The Democrat "Nuclear Option" In The Senate Is The Straw That Broke The Camel's, Or The Donkey's, Back

Last Thursday, the Democrat-controlled senate under Majority Leader, Sen Harry Dingy Reid (D-Nev.) decided to finally use the long threatened on both sides "nuclear option" and ending the filibuster in regard to certain presidential appointments. 
And yes, it is the straw that broke the camel's, or in this case the donkey's back for as even an erstwhile liberal reporter such as the Washington Post's Dana Milbank realizes that gee, the Republicans can use it when they become the majority party in the senate. That should be after the 2014 mid-term elections.
And as I noted the Republicans did threaten this in 2005 when the Democrats blocked quite a few of then President George W. Bush's judicial nominees. The Democrats, led by coinkidink then Senate minority leader Reid and a young first-term Democrat senator named Barack Hussein Obama, fought against the move. The whole threat came to a halt when Sens. John "F--- You" McCain (R-Az) and Lindsay Goober Graham (R-SC) worked out a deal to block the move to get some of the Bush nominees voted on by the whole senate.
Understand that the current filibuster is not the old Mr. Smith Goes To Washington where a senator stands up and says he is going to speak until he or she cannot do it any longer. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky) had one of the lengthier old school filibusters in recent history lasting 12 hours and 52 minutes regarding the confirmation of John Brennan as the current director of the Central Intelligence Agency.
Most filibusters are a senator objecting to a presidential nomination and forcing the senate to come up with 60 votes to break a filibuster. In fact until Sen. Dingy Reid pushed the button on the nuclear option, 60 votes were needed to pretty much pass most legislation in the senate.
So why is this such a big deal?
Well until senators were directly elected in each state starting in 1913, each state legislature elected senators for six-year terms. And before the 17th amendment allowing for the direct election of senators, the senate was a very slow and deliberative body. So the filibuster really made more sense after the direct elections of senators to slow things down legislatively so as to not be like the House of Representatives.
And that is what the Founding Fathers had in mind in creating a bicameral legislature. For the senate to not be a rubber stamp of the house. And to have the final say on such matters as presidential appointments whether it be to a federal court, a cabinet post or any other appointment in which the senate is required to vote on.
To most Americans, this is arcane stuff. Hell, most Americans do not even know what arcane means. But the fact is that in doing what Sen. Dingy Reid and the Democrats did last Thursday, they have created a monster.
Next year are the mid-term national elections. And lets stipulate that the Republicans take control of the senate and keep control of the house. By doing what Sen. Dingy Reid and the Democrats did, the House of Representatives in 2015 passes the bill to repeal Obamacare. Up to now the 40+ votes have been for naught as the senate has not even taken up any of the measures. The new majority leader of the senate, more than likely Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) calls on the new majority to vote to change the rules that it only takes a  majority to vote to repeal Obamacare. Oh, you will hear the riot act being read by Sen. Dingy Reid and all the Democrats how unprecedented it is, yada, yada, yada. Sen. McConnell will just refer back to this vote. And because it is about a rule change within the chamber, the minority party, the Democrats, can not do anything to stop it. It passes on a party-line vote and the senate votes for the first time to repeal Obamacare.
Of course the Dear Leader, President Obama will veto it. But that is not the point.
By setting this precedent, the Democrats have to realize that yes, it will come back to bite them and could be big time.
This will create the exact lack of bipartisanship that we see in the house. It will make the senate a glorified house of states or whatever one would want to call it. It will be used to create a rubber stamp for whatever the house should pass.
I know, a lot of people, and I have this in the back of my mind, think that the Republicans will not do such a thing. Because being a conservative party, they would like to go back to the old rules. But the rank and file will not let them. The people that will get elected to the senate, and should that make it a Republican majority, will want to see it happen. It will be a juggernaut that not even Sens. Graham and McCain could stop. Oh, Sen. Goober Graham is up for reelection next year and has some primary challengers. If one can break out of the pack and defeat Sen. Goober, one less to worry about.
And Steven Hayward over at Powerline blog notes that this is a distinct possibility. That because of what the Democrats did in their desperation it will come back to bite them. And he noted the irony of Mr. Milbank thinking this was a bad idea. But it was the lonely voice of retiring Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich) that I leave you with:

“Down the road — we don’t know how far down the road; we never know that in a democracy — but, down the road, the hard-won protections and benefits for our people’s health and welfare will be lost.”

Short sighted thinking for immediate political gain could mean in the end that a Republican senate can and will use this very nuclear weapon to deal with the excesses of liberalism in the United States once and for all.

Now That Todd Akin Is Doing The Martyr Thing, What Can The Missouri GOP Really Do?

This Todd Akin dude is really unfreakingbelivable.
I mean, does he not get it?
Dude, is is not a change of word here or that you did not mean to diminish rape or anything like that.
IT IS THAT YOU SAID THIS:

“Well, you know, uh, people always want to try to make that as one of those things, ‘Well, how do you – how do you slice this particularly tough sort of ethical question. It seems to me, first of all, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something. You know, I think there should be some punishment but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.”

I went through a much as I could to try to explain how douchbrained this whole thing is.
Because as I noted, he could have just answered the question, this one from Charles Jaco:

“Okay, so if an abortion can be considered in the case of, say, tubal pregnancy or something like that, what about in the case of rape? Should it be legal or not?”

Simple answer, no. And he did not need to give his "scientific" reasoning behind it. Of course I did offer what every Republican candidate should say when getting bogged down in these social issue questions. But, Sweet Todd Akin, the man who could single-handily cost the Republican party the senate, no he said the above ridiculous quote.
But enough of that.
Now that Sweet Todd Akin is doing the martyr thing, what can Missouri Republicans do?
First, I am not so certain that Mr. Akin may nor end up leaving the race.
After all, he did make an apology. He even made a commercial. Hell, even his wife is apologizing for him.
Now Mr. Akin may want to see if all of that ends up shoring support or bleeding it.
Consider that the National Republican Senatorial Committee is not going to spend a red-hot cent on this dude. Karl Rove and his Crossroads group, not one centavo or peso on him. Everyone of consequence on the conservative side is telling him, uh dude, please leave. And that includes the Tea Party. The only viable financial support Mr. Akin will be able to muster at this point is fellow So Cons. And maybe they will not want to touch this guy more radioactive politically than the Fukushima nuke plant in Japan.
I would have to say that at this point, the bleeding is pretty bad.
My hunch is that Mr. Akin wants to do two things for a while.
One, see if he is still really competitive against the Democrat incumbent Dear Leader, President Obama, sycophant Clarie McCaskill. Polling has to be done from the point the interview became public. According to the Real Clear Politics polling average, Mr. Akin is actually ahead of Sen. McCaskill by about five percent. The only good news is that Sen. McCaskill has not polled anywhere near 50% and certainly not anywhere north of that magic number. But if Sen. McCaskill makes any substantive gains and or Mr. Akin's numbers free-fall, it does make it harder to justify himself as the choice of the Missouri Republican voters.
Which BTW, in a crowded primary of eight candidates, Mr. Akin won the most with 36%. John Brunner was second with 30% and Tea Party favorite Sarah Steelman finished third with 29%. While Mr. Akin did win, it was not exactly a swarm of Republican voters. The argument can be made that 64% of Missouri GOP voters went with someone else. It is kind of weak, but it can be made that someone else may be able to do better at this point.
And Mr. Akin needs to show that he can somehow raise the big bucks. Somehow, I do not see him raising that kind of money since most of the big sources have all but dried up. There are only so many small donors in Missouri and even the United States that will pony up at this point.
If I were those angry with Mr. Akin, and I am one of them, I think that pressure should be kept on him to realize that he needs to leave. But we also should wait and see if this really hurt him with Missouri voters over all. It should not take more than about two weeks to see if that is the case.
But lets say that Mr. Akin decides against it all to damn the torpedoes and go down gracelessly.
This is a big question that needs to be asked.
Can the Missouri GOP coalesce around an acceptable-to-all-sides candidate and officially endorse him or her? In other words, can the state party suggest that Mr. Akin may have won the primary but that he can not be endorsed by the party at all levels? That this, fill-in-the-blank, literally, is the official party candidate?
And think it is not without precedent?
As Sen. Joe Miller from Alaska.
Oops! My bad!
Mr. Miller was the winner of the Alaska Republican primary in 2010. But incumbent Sen. Lisa Murkowski did not want to go out quietly. No, she mounted a write-in campaign and she ended up winning reelection.
I did not like that Sen. Murkowski did what she did. After all, Mr. Miller won the primary fair and square. He did not make any outrageous and frankly dangerous comments that Mr. Akin made. he was leading very well in polls. But she did set a road map for a situation like this. And I think that the Missouri Republican party may want to take a good look at this. One thing that will be to their advantage is that the party could help the write-in candidate. That did not happen for Sen. Murkowski, and maybe this was easier to do in Alaska, but it maybe the only option left to save the election.
Todd Akin could have done the right thing today and withdraw from the Missouri senate race. He still might, but it will be complicated. If not, Republicans in Missouri may need to have a back up plan. Because a martyr can not be a drag on the whole when it is not necessary except for pride and vainglory.