Sen. Byrd compares Republicans to Hitler!

[Ramo]

He's saying that the nuclear option "incinerates" the right to debate in the Senate. Nukes can incinerate, you see. You don't need to be clever to realize this. It has not a single thing to do with the Holocaust.

So, y'all control the entire federal gov't, most state houses, and y'all are whining about a guy using the English language with a little flourish.

[GePap]

Originally posted by pchang
When you hate Republicans, enything bad you can say about them is fair game.

But of course, we must keep the discussion civil when talking about MY side.

Yup, those evil, nasty democrats.

After years of calling feminists Feminazis, writing books called Slander and Treason, liberals have...WAIT...that wasn't liberals....OH, yeah, its was conservatives. I had almost forgotten there for a second....

[GePap]

Originally posted by The diplomat


And you think it's appropriate for a senator to say that the other party is trying to incinerate senators when he is just referring to senate rules on debate. Don't you think "incinerate" is kinda a strong word?

It is a strong word. Maybe next time though republicans should pick ideas better than calling thier motion the "nuclear option". Comparing something to a nuclear bombs has this nasty effect of having those you talk about using it against then make comparisons to the use of nukes.

The fact is that the references to Hitler were completely inapropriate. What the republicans want to do is nothing like what Hitler did. To compare the "nuclear option" to the kinds of laws that Hitler passed is offensive and wrong.

Again, he isn't saying what you plan to do was what Hitler did. He says even Hitler did not do what you gys want to do. i.e, Hitler did what he wanted under the pretext of the law, as opposed to repugs who want to just end the "law" to get what they want.

And gimme a break. The Dems are in the minority in the Senate and House and Byrd thinks they are like Jesus Christ who was crucified? So, now being in the minority and not getting your way on every single bill, means you are like the Son of God was was put to death on a cross? Byrd sure thinks big of himself!

Yeah! That's thinking like Mel Gibson, and we can;t have that!!!

[pchang]

Its getting harder and harder to tell the difference between Democrats/Republicans, Liberals/Conservatives, etc. When every speaks in such a shrill voice, it just ends up in hearing loss for all concerned.

[GePap]

Originally posted by pchang
Its getting harder and harder to tell the difference between Democrats/Republicans, Liberals/Conservatives, etc. When every speaks in such a shrill voice, it just ends up in hearing loss for all concerned.

Amen.

NOW HOW DARE YOU SLANDER MY BELOVED LEADERS, YOU TREASANOUS, CHILD KILLING, MOTHER RAPPING MONSTER!!!!!

[Sava]

Byrd

[Dis]

Originally posted by pchang
Byrd is proof that mandatory retirement ages should apply to politicians too.

he's proof that they shouldn't elect KKK members

and yet the democrats wonder why they can't get elected (even against an incompetant president)

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Byrd is an absolute twit. The rules can and should be modded appropriately and expect the same favor once the dems are in power.

What puzzles me is that the repubs have no set of cahoneys at all as they haven't even attempted to force the issue by bringing the appointees up for a vote. It has been a matter of mere threat of filibuster that has prevented teh Repubs from even pressing the issue. What a bunch of pansies!

At least if they did, they could legitamitely point out the cowardly Dems as being a bunch of obstructionists hiding behind procedure to derail the intended process.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe

At least if they did, they could legitamitely point out the cowardly Dems as being a bunch of obstructionists hiding behind procedure to derail the intended process.

Intended process? Given that under Senate committee rules a committee chair can kill an appointment in committee, something the repug did for 8 years, for them to now act as if the constitution states that all nominees MUST be voted on is a lot of hooey. That no one has before decided to end debate without a vote this way means nothing, since the Senate has the constitutional power to set up its own rules and act on them.

The consitution does not say court seats must be filled, or that votes must be quick- it says the Senate has to vote on them, and allows the Senate to make up its own rules. The very fact the senate MUST approve of presidential nominees proves that the constitution thinks it is important for the senate to think about nominations.

Maybe senate republicans undertsand that if they do this, they change the rules permanently, and just like with the consititonal change dealing with presidents might shoot themselves in the foot for the future. Good for them putitng the good of the republic ahead of partisan hackery for this twit in chief.

[Boris Godunov]

Wait. I don't see a comparison in what Byrd said. He didn't say "Republicans are just like Hitler!"

He used Hitler--and others--as examples of the dangers of removing safeguards that protect the minority from the majority. He was giving a prophetic warning of where such actions could lead, not saying that Republicans are just like Hitler.

What a non-issue. I bet if anyone but Byrd had said it, it wouldn't make the news.

But kudos to diplomat for showing once again he hasn't had a political thought that hasn't been put in his head by a GOP talking point.

[Q Classic]

I'm all for incinerating Washington D.C., implementing a direct digital democracy where national leaders are elected by popular vote, and a true citizen government is brought into power.

As in, none of this ruling class bull**** of people who run because they have the financial ability to run. None of this ruling class bull**** where corporate sponsors brazenly command legions of dullards who sit in office breathing my air and polluting it with their damn carbon dioxide and hydrogen monoxide emissions.

[The Emperor Fabulous]

This sucks. We SHOULD be focusing on the fact that Republicans in Congress are attempting to take a stranglehold on the branch. Unforunately, as seems to always be the case this century, someone said something that can be construed as bad, so the pundits will get up in arms about that instead.

It makes me so sick I could vomit

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Wait. I don't see a comparison in what Byrd said. He didn't say "Republicans are just like Hitler!"

"Instead, he turned the law inside out and made this illegality legal. And that is what the nuclear option seeks to do". Here, Byrd just says that the "nuclear option" that some Republicans favor seeks to do the same thing that Hitler did. In other words, Byrd has just said that Republicans are using similar legal techniques that Hitler used. How is he not comparing Republicans to Hitler?

Besides, if Byrd is not comparing Republicans to Hitler, then why bring up Hitler at all? Why even mention Hitler when he is talking about senate rule procedures if he is not trying to make a connection?

He used Hitler--and others--as examples of the dangers of removing safeguards that protect the minority from the majority. He was giving a prophetic warning of where such actions could lead, not saying that Republicans are just like Hitler.

And you think that the "nuclear option" could lead to the same oppression of minority rights under Nazi Germany? I fail to see how changing the filibuster rule will lead to political parties being banned, minoritities banned from jobs, and minorities being mass deported to concentration camps.

Again, using Hitler as an example here makes no sense. It's just a scare tactic.

But kudos to diplomat for showing once again he hasn't had a political thought that hasn't been put in his head by a GOP talking point.

I am on the right, so obviously I must be regurgitating talking points from Right Wing HQ, right? It must be exhausting to have all that bias and prejudice inside.

[DinoDoc]

Re: Sen. Byrd compares Republicans to Hitler!

Originally posted by The diplomat
So, to end this situation, some Republicans have suggested the so-called "nuclear option"

Frist and the other Republicans are a bunch a pansies, if they really wanted to threaten the Democrats they would start ordering cots instead of allowing these soft fillibusters to keep happening.

[Odin]

Senator Byrd:

I also think judicial nominees should need a 2/3 vote. The people in the courts are supposed to be interpreting the law, not bending the law for ideological purposes. *cough* Bush v. Gore *cough*