I have an unfavorable opinion of the Affordable Care Act in its current incarnation and the dimwit who setup healthcare.gov. That doesn't mean I want to repeal the law. We don't advance as a nation by retreating into the darkness when something doesn't work right the first time, wishing, hoping, fantasizing, that somehow things could have gone differently, never knowing what our true potential could have been. We fix it and move on.
The Kaiser Family Foundation found that 47 percent of Americans want to expand (22 percent) or keep the law (25 percent). Conversely, 37 percent said they wanted to either repeal the law and replace it with some Republican alternative (13 percent) or repeal it without replacing it (24 percent).
Last edited by Alnitak; November 25th, 2013 at 05:24 AM.
The 'dimwit' still has her job.
Do you think Bill Gates didn't fire someone every time a new version of Windows debuted and publicly crashed?
Obama can appoint whoever he wants as the new HHS Secretary. I'm guessing she'll be out soon after the first of the year .... of course to spend more time with her family.
You seek to color the historical, factual failures of the filibuster as mere "emotion" because you cannot find evidence of benefit for the filibuster sufficient to refute the negative argument.
Yeah, slavery was a great thing for America, too. And all the arguments against it were just extremist appeals to emotion. Totally without merit.
Nearly two centuries of filibustering, and the best you can come up with is that it initially helped to prevent the development of what eventually became the Federal Reserve banking system?
You're damn right I'm going to come up with an excuse for that not being a good idea! Because it was another failure of the filibuster!
The fact is, you can't find a significant success of the filibuster in the last 176 years because there aren't any!
The filibuster was used to stop the civil rights movement, stop the League of Nations, and stop Lincoln from prosecuting the Civil War for the north. It has been used to prevent president Obama from fulfilling his constitutional mandate to fill judicial appointments and administrative positions. The filibuster does not merely "lack value." It is an anti-democratic institution that has historically been harmful to America.
Moreover, the historical consequences of the filibuster have not been mere annoyances. It has been a disaster, again and again. I invited you to find counter-balancing positives of the filibuster, and you could not. You insist it must surely be wonderful because it has been around for such a long time, and has been talked about favorably by many important people. And yet, you cannot point to a single, significant example of good that it has done! While examples of its failures abound!
Excuse me, but delaying the civil rights movement (by decades!) is not a "tear jerker" unconcern any more than delaying gay marriage or the repeal of DADT is just emotional drama for queens. The whole point of allowing the minority to sabotage the will of the majority is to enable a tiny group of zealots to stop the progress of great ideas. And that is almost 100% of the way in which the filibuster has been used.
And the fact that cloture had to be invented to make the filibuster even somewhat tolerable says a lot.
Last edited by T-Rexx; November 26th, 2013 at 08:19 AM.