Friday, May 20, 2005
Ed's note: PHILOSBUSTER Phollies
The search for ideological consistency continues....
Republican Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist stated on Wednesday that filibuster rules be changed so that judicial nominees with "majority support" can have an up-or-down vote. Ahh, majority rule in the Senate, where Oklahoma, with 3.5 million people, has the same number of senators (two Republicans) as does New York (two Democrats), with19 million people. Or where Bill Frist's state, Tennessee, with a population of 5.8 million, has two (Republican) senators, and so does California (two Democrats), which has a population of 35.5 million! Let's see, that's four Republican senators representing 9.3 million people, and four Democratic senators representing 54.5 million people. Gosh, can't Republican judicial nominees just get a straight majority vote, people?!
Democratic Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid replied that he's trying to save a "200 year old tradition that protects minority rights"--and, no, he wasn't talking about the Electoral College, which some Democrats wanted to do away with after the 2000 presidential election. Reid was, of course, referring to the (now) hallowed filibuster, the former redoubt of Southern senators delaying reform of Jim Crow laws. But, also on Wednesday, Sen. Reid said the filibuster is now "part of the fabric of" the Senate. Of course, the Democrats weren't saying that when the Republicans were filibustering President Clinton's nominees (the Republicans always seem to come up with this stuff first--quite impressive, in a chilling sort of way). But now the Republicans oppose filibusters, when it was they who, during the Clinton Administration....including Sen. Frist...And the Democrats aren't big on "judicial restraint" or states' rights, except when it comes to respecting Florida's actions in Bush v. Gore or the Terri Schiavo matter...and the Republicans ARE big on judicial restraint, except when it comes to respecting Florida's actions in Bush v. Gore or the Terri Schiavo matter, not to mention when states recognize gay marriage...and didn't the Republicans have a Contract With America, promising term limits and balanced budgets? Because now that they control the House, the Senate, and the White House, it seems as if they could...And isn't it weird when the Democrats support self-determination by indigenous peoples, except when the indigenous peoples use their autonomy to over-fish, hunt cute animals or do other environmentally uncool things? Guess autonomy only goes so far...
Maybe Pat Buchanan had the right idea when, in his speech to the 1992 Republican convention, he said we're in a "culture war". Maybe political principles are all just "us, and what we like" versus "them and what they like". Which, if true, is kind of depressing. And which also means I may have seriously overpaid for my PoliSci degree.
--M. L'Ost
Republican Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist stated on Wednesday that filibuster rules be changed so that judicial nominees with "majority support" can have an up-or-down vote. Ahh, majority rule in the Senate, where Oklahoma, with 3.5 million people, has the same number of senators (two Republicans) as does New York (two Democrats), with19 million people. Or where Bill Frist's state, Tennessee, with a population of 5.8 million, has two (Republican) senators, and so does California (two Democrats), which has a population of 35.5 million! Let's see, that's four Republican senators representing 9.3 million people, and four Democratic senators representing 54.5 million people. Gosh, can't Republican judicial nominees just get a straight majority vote, people?!
Democratic Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid replied that he's trying to save a "200 year old tradition that protects minority rights"--and, no, he wasn't talking about the Electoral College, which some Democrats wanted to do away with after the 2000 presidential election. Reid was, of course, referring to the (now) hallowed filibuster, the former redoubt of Southern senators delaying reform of Jim Crow laws. But, also on Wednesday, Sen. Reid said the filibuster is now "part of the fabric of" the Senate. Of course, the Democrats weren't saying that when the Republicans were filibustering President Clinton's nominees (the Republicans always seem to come up with this stuff first--quite impressive, in a chilling sort of way). But now the Republicans oppose filibusters, when it was they who, during the Clinton Administration....including Sen. Frist...And the Democrats aren't big on "judicial restraint" or states' rights, except when it comes to respecting Florida's actions in Bush v. Gore or the Terri Schiavo matter...and the Republicans ARE big on judicial restraint, except when it comes to respecting Florida's actions in Bush v. Gore or the Terri Schiavo matter, not to mention when states recognize gay marriage...and didn't the Republicans have a Contract With America, promising term limits and balanced budgets? Because now that they control the House, the Senate, and the White House, it seems as if they could...And isn't it weird when the Democrats support self-determination by indigenous peoples, except when the indigenous peoples use their autonomy to over-fish, hunt cute animals or do other environmentally uncool things? Guess autonomy only goes so far...
Maybe Pat Buchanan had the right idea when, in his speech to the 1992 Republican convention, he said we're in a "culture war". Maybe political principles are all just "us, and what we like" versus "them and what they like". Which, if true, is kind of depressing. And which also means I may have seriously overpaid for my PoliSci degree.
--M. L'Ost
