Obama & Dems in 2005: Nuclear Option’ Is ‘Arrogant’ Power Grab Against the Founders’ Intent (Video)
Posted by Jim Hoft on Wednesday, February 24, 2010, 11:48 AM
Of course, these same hacks are all for the nuclear option today. They want to ram their unpopular socialist health care package through Congress and have no other option.
Breitbart TV brings you this flash from the past:
Via Naked Emperor News
Joe Biden had the best line: “I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don’t make the kind of naked power grab you are doing.”
Keep praying.
More… This comes from the GOP.gov:
President Barack Obama: “And what I worry about would be you essentially still have two chambers – the House and the Senate – but you have simply majoritarian, absolute power on either side. And that’s just not what the Founders intended.” (April 25, 2005)
Vice President Joe Biden: “This nuclear option is ultimately an example of the arrogance of power. It is a fundamental power grab….I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don’t make the kind of naked power grab you are doing.” (May 23, 2005)
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: “The right to extended debate is never more important than when one party controls Congress and the White House. In these cases a filibuster serves as a check on power and preserves our limited government.” (May 18, 2005)
Senator Dianne Feinstein: “The Senate becomes ipso facto the House of Representatives, where the majority rules supreme and the party in power can dominate, and control the agenda with absolute power.” (May 15, 2005)
BUT THIS IS NOW:
Administration Support: “‘This package is designed to help us [use reconciliation] if the Republican party decides to filibuster health care reform,’ said White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer. ‘That was certainly a factor that went in to how we put this proposal together…’The president expects, and thinks the American people deserve, an up or down vote on health care reform,’ Pfeiffer said.” (White House Communications Director, Dan Pfeiffer, Talking Points Memo, February 22, 2010)
Majority Leader Support: “If a decision is made to use reconciliation to advance health care, Senator Reid will work with the White House, the House, and members of his caucus in an effort to craft a public option that can overcome procedural obstacles and secure enough votes.” (Statement by Senator Reid Spokesman Rodell Mollineau, The Plum Line, 2/19/2010)
Feinstein Support: “Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) became the 11th Senator to sign on to a new effort by Democrats to press Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to pass a public option for insurance coverage using reconciliation, her office confirmed to the Huffington Post on Wednesday.” (Huffington Post, 2/17/2010)
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Featured Story:
Horrible… Obama Tells Foolish Supporters: I’m Not Over-Spending… “I’m Running to Pay Down Our Debt”
Published May 23, 2012 at 11:51 pm - 69 Comments
vikingTX commented:
Biden is amazing. Not only can he make gaffes in real time, he is able to say things 5 years before they become stupid.
Dell commented:
“Well….that’s not what I said. Or meant to say. You took it out of context. That’s a mis-quote and I didn’t say it….I don’t think.” – Rough, Tough, Sheriff Joe Biden.
You’re right about one thing, Joe – You don’t think!!
Major Kong commented:
Only racist, gun-clinging, tea-baggers would resurrect these archival videos. Oh, and doncha think “reconciliation” sounds like something to be desired compared with “nuclear option”. Good grief do I hate the fossil media!
sandy commented:
Today Obama’s plans for his reelection in 2012 have come out. This while forcing Democrats to walk the plank on Healthcare.
Check out this article by Dan Perrin on Red State — Day Two: the Speaker and House Majority Leader Back Away from ObamaCare.
sandy commented:
Major Kong — It doesn’t matter what name they coin this cannot be done.
sandy commented:
Obama doesn’t care about the Democrats in Congress or Congress at all for that matter. He wants the power and screw everyone else. I bet he will beat up the Dems as well as the Repubs tomorrow for not giving him what he wants. His lap dog media will cheer him for it.
Major Kong commented:
Precisely, Sandy. This monstrosity is so damned pernicious they have to try to sell it with a positive sounding word like “reconciliation”. I would hope any candidate running against these sanctimonious, hypocritical rats would feature these videos as strong reminders illustrating the amoral nature of the democRat controlled Congress. Fossil media never will.
sandy commented:
Eric Cantor said today while the use of reconciliation may make things easier for Senate Democrats to pass a bill, it actually makes life harder for House Democrats. With reconciliation, Harry Reid needs to convince only 50 Democrats to support the president’s government take-over of health care. That means Reid can let up to 9 Senate Democrats vote against the final bill.
Who are some of those Democrats? We imagine they’re a combination of senators facing tough electoral odds this November and those disillusioned with their Democrat Leadership—senators from states like Arkansas, Indiana, Missouri, North Dakota, West Virginia, and my home state of Virginia.
If Reid lets senators from those states vote no on a reconciliation bill, what will that do for House Members from those same states who voted yes on the House bill just this last fall? We’ll analyze just half of those states. Six House Democrats from Indiana, North Dakota, and West Virginia could change from a yes to a no if their Democrat senator does so first—and based on their difficult elections this November, they may even switch if their senator doesn’t:
1. Donnelly, Joe (IN)
2. Ellsworth, Brad (IN)
3. Hill, Baron (IN)
4. Mollohan, Allan (WV)
5. Pomeroy, Earl (ND)
6. Rahall, Nick (WV)
Since I’ve already listed Ellsworth above, we’ll only count him once. Again, using simple subtraction, and not even taking into account every Senate Democrat who may vote no on reconciliation or all House Democrats who are facing increasing constituent pressure at home, House Democrats could be down to just 200 yes votes.
sandy commented:
Major Kong — absolutely
Patman77 commented:
I can’t wait til tomorrow when the Repubs start throwing Obama, Biden, Pelosi and Schumers own words right through the glass of teleprompter.
People who live through glass teleprompters are regretting YouTube right now.
bill-tb commented:
So will the Senate Republicans make similar speeches, reference these speeches … WHY NOT
BigJ commented:
“Uhh…well..umm…I didn’t mean to say that. Bush made me do it.”
Little David Puddy commented:
Republicans did use reconciliation to pass the following during the Bush Admistration.
– The 2001 Bush Tax Cuts [HR 1836, 3/26/01]
– The 2003 Bush Tax Cuts [HR 2, 3/23/03]
– Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 [HR 4297, 5/11/06]
– The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 [H. Con Res. 95, 12/21/05]
(Sarcasm on) Oh, the Horror! (Sarcasm off)
To me, and most sane people, all these things are good.
God forbid we cut taxes and reduce the deficit.
The corruptocrats want to use the same thing to take over 1/6 of the economy. That’s Bad.
bg commented:
++
Repealing the First Amendment
[It didn't take long for Congress to try an end-run around the Supreme Court's landmark January decision in Citizens United v. FEC. With a campaign finance bill due to be introduced this week, Democrats are proposing to repeal the First Amendment, at least for some people.]
go here, click on Repealing the First
Amendment – WSJ.com to read the
entire article..
==
Not Likley commented:
Are you really this dumb or do you actually not know the difference between reconciliation and the nuclear option?
Sojourner commented:
ah..ol’ Joe .. God bless im’.. takin’ time, even in those dark, Bushy days to do some Real Talk: his mother from Scranton (God rest er’ soul) used ta’ say to him..’Joey, you’re just a workin’ stiff right now, so you’ve gotta get used to sittin’ down and workin’ with the other little people like the nice laddy I’ve raised ya’ to be. Someday,you’ll own the field, ipso facto. And when you do, stand up Joey, stand up and look back at that little guy and screw im’.. now get back to lookin’ busy, Joey, the cameras are rollin’.
SteveCan commented:
Do as I say, not as I do …..
Just Say’n
Neoavatara commented:
Oh, please Democrats, try Reconciliation…I beg you.
I can picture it now…a full political ad, played nationally…with dramatic music, no talk over…with the following to complete the advertisement:
‘Are these the type of people you want running your country?’
‘This November, vote Republican…’
…and just let the Democrats hoist themselves on their own petard.
http://neoavatara.com/blog/?p=10041
Robert commented:
We need to call it the NUCLEAR OPTION.
Stop saying reconciliation.
Little David Puddy #13
The process of “reconciliation” was at the time used for its intended purpose of passing BUDGET measures. The current use is truly the NUCLEAR OPTION as it was never intended to be used in this manner for this purpose of passing a massive transformative agenda that had insufficient public support.
bg commented:
++
did they read the first stimulus package that part
1 of ObamaCare was stealthily in passed yet??
has it been posted for “we the people” to see yet??
have they read any of the bills they
passed or are about to pass yet??
evidently no one knows what is waiting for US up
the road, just keep the madding crowds distracted..
==
bg commented:
++
re: bg #21
in passed = passed in
==
BurmaShave commented:
The background for all of this fuss is this:
In 2005 Bush wanted to appoint some judges that would, according to their perceived temperament, hew more closely to the constitution than many judges appointed by Clinton. These would be called “strict constructionist” judges (i.e., conservative) as opposed to liberal judges who feel free to make stuff up when and if the spirit moves them.
The [minority] Democrat caucus was outraged at the concept (feeling that this could possibly impinge upon “their” abortion rights). Bush decided to nominate Patricia Owens as the test case. The Democrats were so outraged that they decided to use the filibuster rule to block the vote on Owens’ approval. If my memory serves me correctly, this was the first time the filibuster had ever been employed by any party to block the appointment of any Justice, and this was just an ordinary Justice, not a Supreme Court Justice. This was unprecedented abuse of the filibuster rule that the Democrats were engaged in, and the Republicans were outraged at the depth that the Democrats were willing to descend to in the cause of partisanship. But rather than alter the filibuster rule even for this extremely minor bit of Senate business, which the hyperventilating melodramatic Democrats called “going nuclear,” the Republicans withdrew Patricia Owens nomination.
The Democrats were wrong to throw such a fit five years ago, and degrade our governance in the process; and now they are super-hypocritically wrong to even think about going nuclear with respect to implementing the ground work for the probably biggest entitlement in our nation’s history and legislation that augers to be among the most far reaching in our nation’s history past, present, and future. And notice in this case neither the Democrats nor the Liberal media refer to this as “going nuclear.” As far as I am concerned the Democrats are revealing themselves unworthy to govern whatsoever.
Nathan R. Jessup commented:
In addition to this video release, Obama now faces a new challenge: return to God and abandon his secular ways or his foreign policy will suffer.
http://the-raw-deal.com/2010/02/24/god-becomes-a-problem-for-obama/
Nathan R. Jessup
http://www.the-raw-deal.com
Nathan R. Jessup commented:
Harry Reid. The boy who cried wolf. Sorry Harry, nobody is listening…
http://the-raw-deal.com/2010/02/24/harry-reids-past-comes-back-to-haunt-him/
Nathan R. Jessup
http://www.the-raw-deal.com
Estragon commented:
It’s like TOTALLY unfair to use these people’s past remarks against them now – like they ever meant what they were saying and stuff . . . get real . . .