Filibusted

Yesterday, Republican Senator Rand Paul mounted a thirteen-hour filibuster in opposition to the nomination of John Brennan for CIA director. This is the third Republican filibuster of an Obama nominee since the filibuster reform deal in January, and Senate Democrats are furious (and apparently surprised) that Republicans have not honored the spirit of the middling bipartisan agreement that still left room for precisely this to happen.

In an interview on Wednesday afternoon, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), the author of a proposal to place more of the burden of sustaining a filibuster on the minority party, including forcing filibustering senators to speak on the floor, echoed remarks by Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) earlier in the day about the need to revisit filibuster reform.

"Senate Republicans have demonstrated that they have absolutely no intention of ending their assault on the ability of the U.S. Senate to function," Merkley told TPM, saying he had hoped the bipartisan rules change would ease gridlock. "Many of my colleagues are absolutely beside themselves with frustration, and that frustration is rapidly turning to fury."

GOOD. Because someone who actually has the power to do something needs to get angry about the Republicans' obstructionism turning the federal government into a colossally expensive roadblock to progress, or even basic functionality.

On a side note, Senator Paul is being widely praised for mounting a filibuster that was critical of the Obama administration's drone program. Stopped clock, etc. Paul claims it was not a partisan attack, which I believe; nonetheless, Paul is a hypocritical jerk who, like his father, only champions freedoms from which he stands to personally benefit, while endeavoring to undermine reproductive choice, disability legislation, and healthcare access (for a start). So I'm not going to praise Rand Paul. I am, however, going to say it is the Democrats' shame that they weren't the ones asking the same questions.