Harry Reid just elevated the Obamacare battle. If we play this right, he elevated it to his side's detriment.
From National Review's article by their editors on Democrats' killing the filibuster:
The filibuster is not sacred writ, and we are on record supporting procedural changes to overcome partisan obstruction. The more serious concern here is that the Democrats are attempting to pack the courts, especially the D.C. Circuit court, with a rogue’s gallery of far-left nominees. That is worrisome in and of itself, but there is a deeper agenda: Much of what President Obama has done in office is of questionable legality and constitutionality. The president no doubt has in mind the sage advice of Roy Cohn: “Don’t tell me what the law is. Tell me who the judge is.” He is attempting to insulate his agenda from legal challenge by installing friendly activists throughout the federal judiciary. That is precisely what he means when he boasts, “We are remaking the courts.”
Now that millions of Americans feel lied to, because of Obamacare's false promises, they're much more willing to comprehend that they're being manipulated in other ways, too.
We now have a very easy-to-understand story to tell them: Harry Reid and the Senate Democrats are trying to protect Obamacare, by filling the federal courts with judges who will support whatever President Obama and his regulators want. THAT is why Reid did this.
Now, every Senate Democrat who voted for the rule change, should own the rule change. Let THEM explain why this rule change has NOTHING to do with Obamacare. Harry Reid is on record advocating a single-payer health care system. Did the other 51 Democratic Senators who voted yes on the rule change not know that? Do THEY favor a single-payer system? Do THEY think our courts need to be remade? Now we have even more grounds to ask, loudly and often.
Daily, people get more desperate to fix the bad things that Obamacare has done and will do to their lives and our society. Historically, the most peaceful and responsible way to deal with problems is legally. If the president's actions are illegal, sue. But what's the point of seeking legal redress if the president has packed all the key courts? Federal judges have lifetime appointments.
It's almost as if President Obama and Senator Reid are daring Americans to expose the fabric of our society and government to harm, in order to undo what they've done with Obamacare. (And we're the ones who have bombs strapped to our chest?)
Now, every MSM reporter who, um, conveniently forgets to mention the impact of court-packing on Obamacare, or the federal judiciary's slow-morphing into an arm of Organizing For America, should be asked how they managed to miss such important aspects of the story in their questioning and reporting. Last night I watched Anderson Cooper discuss the Reid nuking with Dana Bash and Jeffrey Toobin. Nary a word was said about the issue of court-packing, or its impacts on attempts to stop illegal or unconstitutional executive actions through our courts. We should ask Dana Bash or Anderson Cooper if they support single-payer. If they do, that would explain why they neglected to mention this aspect of the filibuster issue.
It's funny how our media was so incurious about the negative impacts of Obamacare. I wonder if they'll be as incurious about this subject, too?
For years, the Democrats have relied on a friendly media to look the other way. Now, President Obama and Senate Democrats are trying to build a federal judiciary that's just as friendly, and just as willing to put partisanship and ideology over the Constitution.
We here on Redstate have known that for a long time. Now, though, people should be much more willing to listen.
This subject has legs, folks. We can use this to ask very pointed and painful questions to Dem politicians and their reporter friends, for many months to come.
For that...thanks, Harry Reid.