Can't win? Change the rules. Democrats show their true colors.

[Gonuclear]

Can't win?  Oppose 100% of the President's nominees for no purpose other than obstructionism.

Reid, Democrats trigger ‘nuclear’ option; eliminate most filibusters on nominees

By Paul Kane, Updated: Thursday, November 21, 1:33 PM
The partisan battles that have paralyzed Washington in recent years took a historic turn Thursday, as Senate Democrats eliminated filibusters for most presidential nominations, severely curtailing the political leverage of the Republican minority in the Senate and assuring an escalation of partisan warfare.

The rule change means that federal judge nominees and executive-office appointments can be confirmed by a simple majority of senators, rather than the 60-vote supermajority that has been required for more than two centuries.

The change does not apply to Supreme Court nominations. But the vote, mostly along party lines, reverses nearly 225 years of precedent and dramatically alters the landscape for both Democratic and Republican presidents, especially if their own political party holds a majority of, but fewer than 60, Senate seats.

[See the latest updates.]

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) accused Democrats of a power grab and suggested that they will regret their decision if Republicans regain control of the chamber.

“We’re not interested in having a gun put to our head any longer,” McConnell said. “Some of us have been around here long enough to know that the shoe is sometimes on the other foot.” McConnell then addressed Democrats directly, saying: “You may regret this a lot sooner than you think.”

He added later: “The solution to this problem is at the ballot box. We look forward to having a great election in 2014.”

Sen. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa), the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, warned Democrats against the rule change on Wednesday, saying that if the GOP reclaimed the Senate majority, Republicans would further alter the rules to include Supreme Court nominees, so that Democrats could not filibuster a Republican pick for the nation’s highest court.

Reacting to Republican criticism after the vote, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) called the move “a huge step in the right direction” and denied that it somehow broke Senate rules.

“The Senate broke no rules,” he said in a floor speech. “We simply used the rules to make sure that the Senate could function and that we could get our nominees through.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/senate-poised-to-limit-filibusters-in-party-line-vote-that-would-alter-centuries-of-precedent/2013/11/21/d065cfe8-52b6-11e3-9fe0-fd2ca728e67c_print.html

[dario73]

Can't win?  Oppose 100% of the President's nominees for no purpose other than obstructionism.

For no purpose? You mean a judge who refused to sentence a rapist because it wouldn't make a difference since the rapist and the victim have aids is qualified?

Most of those picks by the so called "president" are ultra libtards who have shown incompetence and unworthy of higher office.

For over 100 years, it has been the right of the minority to filibuster. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THEY FILIBUSTER 10% or 100% of the failureinchief's nominees. They can do that BECAUSE IT WAS THEIR RIGHT AND PRECEDENT. Yeah, the same right that obamathecown and Reid back in 2005 wanted to keep and stated SHOULD NEVER BE TAKEN AWAY!! 

You are the type that is condoning this NOW. But when the shoe is on the other foot, you will be crying about the same action being taken by the GOP.

[dario73]

Another reason for so many filibusters by the Republicans is because Reid keeps adding amendments to bills that he knows the GOP won't agree to. He packs them with all these changes that libtards love but obviously conservatives will never accept.