I think there's no hyperbole in saying that we're headed toward an unmitigated disaster of the banana republic variety.
Now the Dems and their statist allies are talking about filibuster "reform." But it's not reform. Reform would be good thing. The Dems' scheme is more of the same old business as usual ― but on steroids. Neo-neocon sums up the issue as poignantly as anyone:
William Jacobson at Legal Insurrection says not to worry. But I’m hardly as sanguine as he on the possibilities for control of both houses in 2012, or what Republicans would do if they had it.As I wrote before, there’s always the House.Any circumventing of the filibuster this way is short-sighted. What one party can do to become the overbearing majority, another can do just as well. But I think the philosophy is to grab as much power as you can while you can, because the other party will do the same when it can.
So the Democrats and Republicans would take turns seizing as much power as possible. Where would that power come from? The only place it can come from: YOU.
So much for minority rights.
Update:
Doug Ross provides excellent analysis of Ezra Klein's mindless cheerleading for the Dems' radical filibuster machinations:
Say, Ezra, when every week seemed to herald the introduction of a 2,000-page bill that no one read, did you ever stop to consider that blocking this dreck might be a good thing?Or, given the magnitude of the uprising by the American people in November against the Democrats' unrelenting Statist agenda, that it might be precisely what the citizenry demands?Oh, and schmuck: perhaps you could also chart the number of pages of bills (and attendant regulations) passed by each session of the Senate. Consider the hundreds of thousands of pages of "transformational" legislation that not one person bothered to read. That, in the case of health care "reform", is being actively fought as unconstitutional by half the state Attorneys General in the country.
Statists are never satiated.
Discussion: Memeorandum
