Posted on 03/02/2009 7:15:11 PM PST by Bratch
"Once the tool of Southern segregationists, unending debate has become as acceptable as it is undemocratic."
(Excerpt) Read more at 100days.blogs.nytimes.com ...
Also known as democrats like Al Gore Sr.
So now the leftists have tied the filibuster to racism, and of course the three turncoat RINOs will not dare to be called a racist.
Don’t you just love it when a plan comes together? The GOP is the political equivalent of the dodo bird and needs to be replaced.
... “yea for we, nay for thee” strikes again...
>The GOP is the political equivalent of the dodo bird and needs to be replaced.
Agreed. I’m all about cleaning-house. I want a law that applies to everybody, uniformly... I want “justice for all”, or is that just a happy fantasy?
Guaranteed, this scumbag Jean Edward Smith never made a peep when it was the Republicans in control.
Only two years ago, with judicial nominees, (who through history had never been filibustered by either party), the Times saw it as a good thing.
If a person were to assume 'good faith' from the NY Times, it would be difficult to understand their logic reversal.
Fortunately, I understand that the Times does not operate on 'good faith.' They are the paper of record (TM) for situational ethics.
That coincidently means they have zero credibility which is being reflected in their bottom line.
AND THEY WERE ALL DEMOCRATS - they could even say the word.
I support my candidates on their own merits and vote accordingly. Similar with campaign contributions, though Pubbies are greatly favored (can't remember when or if I ever wrote a check for a Dem). Monies to party are given only as required for participation (and Republicans win THIS one 100%).
Not happy but still in there...
Frank Capra didn’t think so.
The author of this screed, Jean Edward Smith, has committed intellectual fraud in his argument. He knows full well that this line of argument is specious, yet that did not stop him from publishing this nonsense. A couple of examples. First, if it truly is necessary to apply the principle of one person, one vote, then the solution is not to abolish the Senate filibuster - rather, the obvious solution is to abolish the Senate itself. But somehow this erudite scholar misses that simple bit of logic.
Leaving party affiliation aside, it is now possible for the senators representing the 34 million people who live in the 21 least populous states — a little more than 11 percent of the nation’s population — to nullify the wishes of the representatives of the remaining 88 percent of Americans.
The author apparently thinks that he can muddy the issue and fool the readers. He's probably right, as far as the average leftist Times reader who can't decide for themselves what to think about any issue until the Times has told them the right way is concerned. But there are still plenty of people who can rely on their own native intelligence and critical thinking skills to see through the bias and propaganda.
How convenient that he can come up with a lopsided count of 11 percent of the population vs. 88 percent (with the ludicrous proviso of leaving party affiliation aside), yet mysteriously he neglects to perform the same calculation to show that almost certainly even a 51 to 49 vote does not necessarily equate to majority rule (on the basis of population represented by the senators casting the 51 votes). Conversely, a minority of votes for cloture can probably represent a majority of the US population (if the vote is constructed in the same fraudulent way that he "proves" that the filibuster is undemocratic).
Hardly anything that graces the pages of the NY Times, whether it is on paper or on-screen, can be taken at face value. There is a game afoot to embolden the DemoCommies to rewrite the rules now that they are in control. This little bit of phony "analysis" is clearly just a part of a broader media assault on the filibuster that is being orchestrated (by whom? by ODumbo's handlers?) with the eventual goal of ensuring one-party totalitarian rule. The Demo-Commies can almost taste it. They see what an ass like Hugo Chavez can get away with in his own sandbox, and they salivate over the prospect of doing even more damage here.
Why is it the Demos want to change the rules whenever they think they are at a disadvantage - every stinking time.
Well, now that the filibuster is racist, that’s the end of active republican resistance in the senate.
From this point on the (R)s are dead for all intents and purposes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.