Rush Limbaugh THEN ... (when he was urging the Senate to do -- EXACTLY what the Senate Majority has just done!)
by Ben Dimiero and Eric Hananoki, mediamatters.org -- November 21, 2013
[...][emphasis added]LIMBAUGH: If the Senate Republicans are not prepared to end the unprecedented use by Senate Democrats of the filibuster rule against the president's judicial nominees, the president is going to have a real tough time getting these re-nominated candidates -- and for that matter -- Supreme Court nominees confirmed. This filibuster, as you know, they're filibustering these nominations which requires essentially 60 votes for a judge to be confirmed. The Constitution says nothing about this. The Constitution says simple majority, 51 votes. But because they're invoking the filibuster, which, you know, the Senate can make up its own rules but not when they impose on the Constitution and not when they impose on the legislative branch. Separation of powers here. But if nobody stops them, they're going to keep getting away with it. It's up to the Senate Republicans to stop them.-- The Rush Limbaugh Show, 12/24/04, via Media Matters
And Rush Limbaugh NOW ... (when he's going apoplectic over the Senate Rule change -- to stop all the arbitrary and routine blocking of "the president's judicial nominees," by the party out of power.)
by Meagan Hatcher-Mays, mediamatters.org -- November 21, 2013
[...][emphasis added][LIMBAUGH: ] Obama's going to get every judge he wants. He's going to get -- if they want to add seats to a court -- if they want to add five new liberal seats to the D.C. Circuit, for example, they can do it, there's no stopping them, because the Republicans don't have the votes.[ -- The Rush Limbaugh Show, 11/21/13, via Media Matters ]
Democrats abruptly changed the Senate's balance of power by reducing from 60 to 51 the number of votes needed to end procedural roadblocks known as filibusters against all presidential nominees. Folks, this is part and parcel of why the Democrats are so hell-bent on winning the House in 2014. This -- winning the House would give them total authoritarian non-challengeable control over the US government. Quite literally there would be no way to stop them. None whatsoever.
Rush went on to say that if Democrats wanted to "nominate avowed Communists to be judges, there's no stopping them now ... If Obama wants to nominate [Syrian President] Bashar Assad to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, there's no stopping him. ... How about they want to make Bill Ayers a judge, or Jeremiah Wright?"
The main difference between NOW and THEN?
The 180 reversal of what Rush considers "constitutional principles" ... between then and now.
How much you want to bet, that Rush-bo DOESN'T stick the landing either, with his latest outrage-on-steroids backflips?
(Apologies in advance for the disturbing visuals of Limbaugh on Ice. I can hear all the Ugh's and Ewwh's now, I know.)