Filibuster: Obama has created another "straw man crisis," and is using it to transform the Senate into a ruling body that pushes "one party rule" to the destruction of the trustworthiness of the Senate.

According to NBC News,  in 2005,  Senate Republican's considered limiting the filibuster and were fought at every turn,  by the minority Democrats.  The attempt failed.   But,  now that the minority is the majority,  things are different,  of course.  Such is the way of the hypocrite.

The legislative decision being made at the Hapless Harry Reid,   to change the filibuster rules of the Senate,  after nearly 200 years of procedure under the current rules,  is being defended by the phony claim that Obama’s appointments are being blocked by Republicans in the Senate,  at an alarming rate.

Obama's Phony Complaint 

Obama, June 4, 2013:   “Time and again, congressional Republicans cynically used Senate rules and procedures to delay and even block qualified nominees from coming to a full vote. As a result, my judicial nominees have waited three times longer to receive confirmation votes than those of my Republican predecessor. Let me repeat that: My nominees have taken three times longer to receive confirmation votes than those of my Republican predecessor.”

At FactCheck.org,  we learn the truth of the matter,  and it is nothing similar to what Obama pictures above.  Suffice it to say, Obama is using a made up crisis to change Senate rules and "federal appointments" may not be the only reason. 

From the chart below, one can plainly see the final results as to federal appointments is almost identical under Obama,  compared to his predecessors.  

Source: Internal CRS judicial nominations database.

What is a filibuster?  

Understand that the filibuster has been with us from the very beginning.  In the first years,  the Senate was so small that it allowed unlimited filibuster but the rules of filibuster were different,  than now.  A continuous filibuster was unbroken and continuous talk,  with time allowed for bathroom privileges and nothing more.  

In 1917,  the rules were changed,  in the larger Senate,  to a two-thirds vote,  for ending floor discussions on a bill,  after all Senators who wanted to speak,  had had that opportunity.  A "filibuster" is nothing more than a floor discussion that continues without end,  from a single Senator.  It takes 60 votes to end floor discussion,  but only 51 votes to pass a bill into law,  after floor discussion is ended.  It the floor discussion cannot be ended with a 60 total,  the "discussion" becomes a "filibuster."    The rule prevents only party rule,  and insures the voice of the minority party (parties).  

What comes next - the deterioration of the Senate process?

We all know that Obama and his Democrat leadership are all in for one party rule,  but only if they are that "one party."    I say , "Fine."  Let them change the rules,  and when the GOP takes back the Senate,  watch what happens to the Democrat agenda,  if the the likes of McCain and Graham are not GOP leadership.  
________________
See the discussion on the filibuster,  here, at Senate.gov.

Our Quote of the Week reveals the Left's determination for One Party Rule and the destruction of the Republican Party.

“Go for the Throat! Why if he wants to transform American politics, Obama must declare war on the Republican Party.”   John Dickerson,  political director for CBS News.        

How does a nation survive under One Party rule? Hint: it doesn't but that is our four-year future.

<<<< In case you have not been paying any attention,  this is where we are  . . . . . NOW.  

In a story coming from The Hill,  we have this disturbing development:  "Democrats say they want to raise as much as $1 trillion in new revenues through tax reform later this year to balance Republican demands to slash mandatory spending."  

Understand that we just finished a negotiation for tax increases under the guise of future spending cuts. And now that the GOP has sold its soul to accommodate Obama's big spending regime,  the Dems are coming back for more.  

What does this mean for the American people and the middle class?  More taxes.  It is that simple. While Obama is using the verbal fantasy of "taxing millionaires and billionaires,"  the most recent tax increases affected all of the working/wealth producing middle class . . . . .  all of that population. 

We know that Mitch McConnell (GOP Senate leader) has told all who were listening,  this past Sunday,  that there will be no more taxes unless and until we deal with the issue of spending.  That is what he said,  but we all know that McConnell has no clout in this matter.  Unless he and the GOP are willing to shut down the government,  he will lose on this matter,  and we know this because the Dems ARE willing to shut down the government.  Understand that because we have a state run media,  the Dems will be able to blame the GOP for the shutdown,  turning GOP determination into nothing but empty bluster.  We have history on this matter. 

We needed to win that past election in the worst way.  And,  now,  that we have lost the presidential election and failed in our bid to recapture the Senate,  and lost 10 seats in the House while maintaining control,   our ability to forestall financial disaster without any help from reasonable thinking Democrats  (yes,  there are a few of these folks,  but not in the highest levels of leadership) and defunct patriotic media,  the destiny of this country is sealed. 

More than this,  we now have empirical evidence that  sacrificing our principles,  as we (i.e. the GOP)  did in the recent deficit deal,  gives us no advantage in dealing with the enemy.  

Point of post:  the next four years will be "white knuckle" season.  And,  if we cannot win the elections in 2016,  the country will have been effectively changed - in a final sense - into what we see in Europe . . . .  secular,  godless, without a serious work ethic and with no intentions of giving honor to the founding documents that made this country great.

One thing for certain,  unless GOP leadership has some sort of epiphany,  it will not survive,  and,  I say this because it cannot win a national election without the conservative,  patriotic,  non-compromising vote.