Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    3,046

    Filibusters & Religion

    "Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist delivered a taped speech Sunday to a nationwide broadcast in which Christian conservatives, during other segments, attacked Democratic senators for blocking judicial nominees described in the program as "people of faith."

    http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7622845/


    Just wondering what my fellow wht members thought about this?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Boise, ID U.S.A.
    Posts
    3,503
    "People of faith" is code for government subsidizing religion. I have mixed feelings about filibusters. The original language was "unlimited debate", which probably had the noble cause of allowing the senator who still has something to say to have the opportunity to say it. I don't think it was intended as a ploy for perpetually obstructing a vote. I think when senators have said all that they have to say, it should be time to vote and not have a minority hold the process hostage to obstructive ploys.
    On the other hand, it does give the minority some balance to curb the majority's excesses. The courts are supposed to be a check on that, but if the vote is to fill court positions, that could erode that check. Still, there aren't enough positions open at one time to completely stack the deck in the courts. As the Republicans try to change the rules, and as both parties gush about how the position that favors current self interest is "in the best interest of the country", they should keep in mind that the balance of power does fluctuate. Maybe what is currently said will be remembered when each side argues for the opposite of what they want now.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    32
    Hey, both sides use it when they are in the minority, its a tool specifically designed for the minority party, and it should stay there no matter what. The religious nutjobs need to STFU, a good majority of the "activist" judges he was talking about during the whole Terry Schiavo thing was going on were appointed by Republicans.

    Depending on which side you are on, any judge could be considered an "activist" judge depending on their viewpoints/rulings on the issue.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Clarksville, Indiana
    Posts
    75
    Honestly, like ArunK said, if the Democrates were the majority, the Republicans would do the exact same thing. Only it wouldn't be a big deal.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •