DURBIN VOTES FOR THE SENATE "NUCLEAR OPTION" AFTER BEING AGAINST IT IN BUSH YEARS
WASHINGTON - Illinois U.S. Senator Dick Durbin voted Thursday with other Senate Democrats to eliminate the use of the filibuster on all presidential nominees except those to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Invoking the “nuclear option” means that most of President Barack Obama’s judicial and executive branch nominees no longer need to clear a 60-vote threshold to reach the Senate floor and get an up-or-down vote.
However, in 2005, Durbin held a different position:
Read more HERE
He's nothing but an Obama cheerleader.
ReplyDeleteAnother useless, phony Democrat driving America off the cliff.
Yes a good "non politician" business man named Doug Truax is running against him. Truax was a west point graduate, and a holds great leadership and business experience.
ReplyDeleteHe is not a Politician.
He is Barney Rubble...
ReplyDeleteHe is senior senator of one of the most corrupt, broke, highest unemployment states in the nation. He is also a contributor to the destruction of America. Keep voting Democratic. Hopefully when we rid ourselves of this cancerous administration Durbin will be put in a cell with Jesse Jr,.
ReplyDeleteWorld biggest car salesman
ReplyDeleteThey are "allowed" to be total hypocrites.....the media looks the other way....after all it is for "the cause"....
ReplyDelete"Liberty and Union, now and forever, one and inseparable!"
ReplyDelete--Daniel Webster
Daniel Webster delivered his famous speech in support of Henry Clay's "Great Compromise." Remember that from school? Seward, who I would say founded the Republican party, would not budge. Calhoun from South Carolina would not budge. Reason and compromise prevailed and prevented a Civil War for at least ten years. But for the Great Compromise, the border states would have sided with the South, thereby almost certainly altering the outcome of the Civil War. Seward also prevented European powers from aiding the South. The Russians would aid the North in the Civil War, and Seward would purchase Alaska from the Russians in part as a favor for Russia's support ("Seward's Folly").
Today's abuse of the filibuster and brinkmanship and obstruction is essentially over . . . nothing (or hate). Today's Republican party is not the party of Lincoln or Seward. Today's Republican party is simple anti everything Obama, anti progress, anti government (shutdown), etc. It deserves to splinter and die, similar to the Whig party going away.
Politics is the art of compromise. Politics, though logical, is often emotional. Emotion is an instrument to achieve policies. Emotion can be played on hate or love. The factions in the Tea/Republican party play on emotion for the hatred of government. Daniel Webster, very logical, still used emotion and played on the love of Liberty and Union. By willing to compromise, by willing to damage his career in order to save the country, he achieved a worthy and logical end, though it was temporary.
No alternatives to Obama. No new policies. No government (shutdown) in fact. No Liberty and Union loving American could support today's Republican party, including that union President from Hollywood Ronald Reagan. Let is divide itself into a Calhoun/Graham Confederate South, Wall St. East, and value-voters Mormons led by Bishop of the Ward Willard Romney. It is comical but harmful to our Liberty and our Union.
Democrats are no prize, but at least they will compromise. At least they will manage government efficiently and effectively, for the most part. No prize, I know, but today's Republican party deserves to wither away. Ideally, the Libertarian wing of the Republican party would emerge stronger from the Wall St., Southern, and value voters wings. But who really cares at this point?
Thanks for that well-reasoned post. An anomaly on this site.
Delete