Pearly Gates is...Quick ReferenceRecent posts
LinksRichard's other blog:Hall Of Fame:
The "Real" Media:
Halosphere:
Minor League Affiliates:
Other Baseball Blogs:
Other Random Crap (in a good way):
Soccer:Archive
Blog*Spot ArchivesContactRichard Ceccarelli Josh Mandir |
Friday, July 01, 2005O'Connor retiresGet ready for war... UPDATE: President calls for "dignified" confirmation debate. Yeah, in your dreams pal: Through the end of April [2005], the DNC raised $18.2 million in total contributions, according to a report filed with the Federal Election Commission, although DNC officials say that $18.6 million is a more accurate total.And that doesn't include PAC money, which we've already seen in action. This is going to be big. UPDATE: Harry Reid is on right now giving us all a civics lesson. It's an interesting journey, to say the least. He, like many Democrats, seems to think that the "Advice and Consent" provision of Article II is a power specifically granted to the minority party, when it is in fact a power granted to the Senate as a body. The President has no obligation to seek out a rubber stamp from the minority leadership of the Senate. Or at least that was never the intention of the Framers. Of course I'm not so naive as to believe that this is their true reading of the Constitution - it's just what they happen to be saying today. This is about nothing more than gaining disproportionate power and political expediency - the only two causes that drive the Democratic party these days, I'm afraid. Maybe if the Democrats spent some of their time being an actual opposition party, and less of their time salivating and posturing for majority party status, they would find that the latter is achievable through the former. Just a thought. Comments:Why is it that two of the key dissenters in Kelo are going to retire, and not the jerks on the other side? Standing for something besides blind obstruction would be a good start. Look at what the Republicans did under Gingrich - focusing on several smaller issues, hitting on them again and again (I'm not saying obstruction didn't play a part in that success, but the fact that the Republicans developed an actual ideology and policy played as large a role as anything). We keep hearing that the Democrats are the "majority party" on most issues. So why don't Democrats ever talk about those issues? Democrats need to come up with an alternative plan to save social security. They must clarify their stance on gay marriage and other social issues. What about immigration? Most of all, they need a coherent strategy for the war on terror (what do we do with the prisoners when we shut down Gitmo? What’s the end game on this war? What will they do different to improve homeland security?). Other than the anti-Bush talking points they spew on the cable news channels, voters have no clue. You'd think that the Democrats would have figured it out by now - "not being Bush" is not enough to win elections, just as "not being Clinton" wasn't enough for the Republicans. Be glad we live in a state where the state constitution guarantees the right to privacy because here comes the attack on the federal concept. |
