Rachel Maddow Rips Harry Reid For Filibuster Reform

[UCmeNdc]

Maddow was unenthused with Reid. She replayed comments he made about the specific changes needed for filibuster reform, contrasted with Thursday's deal.

"The problem in the Senate has been that they are not able to get anything done. The improvement on that today is that now, they're not going to be able to get anything done faster." She added, "No body was anybody talking about taking the filibuster away completely. The idea was to make it something that hurt a little. That actually required some commitment ... It will still be a routine 60 vote supermajority for everything, and this is now it for two years."


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/25/rachel-maddow-harry-reid-filibuster-reform_n_2549826.html?utm_hp_ref=media

[SHRED]

1. In other words...

...just 41 votes controls the Senate.


---

[ewagner]

2. The last time Harry let us down...

...he extracted from the Republicans a promise to "take a walk" while he ran through over 100 of Obama's minor appointments that were being held up by McConnel....

okay....

Did he extract another side deal from Mitch this time too?

Don't misunderstand me...requiring a "talking filibuster" is the absolutely most desirable outcome and Harry (just as absolutely) sold us out from the beginning...but did he play "let's make a deal "with McConnell or did he just cave?

[plethoro]

3. The seriousness of what Reid did will be known almost immediately and

for the entire four years of Obama's second term. Stuff that should be passed, won't be. And at the end of four more years it won't be a president who is simply running for re-election. It will be a new person against another new person, both with more understanding of how they have to act to win. I was fooled. This time I did not think Reid would capitulate. I was wrong.