Democrats and the mainstream media were totally FOR ending filibuster--when Dems did it. Now they say it's just AWFUL!
A "filibuster" is a procedural rule of the U.S. senate that allows
the minority party to keep a bill from getting to the senate floor if
the minority party can muster 40 votes. The device isn't found in the
Constitution but has been part of the senate rules "in its modern form" since 1917.
Until recently--actually until five days ago--Democrats and the Dem-loving mainstream media had been totally in favor of ending the ability of the minority party to block judicial appointments with just 40 votes by using the "filibuster." And indeed, in 2013--when Democrats controlled the senate-- then-senate-majority leader Harry Reid used a simple majority vote to change the rules so that the appointment of federal judges couldn't be filibustered.
Of course that was when Democrats had a majority in the senate.
Last week Republicans used the same procedure to end filibusters on Supreme Court judges.
Ooooh! Unfair!
To listen to both Democrat "leaders" and the lying media a day after Repubs used the exact same procedure on the Democrats that the Dems used four years ago, you'd think this was the worst thing evah!
When Democrat senate majority leader Harry Reid proposed changing the rules four years ago, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow assured viewers that there was no harm because “judges can be blocked on an up-or-down vote, a majority vote, like always. But they cannot be blocked anymore by just a minority of votes.”
MSNBC anchor Chris Hayes praised the Democrat rule-change as “a win for democracy,” while his colleague Al Sharpton said “Democrats took the bold step of changing Senate rules, scaling back the filibuster that Republicans have unfairly used to block the president’s nominees.”
CNN commentator Marc Lamont Hill snidely said that if Republicans wanted to preserve the filibuster they should have won a majority of the senate seats. “That’s what happens when Republicans lose elections,” Mr. Hill said at the time. “But they’re not accepting the consequences.”
When Democrat Harry Reid used the nuclear option in 2013, the NY Times praised the move, under the headline, “Democracy Returns to the Senate.” “Given the extreme degree of Republican obstruction during the Obama administration, the Democrats had little choice but to change the filibuster rule,” said the Times.
But earlier this month, facing the prospect of a conservative judge being named to the Supreme Court, the Times blamed Republican majority leader McConnell for forcing Democrats to filibuster nomination of Gorsuch. The Times wrote that McConnell's "determination to steamroll and humiliate political opponents exceeds any other consideration.”
When Dems do it, the Times praises and defends: "the Democrats had little choice but to change it." But when Repubs do the same thing, the Times sniffs that the senate leader is doing it because of his "determination to steamroll and humiliate opponents."
If the Dems and MSM didn't have double-standards they wouldn't have any standards at all.
Until recently--actually until five days ago--Democrats and the Dem-loving mainstream media had been totally in favor of ending the ability of the minority party to block judicial appointments with just 40 votes by using the "filibuster." And indeed, in 2013--when Democrats controlled the senate-- then-senate-majority leader Harry Reid used a simple majority vote to change the rules so that the appointment of federal judges couldn't be filibustered.
Of course that was when Democrats had a majority in the senate.
Last week Republicans used the same procedure to end filibusters on Supreme Court judges.
Ooooh! Unfair!
To listen to both Democrat "leaders" and the lying media a day after Repubs used the exact same procedure on the Democrats that the Dems used four years ago, you'd think this was the worst thing evah!
When Democrat senate majority leader Harry Reid proposed changing the rules four years ago, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow assured viewers that there was no harm because “judges can be blocked on an up-or-down vote, a majority vote, like always. But they cannot be blocked anymore by just a minority of votes.”
MSNBC anchor Chris Hayes praised the Democrat rule-change as “a win for democracy,” while his colleague Al Sharpton said “Democrats took the bold step of changing Senate rules, scaling back the filibuster that Republicans have unfairly used to block the president’s nominees.”
CNN commentator Marc Lamont Hill snidely said that if Republicans wanted to preserve the filibuster they should have won a majority of the senate seats. “That’s what happens when Republicans lose elections,” Mr. Hill said at the time. “But they’re not accepting the consequences.”
When Democrat Harry Reid used the nuclear option in 2013, the NY Times praised the move, under the headline, “Democracy Returns to the Senate.” “Given the extreme degree of Republican obstruction during the Obama administration, the Democrats had little choice but to change the filibuster rule,” said the Times.
But earlier this month, facing the prospect of a conservative judge being named to the Supreme Court, the Times blamed Republican majority leader McConnell for forcing Democrats to filibuster nomination of Gorsuch. The Times wrote that McConnell's "determination to steamroll and humiliate political opponents exceeds any other consideration.”
When Dems do it, the Times praises and defends: "the Democrats had little choice but to change it." But when Repubs do the same thing, the Times sniffs that the senate leader is doing it because of his "determination to steamroll and humiliate opponents."
If the Dems and MSM didn't have double-standards they wouldn't have any standards at all.
posted by SF at
12:33 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home