The Pit and the Pendulum
 

No, this is not going to be about movies.

I notice that the Republican-controlled Congress is busy changing rules, so that the concerns of the minority party need not be addressed. Ethics committee and Finance committee, at the moment. Because they can.

Well, this nation has traditionally had a democratic-controlled Congress. One might expect that could happen again. Kinds naive to think it won't. So, who is going to feel sorry for the Republicans when that happens and their voice is simply disregarded. Right now, most federal judges were appointed by republican presidents. And now Dubya is trying to cram some real doozies down our throats.

And Dubya and his gang don't seem so good at building bridges, or consensus. There's a divisiveness in our countrie's politics right now, and I just wonder if there are any conservatives on the Board who understand why that's not going to play well for your party. There's paybacks, and then there's the likelihood that this nasty, in-your-face, because-we-can arrogance is going to help turn the pendulim around.

Frankly, I understand how my nation needs both voices in Congress. But just as frankly, I can tell you that when the pendulum does swing back, there is going to be some pain that I will enjoy watching. This is the nastiest, most arrogant and most offensive (not just to American libs, but to most of the Western world's polulation) administration anyone has ever seen. They're asking for it. Anybody think they can avoid the end game I know will come?

I really do tend to agree with you, Jim. I care for neither party, personally, but the politically myopic conduct I see displayed just on this board and later on various news channels, embarrasses me as a citizen. To think that an approach of "my way or the highway" should suffice in a world where people, if not already democratic, know quite well what democracy is, shows horrible disrepect for human consciousness. The other day I was trying to come up with a list of what Bush has accomplished since his presidency, and to be honest, I came up with nothing. Iraq is a quagmire, the economy sucks, our borders have to be guarded by ordinary citizens, and everyone seems to be employed with American jobs except Americans. And as far as one's personal rights and freedoms on the precipice of being nearly abolished at the helm of this administration...well, I won't even start about that.

However, lately there have been cracks in the elephant. Tom DeLay, Schiavo, Social Security and the ever-looming Iraq quagmire, have all taken their toll on the party. I believe there's more in-fighting among Republicans than they are letting onto or the press knows. Such lack of spirit tells me the party is heading down a path from which it will not recover. If this is the case, the infighting and lack of togetherness could insure a Democratic victory in '08. Yes, it will probably be more of the same two-party b.s., but at least the smug pronouncements akin to "I'm right and everyone else is wrong," won't be something we will be forced to be part of as Americans.

I had always thought it would be the democratic party that would self destruct first, but as time goes on it looks like the republicans will do themselves in first instead.

Perhaps their current attacks against the media and the judicial system are preparations to weaken the arbiters and critics of their next contested elections.

As long as they think that they control the electoral process their arrogance will know no bounds.

I'm interested in these ethics issues - So I'll be watching what's going on.

Re: The Pit and the Pendulum
 

You must be talking about the state of Washington government (DEMOCRATS.)
9.5cent/gallon tax INCREASE passes, and the legislators CHEER.

http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/...artysmiley.gif $http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/clap.gif $http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/...artysmiley.gif $http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/.../partygirl.gif http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/ura.gifhttp://www.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/smash.gif



yeah, THAT's representative of the people. The people are so happy to pay more for gas..:rolleyes:
. . .in the state w/ the 3rd highest gas-tax already

There has never been a filibuster to prevent a senate confirmation of a judge - until now. What the Democrats are doing is desparation.

Filibustering a judge's nomination is not a rule change, but I certainly wont feel sorry the next time a Democrat president (if one ever gets elected) nominates a judge and the GOP plays the filibuster card.

This precedent goes beyond Borking - at least that guy got a hearing.

Oh and going after Tom Delay - he's actually my congressman - is fine with me. Politics on a national level is a nasty business. Newt Gingrich went after the Dem speaker of the house on that book deal years ago and took the guy out. Washington is not for pussies.

Also, who should the GOP reach out to? Ted Kennedy? Nancy Pelosi? Al Sharpton? Barbara Boxer? Harry Reid? These are the leaders of your party. I like the countries chances with W, Bill Frist, Tom Delay and Dennis Hastert in charge rather than those freaks.

The pendulum will swing back some day - just not as far. We will never again see the Democrats control congress for decades at a time. I would go so far as to say the democrats have been irrelevant since 1994 when the GOP took over congress - and you can thank the fat hillbilly and his "wife" for that!

Re: Re: The Pit and the Pendulum
 

The people also want less traffic congestion and decent schools. Folks who pretend that money (taxes) is not necessary to accomplish these things are either deluded or worse (deliberately misleading). As I have said many many times before, if you chat with a legislator who has been around these past few years, you will not find any of them, even conservatives, who will pretend this. It doesn't make sense. But it's cute and fun to pretend, I guess, and to other folks who are also clueless, it maybe even sounds clever.

The rule change proposal, as I understand it, is to deny the filibuster option. So, when the dems are back in control, I wonder how brutal they might be to your beloved conservative party. Dubya and the gang are not exactly building bridges and holding out the olive branch. This is why he's been monumentally ineffective, this is why they think they need to change the rules of Congress, and this will be why they will be one sorry lot when the dems are back on the bridge.

BTW, I am told there also has never been appointees that were so viciously fundamentalist and who can be relied upon to apply principles like religion and morality from a bench that should be applying.....the law.

Oh, and I'm not so sure the dems cannot rule the nation longterm again. This nation is likely to get a bellyfull of the antics we're discussing here. And religion is not the purpose of Congress, which the voters will eventually figure out. And the dems like government, believe in government, and know how to run government. That's a striking contrast to the folks running Congress right now.

Again, the point of this thread is the political equivalent of the time-honored professional advice: Be careful who you trample on your way up the ladder. Those same folks will be encountered on your way back down. Tit for tat. The Golden Rule. I guess we're reconsidering whether democracy (everyone having a voice) is really a good idea after all?

If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier - just so long I'm the dictator. - George W Bush, December 18, 2000

Video here: http://www.newsgateway.ca/bush_dictator.htm

Supe this doesn't even sound like something you'd post. "I am told..."!! Told by who? Claire Shipman? Katie Couric? Chris Matthews? Since when do you ever take anyone's word w/o reaserching it yourself. Look at the qualifications of the nominees, not the fact that they were nominated by W.

The GOP is considering unprecedented congressional strategies because the democrats have actually stated that they will filibuster a vote on the judges. Never before has this been tried.

Also, being a man of faith, you know that the entire constitution has a religeous and moral foundation, not a secular one. If we were to eliminate all laws that have a moral and/or religeous component, the penal code will shrink to a pamphlet roughly the same size as "Great Democrats of the 22nd Century".

I'd like to see your source on that.

"When Republicans enjoyed a majority during Bill Clinton's presidency, they simply outvoted Democrats on the Judiciary Committee and blocked nominees there, without a full Senate vote. If that option didn't look promising, the GOP could "slow walk" nominees with tools ranging from the "hold" (a kind of mini-filibuster to slow down or block nominations) to simply refusing to hold confirmation hearings. There is also the venerable practice of senatorial courtesy, used liberally by both parties, that gives senators a virtual veto on nominees who come from their state or will hold office there."

Source:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4534268

Also, "...filibusters rarely delay for long measures that enjoy the broad support of the American people."

You take away the filibuster and you take away representation of 49% of the country in the decision making process.

Conclusion: Republicans are whining little hypocrites.

Number of Clinton's judicial nominees that the Republican Senate blocked: 64

Number of Bush's judicial nominees that the Democrats have blocked: 10.

There are currently 43 judicial vacancies. This compares to the Republicans, who by September 1997 had forced 103 vacancies by not confirming nominated judges.

During Clinton’s term, Republican Senators blocked 35% of President Clinton’s nominees to the federal appellate courts for policy reasons. Republicans threatened to stop all confirmations or eliminate judicial seats to prevent Clinton from selecting his own judges, insisting that they were entitled to choose half of the judges.

Republican's are banking on the fact that Americans as a whole have short memories. This is another example of 'good old boys' trying to replace ethics with their network. It's common in the south and now it's common in Washington. Ethics smethics.

The bottom line is that the democrats in congress had been more productive in allowing the appointment of judges in the senate; right up until the Republicans got control again.

SmileWavy

All the techniques you mention are used by both sides - voting against the nominee in committee, not holding the confirmation hearing, delaying the vote until the candidate gets pissed off and quits.

The technique that hasn't been used is the filibuster of the actual vote in the Senate.

I believe that a president should be able to appoint who he wants to appoint as long as they're qualified. Now the judges are being "judged" on their policy decisions rather than their qualifications. That's wrong whether it's the left or the right doing the obstructing.

The desparation I'm talking about is that the Democrats are not getting their agenda through at the ballot box or in congress since they're out of power. The only avenue left is the courts. So they're trying to make sure GOP friendly judges aren't appointed who would be antagonistic to they're causes - gay marriage, abortion, gun control etc.

Craig, it's all hearsay regardless of where you get your information, unless you were in the room when these judges issued the decisions which are regarded as bench legislating. As Mike says, the dems typically work with the other party, trying for consensus, and now the republicans are changing that.

And no, I am not comfortable legislating faith or morality. Freedom does indeed have a strange definition right now. Freedom is for industrial/commercial entities. Regulation is for people. That's the opposite of what I would prefer. And I'm a fairly conservative Catholic. Frankly the Big Guy gave us, more than anything, a choice. Mandating certain behavior and prohiting certain others is not going to slip anyone into Heaven sideways. It needs to be a free choice, including the opportunity for bad choices.

I don't see it this way at all. Not at all. One of the most important principles of our form of government is that the majority is not permitted to ride roughshod over the minority. Your party is changing this, at its peril. Your president is the most ineffective in decades, but the one bit of damage he potentially can do is to the judiciary, and he's shoving his fundamentalist agenda down the throat of the entire nation. Contrary to majority preference. You should be alarmed. He's trashing your party, as he trashes my nation.

And even if he's successful, this nation simply does not want this kind of control over individual choices. So, whatever damage he does will need to be repaired, and my party is going to be the White Nights, the liberators, soon.

Sorry Supe, I have to disagree. The bizzare rulings that are coming out of the courts are all coming from your appointees.

° The complete removal of anything religeous from courthouses, public squares, schools and government offices,

° The strange rulings governing school funding to the point of judges raising taxes in school districts.

° The "right" to gay marriage found in the Massachusettes constitution.

° The Boy Scouts being ruled discriminatory for having morals.

As far as being inneffective, Bush is getting his way on everything, just as Clinton did for two years - right up until he raised taxes. For the rest of his first term and all of his second term, his job was hanging on to his job.

Bush is not inneffective, he's trying to fix social security, battle terrorism, cut taxes and he's getting all that done. The only things he's not doing is cutting spending and fixing immigration. That is what will come back to bite the GOP in the ass, not their nominees for judges.

Re: The Pit and the Pendulum
 

And Gregoire and her gang don't seem so good at building bridges, or consensus. There's a divisiveness in our state's politics right now, and I just wonder if there are any liberals on the Board who understand why that's not going to play well for your party. There's paybacks, and then there's the likelihood that this nasty, in-your-face, because-we-can arrogance is going to help turn the pendulim around.

Frankly, I understand how my state needs both voices in Olympia. But just as frankly, I can tell you that when the pendulum does swing back, there is going to be some pain that I will enjoy watching. This is the nastiest, most arrogant and most offensive (not just to Washington conservatives, but to most of the Western world's population) state government anyone has ever seen. They're asking for it. Anybody think they can avoid the end game I know will come?

Exactly what I was thinking, Jeff.

yet supe will not see the same of his in your face - tax & spend Demo-buds.

Jeff, Island.... This is my point and I'm grateful for the current day illustration. What MAY BE happening in Olympia will happen on a grander scale in Congress. That's the point of this thread. And it is my believe that the behavior of the "r"'s while they are in power is what leads to this. They do not build consensus. And you're going to see some major tit-for-tat. And then you'll blame it on the libs.

And while we're at it, another thing I think is behind the comments you make, particularly Island it seems, is this notion, this fantasy, that any time taxes are levied something must obviously be wrong. Taxes build roads, fund schools, etc. Gubmint is not free. Your party pretends it is free. Hates it in fact, because it gets in the way of commercial profits. And so there are many people who believe like you do. That there is no need for taxes. It's dishonest, and eventually some group of people have to pick up the pieces and repair the damage. Look at the financial position your "president" is placing your nation in. Look. It's stark. Striking. There is no way to hide it. So, out go the lies and they are partly designed to villify the group of people they know will HAVE TO come in soon and bite the bullet and make the repairs.

You have never really responded, Island, to the question I pose. Or should I say the condition I identify. Do you think there is a transportation infrastructure problem in Western Washington and if so, will the money for improvements come from a source other than citizens? And I know you have heard me emphatically describe our Legislature's witch hunt of WSDOT and the unanimous view on both sides of the aisle that there is no longer another single drop of extra efficiency to be squeezed from that agency....so I am sure I don't need to warn you away from this convenient (for several of the last twenty years) diversion of attention away from the real problem.

RTA (passed)= Billions of suplemental tax $ for transportation infrastructure in Western;);) Washington.
Monorail (passed)= Big Millions of suplemental tax $ for transportation infrastructure in Western;);) Washington.

'Kitsap Co . . you want a much needed bridge? . . .. pay for it yourselves.'

Our State Gobnr, focusing on raising money for the " transportation infrastructure problem in Western Washington"
. . .p'lease. it's the same old shakedown.

Let me ask you this Supe; how was the 520 bridge paid for the first time . ...back when taxes were lower, and hardly anyone lived here? (read: small tax base)

Quite the dodge and twist there Island; hope you didn't sprain anything :)