important. Equally and more important may be living in the present and reacting to the present ... when what's been happing is unprecidented.
You folks are so pissed off at how Barack Obama has made all of you look like fools that you've now resorted to calling all of us who told you so "America Hater's" in order to make you feel better about your 5 years of Cult of Worship. I think it's hiliarious!
You better read again, did you know graphs are factz??
I can read graphs, but what graph, you posted a link to hundreds of graphs, pictures of obama, reid and who knows else....Give me somehting specific, (if you can) in those graphs and pictures you posted that talks about a filibuster....
My link is facts about obama nominations, care to talk about what I posted, or contiune with the kindergarten picture show....
The reason all these quotes are irrelevant in November 2013 has been explained dozens of times on this thread. Try reading it.
LOL...not really, But I see you had a great comeback....
Let me cifer what you said...
Back then it was the Ds going against the Rs, so it mattered....now, who cares...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
