“It’s called precedent,” the Senate Judiciary Committee chair said of violating the same rule that Republicans ignored to move forward with judicial nominees.
This does not make me happy.
This is why using precedent and RROO is bad mojo for US American parliamentarianism. Very few act in good faith for a legal fiction that is the United States of America. And when the leader, the person in The Office Of The President, acts in bad faith we are fucked for generations if not permanently.
Now the representatives are abandoning their structure and tradition because the other side did, too.
We are done here.
The Hard Left needs to consider revolution.
edit: maybe i don’t mean the revolution … but the Senate of Rome became vestigial doing the same thing.
The question for me is this: who will be our person to go from Octavianus to Octavian in front of the world ?
US American parliamentarianism
USA does not have a parliament.
the leader, the person in The Office Of The President
The POTUS specifically is NOT the leader. That’s the whole point of checks and balances; the three branches of government are equal in power and can veto each others. This very different of other countries with a Parliament system.
I doesn’t make me happy either, it’s also the right thing for them to do in the circumstance. They can’t pretend as though things didn’t change, as consequences of the recent decades of Republican treachery.
It’s tough to see a way out.
Though tempted to view these breaches of precedent by Republicans in isolation, I have to remind myself that the reasons they wanted to do so and got away with it are systemic. I mean, years ago, some of these things might have resulted in pressure from their own constituents. The Republicans have been chipping away at everything for decades to sculpt the nation into a shape that enables them to act with impunity. You can trace the progression in Congress starting with, say, Newt Gingrich. It’s like an abusive sociopath overstepping boundaries little by little until they’re in complete control.
That said, there was a time when politics broke out in fist fights. Thinking long term, it may not always be like this. But we can’t expect a single election, or mere voting, to fix this.
Yep, it’s been the boiling frog for decades now. It’s surreal to compare 1970s Republican politician antics to what they’re doing now. Back then, much of their current bullshit would have outraged their constituency and the nation in general. It would be the headlines of every paper. Now their supporters cheer for it, the corporate news spins it in a positive light if they report on it at all, and many more progressive voters just tune it out.
Now the representatives are abandoning their structure and tradition because the other side did, too.
So the Democrats should just keep adhering to rules that allow the Republicans to block their every move despite the fact that the Republicans ignore those rules whenever they see an advantage to doing so?
That foolish mindset is why we now have the judicial cluster fuck which is putting our very Democracy is at risk. We are in a fight for our lives and freedoms and you don’t go into such a fight with your hands tied behind your back. It is long past time the Democrats should have come out swinging.
I reject modern political labels but would say I lean slightly right. Over the years I’ve wrote to many of our politicians but Mr. Durbin is the only one who actually gave me the time of day, and for that he has my respect.
Big “of COURSE two wrongs make a right” energy in this article and comment section 🤦
Why should Dems follow all the rules when repubs don’t? If anyone cares about the rule, they should have punished the previous committee leaders even though they have an R by their name.
Because rules are how society works. If both parties agree to throw out the rules… we don’t have a democracy anymore.
So it’s turn the other cheek bullshit? They’ve had my left, right, and both ass cheeks. There are no cheeks left to turn.
The same reason Dems should do a SHITLOAD of things differently than the Republicans: because they’re better and more honest or at least pretending to be.
Nobody’s shooting them for allowing debate. It’s not a binary where they have to either allow Republicans to obstruct endlessly or eliminate debate completely.
Well…a wrong is a negative thing. Two wrongs would be a double negative. A double negative is a positive and a positive thing is a right. Therefore two wrongs do in fact make a right. (Please note: I don’t believe this and an just using words recreationally)
It’s about time Dems started using the same tactics the GOP uses. Whiny hypocrites can’t stand when the tables are turned.
Still I understand why they hesitate. It basically drags our government permanently into shitty behavior. This is why they don’t start this stuff but reluctantly utilize it. You don’t want to be known as the guy going for the balls but if that is how the opponent is going to fight whelp then I guess we are ballers.
Nope. Same rules should apply for both. They should not be the least bit reluctant to use the same tools the Republicans do. If the Republicans are breaking rules then the Democrats need to break the same rules. If the Republicans don’t like it, they can stop breaking the rules whenever they feel like it.
Holy cow! Is that where the term ballers comes from? I did not know that. I kinda assumed it was about pro basketball players, in reference to their wealth and success.
I get to reevaluate so much pop culture now.
no no. certainly not. I often sorta joke around with use of language, especially in regard to modern terms like that.
