.... God Damn it Harry "they" might give you a vote or two but they have broken
their word time after time and they are on the record as saying they will never work
w/the President.

then reid needs to resign as majority leader.

could resign retroactively? Think of ALL THE THINGS we could set right if this BOZOs determined obstructions were swept away. Really, Reid is the Boehner of the Senate! That ditzy dame that challenged him for his seat last time - could things have been any worse had she won?

Use the nuclear option now! People who say, "well, don't do it because then we'll be screwed when Republicans have control of the Senate." are missing the point. The Republicans will change the rules against fillabusters on day 1 should they gain control regardless of what Reid does now.

you PLEASE stop using logic and telling the truth!!!!!!!

And the Dems cower in fear of them, even when the Dems are in control.

Gawd forbid they'd all work for the 99%

they were too strong to do anything about. Now they are the minority and are still too strong. In both cases, Reid led the party.

every time

I believe he's making this deal because he might not have the 51 votes to change the rules.

Senator Carl Levin has already announced that he oppose ending the filibuster.
He's also the Senator that tried to have the filibuster rules watered down at the beginning
of this Senate session back in January.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/johnstanton/key-democratic-senator-will-oppose-efforts-to-end-filibuster

I'm starting to wonder, why Senator Levin continues to push for the current filibuster rules.

Anyone with an opinion?

Feinstein, my senator, won't go for it. Lots of others won't also.

would sellout to thwart any kind of reform. As for Levin, who knows? However, the message I get from any senator in opposition to filibuster reform is that a majority should not govern without the consent of the minority, and that any 41 Senators are entitled to a facto veto over anything the other 494 members of Congress might want to do.

Water is wet.

Last edited Tue Jul 16, 2013, 04:28 PM - Edit history (1)

steam

or

a solid!

is a joke.

What a chump.

He reminds me of Charlie Brown with the football.

Wait. What?

That was the other agency the Republicans were trying to shut down by denying any nominees.

Has that been abandoned to the wolves.

with people of Obama's choice, and the Republicans don't filibuster those replacements.

If the Republicans break their word, nuclear option is still there.

Not ideal, but at least there will be replacements.

I heard on MSNBC this morning that the Republicans agreed to go forward on 5 of the nominations. They did that in exchange for NOT going forward on the 2 nominations for the NLRB. They want different nominees for those 2 positions. I called Senator Reid's office and asked if that meant that they wanted 2 Republicans to be nominated to those positions and it sure sounded to me that the lady on the phone said "yes". Again Reid shows that he has no spine. Folded again. But really... is anyone truly surprised?

from what I understand, we are getting all our nominees confirmed, except we're having to replace two of the NLRB nominees, but with different pro-labor nominees that Obama will select and who will be confirmed by August.

This seems like a face-saving move by Republicans. By the time August rolls around we will have all 7 spots filled by our guys whereas before Reid threatened to go nuclear they were all being blocked or delayed. Seems like a win to me.

If the Republicans obstruct, it comes back into play.

I hope you're right about the 2 replacements also being pro-labor nominees. I didn't get that impression when I called Senator Reid's DC office this morning and quizzed the lady on the phone in his office.

1) We get Cordray, the CFPB. This is huge, because there were legal questions about its ability to run without a confirmed director.

2) We will get the NLRB after we pick other pro-labor nominees.

3) We get the other three cabinet officials.

What do the Republicans get? Reid won't use the nuclear option this week.

If they try monkey business, it's right back in play.

Or was this just basically throwing the Republicans a bone?

They may give up a few executive appointments but they will never let Obama appoint a Supreme Court Justice unless the filibuster law is gone.

that's why we won't go nuclear over judges. If, say, Christie gets elected in 2016 with a Republican Senate and, say, Ruth Bader Ginsburg retires, we will need that fillibuster to demand a pro-Roe justice.

Just like Bush got two - Roberts and Alito. Kerry and Kennedy filibustered Alito because he was very extreme on many issues. Kerry gave 3 speeches - none focused on him being pro life. The reason is that the only chance to succeed was if he was seen as out of the mainstream. Bush was NEVER going to nominate a prochoice justice - just as Obama will never nominate a prolife one.

if however, Obama gets to name replacement for Scalia, Thomas, or Kennedy, THEN we will have WW III...

Harry: Define "Everyone". It's got to be a small fellowship!

I hafta wonder if Harry's even HEARD of the many petitions that have been put together, urging him to reform the GOP's obstruction tool?

n/t

next time democrats are the minority. I BETTER SEE SOME FUCKING PARTISANSHIP.

I don't think Mitch is fulfilling his duties in the bedroom. He's too worn out after sticking it to Reid over and over and over.

First McConnell offered all 7 nominees if they gave up the ability to go nuclear for the rest of the Congress. Reid said no. So what he got is 5 nominees now, the other 2 by August 27, and didn't give up the ability to go nuclear later.

http://www.dailykos.com/

Maybe I've judged Reid too harshly in this case.

Thanks!

I'm so surprised.

Very well put.

The deal also includes the Democratic leadership's support for the House farm aid bill (the one without food stamps) and Republican plans to privatize Medicare and make abortion illegal after twenty weeks of pregnancy. As Senator Reid said in response to reporters' questions, "You get something and you give something in return."

Of course I'm just kidding, though something much like this would not really surprise me.

He trusts them to keep yet another "deal". He'll get fucked again. Or rather, we all will.

Once again, making deals with Republicans that will make no deals, until, in the end, the GOP gets exactly what they want and the Senate flips to the dark side next year.

You know they will, and most likely they'll get away with it like George Zimmerman.

Is anyone really surprised?

once again, you prove to be a paper tiger.

the first order of business will be to shut down the filibuster.
What is the matter with Reid?

is that Harry Reid can't actually corral the votes of Democratic senators because too many of them don't mind THAT MUCH having Republicans to hide behind as the excuse for not voting for the progressive legislation and blocking the middle class destroying and rich enrichening initiatives of the GOP.

The Republican abuse of the filibuster is making the case for eliminating not just the filibuster but the Senate itself that is more like a country club looking out for the interests of the wealthy than any kind of Democratic institution.

More and more, I see the Dems are likewise controlled by the 1% just as repukes are. Just throw a Dem $50K or so and he or she will bark, "How shall I vote in your interest?"

Woof, woof

but even if we could do that, we can't compete with the back end--the high paying jobs when they leave office as lobbyists, consultants, CEOs, and do-nothing corporate board members.

It doesn't take that much, really, to buy a congressman. I am always surprised at how little the Kochs and other richies spend per candidate. They get a huge bang for their buck and can continue their criminal ways for 50K or less.

so it's just for the benefit of Democrats who expected their elected democrats to enact democratic policies, which they are not doing.

Your prize is another year of disappointments.

For one thing the rules change that seemingly will be averted by this deal doesn't have to be averted all the way to the opening day of the next Congress for it to be reconsidered if/when the Republicans break their agreement. In other words the Republicans didn't exactly dodge another bullet, this one stays circling overhead and can be brought back again at any time in the Senate calendar. It doesn't involve a window of opportunity for change that closes if it isn't used now.

For another thing this deal has an instant verification process built in. It isn't banking on a toothelsss Republican 'promise to behave" in the future, it is specific; certain Obama appointees either will or will not be confirmed in the next couple of days. The most important part is this time it seems like everyone agrees that Reid has the 51 votes he needs now to move a rules change, and the Republicans believe it. That means Reid would have even more votes to make even stronger rules changes if the Republicans piss off the Democratic caucus over this yet again.

and stop playing nicey-nice with the criminal element repuke puppets of the 1% Kochmasters.

There is a reason why "face saving measures" are a standard tool of international diplomacy, even when dealing with criminal regimes. It Reid and the Senate Dems make a show of "rubbing their faces in it" even when the Republicans tacitly admit defeat and stand ready to deliver the votes needed for Obama to instill his selected team - there are other ways Senate Republicans can make it virtually impossible for anything to get done in the Senate - that do not involve use of the fillibuster. Yes that type of obstruction would look spiteful and deliberate - the equivelent of when unions do "slow down strikes" agains employers by religiously insisting that every rule in the rule book be literally observed at the work place. Republicans would do so claiming that Democrats were unwilling to give an iinch and that is what it happens as a result.

Could Reid and the Democrats try to turn that type of follow up Republican obstruction back against the Republicans if they tried that? Sure, but at the expense of getting even less accomplished in the Senate than may now be possible by accepting this deal instead. Democrats by and large actually want to accomplish things rather than just score political points.

so they're torn between nicey-nice going along with repugs and bucking their puppetmasters.

I suggest that everyone take a look at how much $ their representatives take in from various sources and their investments in stocks as well. Dems head or sit on committees --- for example, Debbie Stabenow heads Agriculture & at the same time is invested in agribusiness. Stabenow also took in $928K+ in campaign contrib's from agribiz. Then we wonder why a bill like the Farm Bill is "agribusiness as usual. "

Dems are protecting their own personal financial interests just as repukes are, and far too often.

Here is just one source for what I'm talking about:

http://reporting.sunlightfoundation.com/2013/senators-who-write-farm-bill/

Sites like opensecrets.org and sunlightfoundation.org have lots of info.

Please, don't tell me that anyone ever really believed Harry's spiel about going nuclear?

*sigh*

The best you can say about old Harry is that at least he's consistent. (I believe he likes taking a beating myself. Sort of a political masochist.)

Typical Harry Reid.

Sadly, it's as much HIS fault as BONER's that we've got a DO NOTHING CONGRESS...it's not helpful to either party.

Spineless Harry

Now lets see, Rob Cordray is legal head of the CFPB, the other 6 nominees are either approved or an acceptable alternative is guaranteed a vote and Reid retains the right to call the nuclear option at any point in the future.

Yeah, that looks like a huge Democratic defeat to me How can we survive many more days like this...

This thread is absolute proof.

Senate Democrats often deserve outrage but this time they did good, regardless of how hard some here try to deny reality. Director Cordray and Secretary Perez are now undeniable facts.

What a leader!!!!