Obama Against Reconciliation - "not the founders intent"

@Rollo1 (16670)
Boston, Massachusetts
February 24, 2010 11:11am CST
Well, at least he was against it in 2005 when it was the Republicans threatening to use it. Joe Biden was against it too, in fact, he was appalled at the "power grab" being taken by the Republicans. Biden in 2005: "I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don't make the same kind of naked power grab you are doing". Incidentally, the threat to use the nuclear option in this case was to prevent filibuster and force a vote on Bush's judicial nominees. Democrats threatened to shut down the Senate and prevent consideration of all routine and legislative Senate business if the Republicans used this option. It's use was avoided in this instance. No one would argue that politics isn't a dirty business but isn't it a bit sickening when things are wrong and unconstitutional when the other guy does it but pure and holy when our side does it? Watch the video: http://www.breitbart.tv/obama-dems-in-2005-51-vote-nuclear-option-is-arrogant-power-grab-against-the-founders-intent/
1 person likes this
2 responses
@anniepa (27159)
• United States
24 Feb 10
"Reconciliation" - which simply means and up or down vote in which the majority wins and the V.P. can cast the deciding vote in the event of a tie - "was not the founders' intent" but the blatant, ridiculous overuse of the filibuster WAS? As the list of times when reconciliation has been used indicates, the Bush tax cuts that contributed to our current deficit and debt were passed that way. I think it's also worth noting that the number of times the filibuster has been used has more than doubled during this Congressional session. The minority party has filibustered just about everything, even bills that ended up passing by votes of 90-10 or thereabouts. GOP Senators have filibustered bills they wrote themselves. Senator Richard Shelby recently put over 70 of President Obama's nominees on hold over earmarks he demanded for his own state of Alabama, only to release most of them when he realized what a fool he was making of himself. Don't elections have ANY meaning at all? I think they do and I'm sure the majority of the American people do as well and the most recent Presidential and Congressional national election happened to have been in 2008. The Republicans need to grow up and face reality. As Senator Jim DeMint said several years ago (this is not an exact quote but the meaning is the same), "There's a reason the voters reelected President Bush and a Republican majority in Congress." That's RIGHT, Mr. Waterloo, there usually IS a reason people give "power" or take it away. Annie
1 person likes this
@Rollo1 (16670)
• Boston, Massachusetts
25 Feb 10
So, you're against filibuster and for reconciliation, which means you hold the opposite views of all the Democrats in the video who were for filibuster and against reconciliation - Obama, Reid, Dodd, Shumer, Biden, etc. ? Or is it more that now they've changed their minds to fit their agenda, you've changed yours too? Yes, the reconciliation was used to pass budget-related bills, such as tax cuts. I think my point in the response above pointed out that it has always been used for bills related to the budget and there's no precedent for using it in a case such as the one before us. Not that you haven't made a valiant attempt to deflect with a lot of extraneous issues that don't address the statements made by these politicians just a few years ago. Do the American people need "to grow up and face reality" too? Is that reality that these guys are in power, so no matter what the people think or want, these guys are going to do whatever they want? As for the election, let's face it, the majority would love a "do over" on 2008. As Valerie Jarrett said "I think probably hope and change were so catchy because it was really very simple and it was something everyone understood the definition." She just admits that people voted for the meaningless catch phrase (the simple folk, that is). Style over substance, Valerie?
@Rollo1 (16670)
• Boston, Massachusetts
25 Feb 10
And you are aware, I am sure, that the Byrd Rule prevents Reconciliation being used if the legislation proposes changes in Medicare, which precludes it being used to pass Health Care Reform.
@piasabird (1737)
• United States
24 Feb 10
Well, well, well, isn't that interesting ..... but not surprising. Is that what they mean by hope and change? They change their minds and hope no one notices.
1 person likes this