Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) finished his grandstanding, showboating floor speech on Tuesday night. I can’t believe he didn’t end it by dramatically collapsing on the floor like a scene from a movie. That would have been the perfect way to put a punctuation mark on his stunt, but alas, he didn’t think about that.
Advertisement
Still, the left is heralding Booker’s speech as something historic and meaningful, even though it wasn’t a filibuster because it didn’t prevent or stop any Senate business. My friend and colleague Stephen Kruiser wrote in Wednesday’s Morning Briefing, “Booker wasn’t filibustering any proposed legislation; he was having a very expensive, taxpayer-funded public airing of his daddy issues. Once again, the American public had to foot the bill for a mentally unstable Democrat to be able to get his attention whore fix.”
The non-filibuster nature of Booker’s so-called filibuster hasn’t stopped the Democrats and their willing accomplices in the media from crowing (h/t to Kruiser for these X posts):
LONGEST FILIBUSTER IN U.S. SENATE HISTORY! 🔥 @CoryBooker pic.twitter.com/6HnUcdKhjc
— Democrats (@TheDemocrats) April 1, 2025
Democratic Sen. Cory Booker was still speaking Tuesday afternoon on the Senate floor — continuing a filibuster he started at 7 p.m. Monday night — in protest against the national “crisis” he says Pres. Trump and Elon Musk have created.
Read more: https://t.co/RuiDcLy8Ix pic.twitter.com/RXMPSsIjNN
— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) April 1, 2025
So stunning. So brave. Just kidding!
So theatrical. So performative. So on-brand for today’s Democratic Party.
Advertisement
Here’s an idea of the level of performance art in Booker’s speech. The previous record for a filibuster was the late Sen. Strom Thurmond’s speech against civil rights legislation, which went on for 24 hours and 18 minutes. Booker spoke one minute longer — just enough to break the record.
Related: When You Have No Substance, All That’s Left Is Performance Art
Let’s contrast the rapturous coverage of Booker’s marathon stunt with Ted Cruz’s filibuster from 2013. Cruz spoke for 21 hours and 19 minutes in September 2013 about the need to defund Obamacare in a continuing resolution that year.
“This was all about elevating the debate in the public and giving the American people the chance to speak,” ABC News reported Cruz telling a reporter after the speech. “At this point, the debate is in the hands of the American people.”
Naturally, ABC News didn’t celebrate Cruz’s speech as something monumental:
After the House of Representatives passed a continuing resolution, which strips Obamacare of its funding last week, Cruz vowed to use every procedural measure possible, including a filibuster, to keep the Senate from restoring the funding.
But Cruz’s overnight speech was technically not a filibuster and won’t do much to delay or prevent the votes. The Senate is operating in “auto-pilot” mode and will hold its first procedural vote on the continuing resolution later this afternoon.
Advertisement
“Democrats were largely dismissive of Cruz’s effort, noting that it was not a formal filibuster since it had no effect of delaying or preventing a vote on the House-passed legislation,” NBC News pooh-poohed at the time. “And [then-Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid even noted that he and Cruz had previously agreed to set aside time for the Texas senator’s lengthy screed.”
“But for all the posturing, his effort amounts to little more than a very, very long speech,” NBC News later sneered.
The BBC was similarly dismissive, reporting, “Analysts say his marathon talk was a mainly symbolic gesture of defiance, rather than a filibuster — a tactic made famous by the 1939 Jimmy Stewart film, Mr. Smith Goes To Washington — as it could not hold up Senate proceedings.”
For his part, the late Reid reacted with a snotty tweet:
With all due respect to Sen. Cruz, I’m not sure we learned anything new. It’s been interesting, but it’s also been a big waste of time.
— Senator Harry Reid (@SenatorReid) September 25, 2013
Erick Erickson pointed out on Wednesday:
When Strom Thurmond mounted his famous filibuster, it was to stop the Civil Rights Act. Thurmond ground the Senate to a halt, and it was unable to do any business or advance the bill. While it is nice to see someone finally pulling Thurmond’s filibuster against Civil Rights outside the record books, Thurmond actively blocked legislation. Booker did not.
Thurmond, you should note, was a Democrat at the time of his Senate filibuster, putting Democrats on top for filibusters — one to stop civil rights and one to stop, well, nothing.
But that is what Democrats want — spectacle.
Advertisement
Comparing the media’s treatment of Cruz’s speech to the rapturous reaction to Booker’s theatrical fauxlibuster goes to show that when Democrats want to perform, they’ll get the media’s full attention and glory. The rules are always (D)ifferent.
Stunts like Booker’s are ripe for ridicule and a prime opportunity to call the Democrats out on their ridiculous behavior. You can help us in our mission to do just that by becoming a PJ Media VIP member.
VIP membership is an investment in our mission, but you get some cool benefits as well. And it’s a great deal when you take advantage of our 60% off sale. Click here to sign up today.
