Log in


The left, the Patriot Act and the fillibuster: the Chronicles of Politics - the_right_ideal

About The left, the Patriot Act and the fillibuster: the Chronicles of Politics

Previous Entry The left, the Patriot Act and the fillibuster: the Chronicles of Politics Dec. 19th, 2005 @ 10:52 am Next Entry

As you can see from the above link, the liberals are all a-tizzy about the Patriot Act. They are questioning it's constitutionality, in spite of the fact that this is not the broad, wide-ranging campaign of privacy invastion that the liberal left would have us believe. Why they cannot see the wisdom of monitoring the communications of known terrorists and their associates is beyond me. To me, it seems as though the left is willing to sacrifice our ability to effectively defend ourselves, and to sacrifice the lives of innocent citizens and troops, merely to derail any efforts that the Republicans and Conservatives fly. Why? Because they're not doing it. Had Al Gore or John Kerry been in office, the postulation of such a thing as the Patriot Act and the use of the National Security Agency for what it is actually intended for would not be any form of issue, whatsoever. In fact, if the Conservatives had dared complain, they'd be saying the same thing that I am, right now. Quite frankly, the hypocracy and sheer galling ignorance of the left thoroughly sickens and disgusts me.

I've also noticed that, by and large, the vast majority of those that make fillibusters are democrats, and when they're doing it, it's in reference to stopping a good and valid piece of legislation. Now, they are at it, again, and working to stop the Patriot Act's renewal. Previously, as has been pointed out by President Bush this morning, they supported it; now, all of a sudden, it's no good, and no longer needed. I cannot recall seeing any Republican fillibuster a good bill or law, and don't expect to see it happen anytime soon (unless you're talking about McCain, who, to me, isn't much of a Republican, to begin with). Is it time to outlaw the fillibuster? I'm sure that it was created with good intentions, but they're no longer there, quite clearly.

"Under Senate rules, the speech need not be relevant to the topic under discussion, and there have been cases in which a senator has undertaken part of a speech by reading from a telephone directory."

Maybe I'm a little too quick to anger in this arena, but I think an idiot that does something as stuipd as read a telephone book should be beaten. There's a difference between opposing a motion, and obstructing it. The people we elect to congressional and senatorial office should have more than enough intelligence, college-educated or not, to know how to adequately explain why something should, or should not, be passed. The fillibuster, to me, is an invention of sheer childishness, and the weapon of the mentally inferior. Reading from a telephone book, just to obstruct someone from having the right to express their own opinion? How liberal democrat of them, even of the Republicans that may've used that tactic. I think there needs to be a change in the law, making it mandatory for whatever you say to be relevant to the cause on the floor. No more fillibustering. Each congressman or senator should have a limited amount of time in which to get their point across; they should not have an unlimited amount of time to pontificate about nothing, just because they do not have the wherewithal and mental ammunition with which to combat proposals with which they disagree.

I say "down with the fillibuster", and "down with the politicians that fillibuster". Am I the only one that feels that something must be done about this weapon of the weak-minded?

Leave a comment
Top of Page Powered by LiveJournal.com