Scarcely had the words faded from the mouth of that man whose name you asked me never to mention — a precedent, by the way, set originally in Scripture in relationship with YWHA — the THAT PERSON's words mysteriously find their way into our blue pages. I said I'd not mention the name if you'd stop spreading the misinformation. I haven't used the name; you haven't researched the information.
Since exactly when is "reconciliation," the long used process by which bills with versions that are substantially different between House and Senate are reconciled by a committee of members by both houses. This is a practice that gone on for as long as I can remember and has been used by governments with both Republican and Democratic majorities to come up with compromise version that are most likely to get past veto from the white house. Has your memory gone up in smoke, man? This is a regular occurrence. It is part of the democratic process that's been going on since before you were born, without much more than an occasional bitter grumble about the nature of the compromises reached.
"The Nuclear Option" was a threat by Trent Lott. If the Democrats didn't knuckle under and give advise and consent the series of Supreme court nominees the Republicans were pushing, then he threatened to change the Senate rules so that it would be impossible to allow the Democrats to use the filibuster as a possible recourse. I believe he wanted to raise the number back to 66 from 60, where it was at that time, making it close to impossible for the Democrats, with only 47 or 48 senators at that time, to go for a filibuster against a highly rigidly controlled Republican majority.
That was what Trent Lott and his friends called "The Nuclear Option," because it essentially reduced the chance of the Democrats doing anything to nuclear dust. And that is what President (then Senator) Obama was objecting to, not the use of reconciliation.
In fact, the term "nuclear option" was coined by then-Republican Sen. Trent Lott in 2005 to refer to a possible Republican attempt to change Senate filibuster rules, while the budget process, known as reconciliation, is already part of Senate procedure, and Republicans have used it repeatedly in the past.
The height of hypocrisy is for somebody who knows very well what the reconciliation process is about, such as that fella who thinks he's YWHA, and to try to pretend that it means something else indeed: The Nuclear Option, which was a threat his party made against the party now in power.
I can't help but understand why he's worried about such treatment. After all, when he's busy suggesting such things and saying they're a great idea for use against Democrats, he's got to be sure that the Democrats are just looking for a chance to use such things against him and his. It's one of those things about being paranoid in your treatment of others; you simply don't expect to be well treated in return. It's a behavior pattern that is so often successful in creating its own enemies and its own truth. Poor What's-his-name.
It must be a terrible shock to find out that it may actually be possible for business to get done in the Senate with only 51 votes at times. He makes this sound so anti-democratic, I almost feel sympathetic, except of course that it's quite democratic and he's been indulging in one extended case of special pleading since the Democrats came into office. And getting the best of it too, for much of the time.
This wasn't even Lying by Omission. This was simply Lying. He was claiming that Lott's "Nuclear Option," then, which is what the Democrats were complaining about, is the same as having a bill go through the quite standard legislative process of reconciliation now, and then tries to paint the the Democrats as liars in the process.
Now anybody who suggested that health care reform and insurance reform would be easy, there we might all agree, would be a liar. In this case, I think not; and I can imagine more obvious candidates for being hypocrites than the guys that Mr. Excellence in Bat-puckeying might be so quick to nominate. He might try looking in a mirror and trying not to think of pink elephants.