It was only yesterday that I posted, "Harry Reid hints at filibuster 'nuclear option'… again. Try using it this time, Harry." I peppered that post with comparisons of Reid to an ineffectual parent plus comments like:
-- But Harry shook hands instead, although he has threatened to revisit filibuster reform from time to time, getting Democratic hopes up, like Lucy pulling the football away from Charlie Brown. We’ll believe it when we see it.
-- Of course you will, dear.
-- I will NOT get my hopes up, I will NOT get my hopes up…
-- That would be novel. Just do it already.
From the tweets and comments I received, we all had the same reaction. And for good reason.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has the tools he needs to overcome any initial filibuster of a firearms background check bill, but he may not be inclined to use them.
Indeed, the Nevada Democrat is biding his time, even as President Barack Obama embarks on an aggressive new push for votes on a variety of gun-related measures, including background checks and a new prohibition on assault weapons.
The trouble for Reid is the new process — established in January through modest filibuster rules changes — may have a fatal flaw in practice when the Nevada Democrat actually wants the bill involved to become law.
And what might that fatal flaw be? Reid's New Rules do not prevent senators from blocking a bill from passing once it’s up for debate.
Did I mention that he still needs at least 60 votes? That he still needs a super majority? That real filibuster reform is still just a twinkle in sane and reasonable Democrats' eyes? And that Republicans despise compromise so much that they won't even use the word?
Here's what "compromise" means to the GOP:
Here's what Harry Reid means to those of us who are fed up: