The Philly-Buster - is it a Good Thing?

DGS49

Diamond Member
Apr 12, 2012
15,817
13,316
2,415
Pittsburgh
In this season of unprecedented bullshit, Democrats in the Senate are bound and determined to kill the filiuster. They have a MAJORITY, dad-gum it, and they should be able to pass their shit!

But should they?

The concept behind the filbuster is that MAJOR CHANGES, earth-shattering new legislation should not be implemented with a simple majority. Note that both the "New Deal" and the "Great Society" incorporated previously unheard-of changes with strong bi-partisan support.

Today's Democrats - dating back to the Obama years - wants to implement similarly groundbreaking measures with essentially no majority at all. Without a single Republican vote, and with nothing even approaching a "mandate" either in the White House or in either house of Congress. In fact, the President was elected because he sort-of promised that he would not be as extreme as Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren. And yet he has acted basically the same as either one of them would have acted, with a few insubstantial exceptions.

It appears that at least one "adult" remains on the Left side of the Senate (possibly 2), and thank God for that. It would be a huge disservice to the American people to shove this bullshit down their collective throat with a Congress that is split 50/50.

Democrats know this, and would be screaming bloody murder if the situation were mirror-imaged, but they just don't fucking care. They are evil.
 
Dems want a Mobocracy....No protections for the minority except of course when they are out of power.

If I wasn't fearful for what they would do till the mid-terms with Tater and his band of turds at the helm of the fail boat I'd say let them have what they want....Good-N-Hard....The "Reed Rule" worked-out pretty well.
 

Forum List

Back
Top