Wow. Time does fly here, and I can't believe I haven't posted in over a month.
So, I'll just post a few quick thoughts:
I'm getting really tired of Democrat obstructionism. The judicial filibusters and their conduct with regards to John Bolton's nomination as the American UN Ambassador have been really pathetic.
But, I'm even more tired of weak and squishy Republicans who have no principals either. I'm not saying that they must walk in lock-step with the President, but my god, show us that they really believe in anything except compromise and moderation.
As Barry Goldwater said is his acceptance speech of the Republican Party’s nomination as their candidate for president in 1964: “I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice (and) that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.”
I don't mind that many in the Democrat party would prefer more liberal judges, or that they'd prefer a more appeasement-oriented UN Ambassador, but the fact is that they lost the election. More Americans voted for BUSH and he is still the President. He has the right and authority under the Constitution to make these appointments. Absent evidence of lack of qualifications or ability, his choices should be approved. They almost always have beeen in the past, with either a Republican or Democrat in the White House.
To me, this obstruction is a real sign or a collapsing party and ideology. Opposition is fine, but reflexive opposition is foolish and belies a lack of an acceptable alternative philosophy. The Liberal philosophy had a good run, it spurred many changes in society, government, and our culture. Not all have been bad, but many have turned out to be disasterous.
Is that fatal to their cause? Not if they honestly acknowledged what we see in our lives every day, and if they worked harder to try and address their failures. Admitting failure isn't failure. It could be the first step to greater success. But, I think they feel they can't admit failure, since they don't have a solution, since their failures may be inevitable consequences of their guiding principles.
What am I saying? Well, I don't think the Liberal world-view is grounded in reality. I don't think Liberals understand the human condition. The fact that people are inherently conflicted--with good and bad instincts and with patterns of behaviour which seem hard-wired into the species. Is that goood or bad? Of course it's neither. It's just the fact of being human.
Liberals seem to view the world as an ideal environment where humanity will necessarily move towards their preferred path. If this were so, then thier programs and teachings might make some sense. But, I don't think it is so. People aren't ideal, and it takes a certain type of training and coaxing and corralling to push people down the right path. But, it also takes an understanding of what makes people "tick" and what motiviates people. Ambition, faith, love of Country and Countrymen, Jealousy, Logic, Compassion, all are PART of the equation. These things can't be removed from the human condition. They are the human condition. And, it's ok to accept that and to work with that.
I think that people are waking up after a long sleep, and are re-evaluating their lives, their nation, their preconceptions and their world. For those who don't do this, and who can't see the reality around them, it must be a confusing and frustrating time.
It always reminds me of the scene in The Matrix, when Neo has to choose between the two pills. One color (blue) would return him to his previous unreal "reality" while the other (red) would force him to confront the actual "reality." I've taken the red pill he took. I see a lot of other people in our vessel, but I see a lot still hooked up to their tubes and inside of their water-capsules.
I believe that more people are taking the red pill, and that this is happening even in our "blue states."
So, Senate, get back to business. Approve the judges, approve the appointments, and Democrats, if you don't like it, come up with some better ideas and CONVINCE us that the're wise.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
One point... the Dems did not fillibuster and therefore allowed up-or-down votes on scores of nominees over Bush's first term. The donkeys got in the way of 8-12 (I can't remember exact #s) nominees. The GOP has done this in the past when they were the minority party as well.
Frankly, as a moderate Republican, I'm glad to see it. I don't like a wide-open door and there is too much fear to dissent among moderates in today's GOP. We're both looking for backbone in the GOP, but for different groups within the party it seems.
Well, the Dems DID filibuster for a FEW YEARS. It's the main reason that former Majority Leader Tom Daschle is no longer in the Senate. Judicial filibusters in as a systematic method of denying a MAJORITY of senators their right to approve the President's choices. There is a long-standing history of thwarting some nominees by in the Senate. "Blue slips" or bottling them up in committee have happened regularly in the past. But, the history of blocking the President's nominees shows that it's done when the opposing block in the Senate is a majority. (i.e., when Reagan was President and the Senate was Democrat.) This practice has a long history and it is a tools where a majority of an independent branch of government asserts their Constitutional power. The Senate must confirm the nominee. But, when the majority of the Senate is prepared to do just that, the minority of the Senate have NEVER filibustered to block it until the recent Dems. The "deal" has moved some things along, but it never should have been necessary in a Republican Senate. And, ideology of eminently qualified nominees has never been THE sole reason for such blocking in the past. If the majority want to confirm, they are empowered to do so. How about Justice Ginsberg? Former ACLU Counsel and quite liberal, but almost unanimously approved by the opposition Republicans. That's how it's supposed to be. If a Senator doesn't like a nominee, speak out against them and vote against them.
Post a Comment