Remember the filibuster flap of 2003? That was the one where Democrats wouldn't allow various judicial nominees to come up for a vote because they knew the nominees would get confirmed and the Democrats couldn't have that.
Oh, there was lots of pontificating from the left side of the aisle (see here, here, and here for starters) about the importance of consultation in the selecting of judges. And Democrats used the filibuster very well on other issues, as well.
I'm not a fan of the filibuster as it is currently practiced. I've always said that if one side or the other wants to filibuster, then do it the proper way: read the phone book. But such physical display is unseemly these days, so it isn't done.
I'm not in favor of the "nuclear" or "Constitutional" option, either. That is, I don't think the filibuster should be done away with. It is the only brake the minority party has in the legislative process in either House of Congress. Without it, the minority party might as well not bother showing up for votes. Or we could look a lot like Congress looked during Reconstruction.
Well, evidently Cenk Uygur agrees with me that the filibuster should be a real filibuster.
They could read the telephone book for all I care. I just want to embarrass them. Make them get up there and physically block a vote about what we should do in Iraq. Have them in front of the cameras telling the American people why we wouldn't shouldn't vote on the most important issue in the country.
They want a filibuster? Give them one. Let them make jackasses of themselves.
Somehow, I doubt Uygur was as enthusiastic about making Senators drone on for hours on end when it would have been Democrats doing it. But maybe I'm not giving the guy enough credit.
|