Wednesday, May 18, 2005

CHECKS AND BALANCES AND SENATE FILIBUSTERS

The Dems in the Senate are CHARGING that the proposed rule change will destroy "checks and balances" and will turn our republic into a tryanny. But "checks and balances" is a term which has to do with the three co-equal branches (the executive, the legislative, and the judiciary), and NOT minority powers within one body (the Senate) of one branch.

When the Dems CHARGE that MERELY reducing the votes required to invoke cloture on judicial nominees is an "attack on checks and balances" they are hyping to the point of pure unadulterated demagogic LYING!

The reason that Bush should get most if not ALL of his nominees conformed is because we live in a DEMOCRACY, and a majority of Americans have VOTED IN the GOP into a MAJORITY in the Congress - BOTH in the House and in the Senate - and into the White House. That's DEMOCRACY - the WILL OF THE PEOPLE - and NOT a "power grab." Rather, it is the DEM MINORITY that's trying to GRAB power - literally use ARCHAIC SENATE RULES to exert more power than they are Consitutionally entitled to, and more power than they can win IN ELECTIONS. And in DEMOCRACIES, elections are SUPPOSED to be how things get decided.

UPDATE: 12:54PM - Chuckie Schumer is accusing the GOP of abusing power and threatening "CHECK AND BALANCES" - and... GET THIS: he accused the GOP of throwing a "TEMPER TANTRUM." The Freudian concept of "projection" never had a more perfect, more salient example.

3 comments:

  1. Nice blog! I like what I see, keep it up.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The dem/leftists are trying to subvert the Constitution by using the filibuster to force a super majority vote (60) on judicial nominee confirmation.

    Remember that some of these very same whining dem/leftist Senators wanted toeliminate the filibuster altogether back in 1995.

    This is all about the dem/leftist agenda, which they have not and/or cannot pass through legislation. Hence they need an activist judiciary to do it for them.

    ReplyDelete
  3. As far as I'm concerned, this issue was decided in November. We won, they lost. And in a republic, the people can throw our guys out if they don't like what they are about to do. The courts are the last gasp of a dying ideology.

    ReplyDelete