That is hypocritical.

I have opposed unconstitutional acts regardless of who did it.

And the filibuster is a rule that is Constitutional so to say it is not, is wrong.

They can’t be deemed. Yes, that process has been used to fix errors or correct a number problem but not for entire legislation.

The number of people opposed to this health care plan are just a bit more, including seniors who do not want Medicare cut.

But the voices of opposition had no effect on the deaf Dems.

DAR
Well they did.

Upon what basis can you say they can’t do this when it’s well established procedure practiced regularly by your party?

And try to do it without looking like an flaming hypocrite. That would be a neat trick.

D.
——————
“When Republicans took power in 1995, they soon lost their aversion to self-executing rules and proceeded to set new records under Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.). There were 38 and 52 self-executing rules in the 104th and 105th Congresses (1995-1998), making up 25 percent and 35 percent of all rules, respectively. Under Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) there were 40, 42 and 30 self-executing rules in the 106th, 107th and 108th Congresses (22 percent, 37 percent and 22 percent, respectively). Thus far in the 109th Congress, self-executing rules make up about 16 percent of all rules.

On April 26 [2006], the Rules Committee served up the mother of all self-executing rules for the lobby/ethics reform bill. The committee hit the trifecta with not one, not two, but three self-executing provisions in the same special rule.” Link.

This raises the question, are there any bounds to republican hypocrisy or is it truly infinite?

DAR
The “left” wouldn’t have had to do anything. The seniors would have risen up in the middle of the night and strangled him. The only evidence would have been all of the wheel chair tracks leaving the White House.

I must say I immensely enjoyed watching Bush blow all of his political capital on an intensely unpopular and completely hopeless endeavor. I knew it didn’t have a chance from the start.

Bigd: “…now that we know the rules we can use them when we are in charge again. Then we can change all this stuff.”>>

DAR
Oops, Bigd just admitted, by his own measure, he’s a hypocrite. He thinks it’s unconstitutional but then he wouldn’t mind at all to do it if it’s for a cause he supports.

Bigd: I won’t agree with the process…”>>

DAR
Sure you won’t. Empty posturing.

D.
——————-
“Art. 1 Section 5:
“Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two thirds, expel a member.”

The filibuster, reconciliation, and the self-executing rule Pelosi is proposing are long established, well-known Congress rules.

So of course, they are perfectly legal.

Republicans have used them and are using them constantly.

The author [Tony Blankley] is just being hypocrite.”
Link.

But when I say something that they think is beyond the pale and then remind them of how the left acted when Bush was in office they say just because Dems acted that way does not mean you have to.

Any truth to the rumor that Obama gave Kusinich a Lewinsky on AF 1 to get him to change?

Kos would have crapped his pink panties and Darrel and Adam would have been having seizures.

Kind of wish they had done it that way but now that we know the rules we can use them when we are in charge again. Then we can change all this stuff.

I won’t agree with the process but if it happens then the Dems have only themselves to blame.