More on the Congressional Brouhaha (sp?)
From the office of House Minority Leader Representative John Boehner (R-OH) via Jonah Goldberg at The Corner on NRO: Democrats to Change 185 Year-Old House Rule To Allow Tax Hikes Without Having to Vote
The Washington Post also has an article just about the failure of the Iraq bill: Senate Rejects Iraq Withdrawal Amendment (free registration ( Read more... )
The Washington Post also has an article just about the failure of the Iraq bill: Senate Rejects Iraq Withdrawal Amendment (free registration ( Read more... )
Reply
Also, um, aren't Republicans just as procedural and technical when they're in power? Given that a politician's a politician and they twink their system as much as... gamers... everyone's methods are going to suck.
What are their goals? Ending a farce of a war? Supporting minority rights? Getting rid of education policies that don't work? Ensuring the revenue is in place to properly fund social progress?
I'll take the devil who shares my values.
Reply
Reply
You say this like I don't disagree with it when Republicans pull procedural bullshit moves too. In fact, on my first post about this whole issue, I pointed out ways in which both parties are wrong.
If the Democrats seek to remove a standard part of the way Congress runs in a fashion that will be permanent (until someone comes along and succeeds in changing it back) I think that's wrong. I especially think it's wrong because it's there to give whoever naturally has less power (thus being the minority party) a little leg up. There are other, cleaner ways to get us out of the war, and I STILL disagree with linking funding for the troops to a pressure to withdraw.
Also, my posts had absolutely nothing to do with minority rights, education policies, revenue, or social progress issues, so I'm not sure why those were brought up. They don't have relevance to my argument.
Reply
But mostly I was just explaining why there are those (like myself) who don't like the tactics but don't really care enough to worry about the congressional politic details of it all as long as we get some form of justice. I agree in principle with everything you're saying, but right now I want to have some assurance that I won't be fired just for being queer. (for example)
Sort of a lateral argument, I suppose. Different priorities. Different point of view.
Reply
I care about the congressional political details because I'm one of those international law freaks who sees precedent being set and goes 'NOOOO! Not until we're sure it's safe...'
Thing is, your job security based on your homosexuality has nothing to do with the focus of my set of posts, that being the congressional procedure hijinks.
I have different priorities, I agree, and it does influence who I agree with on some issues. Politics is often personal, and this is a pretty good example of that.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment