Connect with us

DC

Barack Obama On The Filibuster

Published

on

Unlike a lot of our posts, we wrote a fairly “newsy” review of the U.S. Senate’s decision to invoke the so-called “nuclear option.”

In other words we strayed from our whole “unfair, imbalanced” mantra and did the “we report, you decide” thing instead.

Missed that post? Here ya go …

Anyway, unlike many in the “conservative blogosphere” (whatever the eff that is) we didn’t go nuclear on the “nuclear option” – which reduces the U.S. Senate’s threshold for approving controversial executive appointments from 60 to 51 votes.

Why not? Because with “Republicans” like John McCain and Lindsey Graham in the U.S. Senate, Democrats have rarely had to go hunting for the extra votes they need.

They’re usually right there …

Anyway … another reason we didn’t go overboard is because we figure what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Which means if Republicans ever rediscover their core principles and elect pro-free market, pro-liberty Senators (yeah …try not to giggle), those Senators will be able to appoint pro-free market, pro-liberty appointees to various executive and judicial posts.

Or better yet eliminate a ton of unnecessary appointments altogether.

But we digress …

As the headline of this story indicates, we intend for you to depart from this article with a more complete understanding of the evolving views of U.S. President Barack Obama on this issue.

And when we say “evolving views,” we mean the total 180 Obama has done.

First, here’s what Obama had to say on the filibuster when he was a member of the U.S. Senate …

I recognize that the filibuster can be used for unfortunate purposes. However, I am also aware that the Founding Fathers established the filibuster as a means of protecting the minority from the tyranny of the majority — and that protection, with some changes, has been in place for over 200 years.

Now let’s fast forward to what Obama had to say on the same subject last month …

I support the step a majority of senators today took to change the way that Washington is doing business, more specifically, the way the Senate does business. What a majority of senators determined, by Senate rule, is that they would restore the long-standing tradition of considering judicial and public service nominations on a more routine basis.

Ah yes, that’s just the sort of courage of conviction Mr. Smith would be proud of …

Comments