The late terrorist Yasser Arafat (1929-2004) was famous for saying one thing to American media and the opposite to Palestinian audiences.
.. To U.S. presidents and chief diplomatic correspondents he would profess his desire for peace and for a two-state solution, while to Arabs and Muslims he would impugn Jews, hint at Israel’s abolition, and incite and pay for anti-Semitic violence.
.. By the time of Arafat’s death, it was clear that any practical improvement in the Israeli-Palestinian relationship would have to bypass the Palestinian autocrat. He just couldn’t be trusted.
.. Schumer is so practiced at saying one thing to Democratic elites and another to the Democratic base that it is easy to fall for his charade.
.. a judge who was approved to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals with Democratic support — including Schumer’s — and whose fans include President Obama’s former solicitor general and legal scholar Cass Sunstein is somehow a jurisprudential freak who should be prevented from joining the Supreme Court by extraordinary means.
.. But what is Schumer telling his caucus behind closed doors?
.. Especially if the Democrats are aware that McConnell probably has the votes to go nuclear, which would not only leave them with Gorsuch on the Court but also free Trump to nominate Bill Pryor or Mike Lee or Kid Rock the next time around? Having the nomination squeak through would allow Schumer to have it both ways: animating his base with a meaningless pose while preserving his leverage. There’s a reason he smirks so much.
.. This is the self-proclaimed “guardian of Israel” who said he opposed the Iran deal — but then did absolutely nothing to stop it.
.. leading the opposition to the Iran deal wasn’t in his self-interest. Taking a stand against President Obama would have sunk his chances for career advancement. Besides, he must have thought, the deal was going to happen anyway.
.. Ellison is on the far left of the Democratic party, has a history with the anti-Semitic Nation of Islam, and supports Bernie Sanders in his war against the Wall Street bankers that Schumer represents
What was Schumer doing? Here’s what he was doing: He knew Ellison had no chance, that the White House would oppose Ellison, that the opposition research would bring Ellison down, but he supported Ellison anyway just to shore up his left flank. He was telling the base he was with them, while telegraphing to the Democratic elites alarmed at Ellison’s rise that he was with them too.
A Blueprint for Repealing and Replacing Obamacare with Bipartisan Support
It was hubristic of President Obama to think that after enacting a monumental law, without any bipartisan buy-in, opponents would simply fall in line. As history played out, Republicans had no problem undermining a law they had no part in enacting and felt no attachment to. Senator Max Baucus, chairman of the Finance Committee that drafted the health-care bill, “fret[ted]” about the ACA’s origin. “It is my belief,” he said in December 2013, “that for major legislation to be durable, sustainable, it has to be bipartisan.
.. “The partial repeal bill does not get rid of Obamacare’s tens of thousands of pages of insurance regulations,” Roy explains, as well as “the regulations that are responsible for the law’s drastic premium hikes.”
.. If Republicans choose the reconciliation path, as some members are already considering, we would be stuck with Obamacare’s hollow shell. Gutting the subsidies, without eliminating the regulations that make insurance expensive, would be counterproductive: Premiums would continue to increase
.. In 2014, Senate Majority Leader Reid invoked the so-called “nuclear option” to remove the 60-vote threshold for confirming judges and other executive-branch appointments, with the exception of Supreme Court nominees. I fully expect Majority Leader McConnell to use the same parliamentary procedure to confirm President Trump’s first nominee to the high court — it is simply the next step in the downward spiral of our confirmation process.
.. In 2014, Senate Majority Leader Reid invoked the so-called “nuclear option” to remove the 60-vote threshold for confirming judges and other executive-branch appointments, with the exception of Supreme Court nominees. I fully expect Majority Leader McConnell to use the same parliamentary procedure to confirm President Trump’s first nominee to the high court — it is simply the next step in the downward spiral of our confirmation process.
.. In this game of mutually assured destruction, Republicans may be tempted to move first. And if there was ever a single goal that would unify Republicans to take this extreme step, it would be the elimination of Obamacare.
.. In this game of mutually assured destruction, Republicans may be tempted to move first. And if there was ever a single goal that would unify Republicans to take this extreme step, it would be the elimination of Obamacare.
.. There were rumors that House and Senate staffers would resign if they were forced to pay full fare for their insurance. It is beyond ironic that employees who labored to pass Obamacare threatened to leave government if they had to actually use it.
Can Merrick Garland Kill the Filibuster?
The conflict between the new guard and old will likely come to a head over a Supreme Court nomination. If a moderate like Garland can get majority support but not sixty votes, what will the Democrats do? It is a good bet that they will go nuclear again—and abolish filibusters for Supreme Court nominees as well. That would be a healthy step for both Democrats and democrats. The filibuster has become a cancer on the legislative process, creating the need for supermajorities on even the most routine business. The less it exists, the better.
Supporters of the filibuster will warn that if it is abolished for Supreme Court nominees, it will soon be abolished for legislation too—and then the Senate will become more like the House. And that will be fine. The Senate is, by design, a less than democratic body; there is no real justification for the fact that small-population states like Vermont and Wyoming have the same number of senators as California and Texas. The existence of the filibuster only exacerbates the anti-democratic nature of the chamber. Merrick Garland’s nomination will prove consequential indeed if it helps usher the filibuster to its long-overdue demise.