Blog Entry

Not so Mr. Irrelevant

Posted on: April 27, 2009 11:35 am
  •  
 

Senate Democrats have agreed to use a shortcut method to avoid debate on the sweeping healthcare reform that President Obama has proposed.  By doing so the Democrats will quickly pass their measure and avoid a potential fillibuster by Republicans.  The whole purpose of having a House and Senate and the belief that a two party system is important is centered around the need to debate issues. 

Debating an issue is not about arguing it to death, though that has become the norm in Washington.  The problem with both sides of the aisle is that you have to be for or against something.  Or more importantly you have to follow the party line on various plank issues like abortion, social issues, business,taxes, common defence, etc.  As a result we have created a system of diametral opposites with no common ground to hammer out agreements and compromise.

For me, the decision by Democrats to bypass debate on this monumental issue is a violation of our Constitution.  A simple majority vote should not be allowed to pass such a sweeping change to our political and societal foundation.  But that is what is about to happen by the party who takes its name from "democracy."  Purportedly they are for democracy and therefore, they are for debate.  The word democracy means "people rule" from the greek.  It does not mean "party rule" by the way.  Semantics, I don't believe so.  One party has become so powerful as to become dangerous.  They are manipulating everything and carrying out political vendettas and now they are going to do something so revolutionary - to pass government controlled healthcare - without taking into account the opinion and thoughts of slightly less than half of the people.

Where is the outrage from the folks who have fought so hard to protect the Constitutional rights of our enemy combatants (since I cannot call them terrorists anymore).  Are they not afraid of the power of one party rule?  They should be.  Failing to express outrage to our senators for their wreckless behavior makes us all culpable to what may come to be.  Let your voice be heard.

  •  
Category: NFL
Tags: democrats, draft
 
Comments

Since: Mar 20, 2008
Posted on: April 28, 2009 4:36 pm
 

Not so Mr. Irrelevant

The Patriot Act was overwhelmingly supported by a majority Sunny.  In fact, only one senator voted against it, Russ Feingold.  A two party system, democratically elected, debated, compromised, and passed a law as the process was intended to work.   The Republicans of the last 8 years faced fillibusters on many bills and judicial and cabinet positions by their Democrat counterparts.  The shoe is not on the other foot as you say.  We are violating the Constitution of the USA.

The comment about they did not vote for a one party rule ...but was done in a democratic way...is silly because is suggests that no republican was re-elected at all, lest ye forget only 54% of the population voted for Obama.  This is far from the sweeping mandate you and the Democrats suggest it was.  In fact, the Democrats are subject to overreaching and will likely screw up their current position.

Case in point, Democrats current release of interrogation memos.  Blah blah blah...blame, blame, blame...make it look like the republicans are evil nasty folks.  When in fact, the memos suggest the administration and the CIA were doing the right thing - making sure they were within the boundary of law.  That is why the memoranda were taken.  Now for the rub.  Your girl Nancy Pelosi reviewed and agreed to everyone one of the rulings.  She did not object to any of them.  She is guilty of complicity if anyone is.  But guilty of what?  Review of interrogation techniques before the legal counsel?  Yeah - we look pathetically weak among the terror states right now.  They have to be laughing at us for complaining about waterboarding.  If I recall they were lopping off heads.  Let's see how free thinking the CIA will be in the future as they play cover your ass for the next 4 years or so.  Great work.  Excellent leadership Obama!

The amount of money should not be immaterial Sunny.  A trillion dollars divided by 100 million working Americans is $10,000 per worker.  That is a lot of money coming out of your paycheck.  You should give a sh!t, I know I do.  Given that, I currently pay a part of my healthcare and it amounts to about $5000 per year and my employer chips in the rest.   So $10k per worker is about right wouldn't you think?




Since: Dec 31, 2007
Posted on: April 27, 2009 4:58 pm
 

Not so Mr. Irrelevant

Smorgie,

No I didn't miss your point at all.  They may have not voted for an outright 1 party rule but were not all things done in a democratic way during the elections?  If the people wanted more republicans in the house/senate they would have been voted in.

The shoe is on the other foot for a change.  I know its not all rainbows and unicorns in the conservative camp right now but for the last 8 years they enjoyed some of the benefits that the current administration does in terms of pushing bills through into law.  (Hello Patriot act!)

The amount of money to me personally is immaterial.  The people voted for those whom they wanted in charge to make these decisions and while I fully understand that you want all issues to be debated until the next election it just simply isn't going to happen because the democratic process was followed.

If you are going to complain about the filibuster process then please complain about the democratic process as a whole not just in an area where it suits your needs.



Since: Mar 20, 2008
Posted on: April 27, 2009 4:50 pm
 

Not so Mr. Irrelevant



Mmmmph!

I will shut up now.

I highly doubt that.

 




Since: Feb 18, 2008
Posted on: April 27, 2009 3:53 pm
 

Not so Mr. Irrelevant

I will shut up now.

I highly doubt that.



Since: Feb 18, 2008
Posted on: April 27, 2009 3:53 pm
 

Not so Mr. Irrelevant

But people voted for change and we's getting it.

We're getting it alright.  And the rules here prevent me from saying just what it is we are getting.  Denying the people the right to have their elected representatives vote on one of the most profound and future altering decisions is not what the people voted for.  Not by a long shot.  The whole purpose of a regionally elected Congress is to make sure legislation does not get drafted directly from Washington and passed into law. 



Since: Mar 20, 2008
Posted on: April 27, 2009 3:45 pm
 

Not so Mr. Irrelevant

What do I know about one party systems....oh that is right....the CCCP.

I will shut up now.



Since: Mar 20, 2008
Posted on: April 27, 2009 3:44 pm
 

Not so Mr. Irrelevant

Sunnysidez,

You missed the point completely.  This is not about elections or mandates or any of that garbage.  This is about using a loophole to avoid debating an issue on floor of the Senate so that they may avoid a filibuster.

Let me make the point clear.  Suppose the majority in the Senate decided to abolish the sale of fast food but instead of debating and having a vote they chose to use a loop hole that allowed them to skip the debate and avoid fillibuster. That is outrageous and just plain dangerous.  It sets a terrible precedence to allowing a party to have too much power and control.  This is about TRILLIONS of TAXPAYER dollars!!  By God it should be debated!  Argue that POINT!

The fillibuster is a tool that has been successfully used by both parties to stop legislation or to at least reach compromise.

The people voted for change, true.  They did not vote for a one party system.  The backlash will be terrible in the future.  Just you wait and see.  That is the outrage.

Wake up!



Since: Dec 31, 2007
Posted on: April 27, 2009 3:11 pm
 

Peace love and rubber doves

Where is the outrage from the folks who have fought so hard to protect the Constitutional rights
That outrage you speak of was voiced in the November elections.

Because of the outcome of said elections that granted them the ability to push their agenda through.  Naturally as the republicans are the minority they are upset at their inability to stop this however the voice of america has spoken.

Of course if the ball was in the other court and the republicans had their way they wouldn't be complaining about the democrats inability to stop their filibuster now would they?

No of course not.


I know this issue specifically affects you more so than others as the healthcare industry is one  you work in and I really have no idea as to what changes to the system that would impact you and your company.

But people voted for change and we's getting it.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com