Thursday, 12 May 2005
The 'Nuclear' ...er 'Constitutional' Option
Several sources speculate that the ploy to end the two centuries old filibuster, commonly called the Nuclear Option may come as early as next week. A spate of frantic emails from Democrats stream unabated into my email in-box, exhorting me to take action (and pay money.) Eric Myers sums it up nicely, though in a single sentence: "if a judicial nominee is so weak as to be incapable of moving over the speed bump of a filibuster, is America better served by removing the speed bump, or the nominee?"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
As strongly as I feel about preserving the filibuster, I've kind of had it up to here with all those impassioned emails imploring me to take action (and send money). Although I identify myself as a Democrat, I first see myself as a responsible American. Most politicians seem to have this priority reversed.
In the end, I have no desire to be played as a tool for either party, thank you very much.
In the end, I have no desire to be played as a tool for either party, thank you very much.
This is aimed at the mass emailing from political parties, not your post. Just wanted to be clear.
Don't worry Eric. I'm with you - I don't know if it came through in my post, but I roll my eyes at the tenor of those email messages, even if I hope the Dems succeed in abating the "nuclear" option. It saddens me that the alarmist name-calling approach they are using to garner public support for their position is probably "good strategy."
Post a Comment