-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
It?s Time to 'Go Nuclear'
- Thread starter IGBT
- Start date
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
"Yet, despite the voters? November 2 demand to "Confirm the Judges" (or at least to hold simple up-or-down floor votes on their confirmations), President Bush?s judicial picks should not expect smooth sailing, or even fair treatment, regardless of the GOP?s 55-seat majority."
What demand? The demand from this paper of course. Regardless of how you feel about one party or the other, it is always a bad idea to silence the opposition no matter how irksome it is. A one party government one day turns completely evil.
What demand? The demand from this paper of course. Regardless of how you feel about one party or the other, it is always a bad idea to silence the opposition no matter how irksome it is. A one party government one day turns completely evil.
it's only tyranny by the minority in the strictest sense. it's not how it used to be, where a small clique of senators could hold bills hostage. if filibustering is being done by a fringe group for ideas outside of the mainstream, they just need 60 votes.
what Frist is talking about is punishing America and allowing a tyranny by a slim majority.
what Frist is talking about is punishing America and allowing a tyranny by a slim majority.
lol, nuke it. until a democrat becomes president again, then "denuclearize" everyone! filibuster again!
just like the gop flipflopping on ethics issues, it was ok in 1994 when they wanted to show how "ethical" they were, but now that they're showing that they really never gave a sh*t about ethics, theyre removing that rule.
just like the gop flipflopping on ethics issues, it was ok in 1994 when they wanted to show how "ethical" they were, but now that they're showing that they really never gave a sh*t about ethics, theyre removing that rule.
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
I think he got it right. After all it was the Reps who wanted this stupid war, who pushed the Patriot Act, and hired Ashcroft only to fire him with someone who may well be worse. Yep, he got it right.
The filibuster has a long history. It has been used by both sides with dramatic effect. If the Republicans change the rules, then lose a majority in the Senate in the next election they are going to be some hurtin' puppies. That's why they will think 47 times about this before they do anything. Don't be surprised if the filibuster/cloture rules are not changed.
-Robert
-Robert
wirelessenabled
Platinum Member
Thanks for repeating the Rebublican talking points on this. Only about 8-10 out of over 200 judge appointees have not been confirmed.
Constitution says "advice and consent" of the Senate on appointees. It says nothing about rubber stamp or "up or down vote" or any of the rest of these talking points.
In case you haven't read it the Constitution is explicitly set up to protect minority rights. Why do you think each state had 2 Senators when California has 35+ million and Idaho has 1 mil? Minority rights is the answer.
If you think you don't like "tyranny of the minority" wait until you take a chance on tyranny of the majority. History shows that path is much worse.
It is trickier than it seems at first glance:
In sum, it's the corporate state, stupid.
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of
state and corporate power". - Benito Mussolini.
by David G Mills
Information Clearing House (November 10 2004)
The early twentieth century Italians, who invented the word fascism, also had
a more descriptive term for the concept - estato corporativo: the corporatist
state. Unfortunately for Americans, we have come to equate fascism with its
symptoms, not with its structure. The structure of fascism is corporatism,
or the corporate state. The structure of fascism is the union, marriage,
merger or fusion of corporate economic power with governmental power. Failing to
understand fascism, as the consolidation of corporate economic and governmental
power in the hands of a few, is to completely misunderstand what fascism is. It
is the consolidation of this power that produces the demagogues and regimes we
understand as fascist ones.
While we Americans have been trained to keenly identify the opposite of fascism,
that is, government intrusion into and usurpation of private enterprise, we have
not been trained to identify the usurpation of government by private enterprise.
Our European cousins, on the other hand, having lived with Fascism in several
European countries during the last century, know it when they see it, and
looking over here, they are ringing the alarm bells. We need to learn how to
recognize Fascism now.
Dr Lawrence Britt has written an excellent article entitled "The 14 Defining
Characteristics of Fascism". An Internet search of the number 14 coupled with
the word fascism will produce the original article as well as many annotations
on each of the 14 characteristics of fascism that he describes. [See list
appended to this essay.] His article is a must read to help get a handle
on the symptoms that corporatism produces.
But even Britt's excellent article misses the importance of Mussolini's point.
The concept of corporatism is number nine on Britt's list and unfortunately
titled: "Corporate Power is Protected". In the view of Mussolini, the concept
of corporatism should have been number one on the list and should have been more
aptly titled the "Merger of Corporate Power and State Power". Even Britt failed
to see the merger of corporate and state power as the primary cause of most of
these other characteristics. It is only when one begins to view fascism as the
merger of corporate power and state power that it is easy to see how most of
the other thirteen characteristics Britt describes are produced. Seen this way,
these other characteristics no longer become disjointed abstractions. Cause and
effect is evident.
For example, number two on Britt's list is titled: "Disdain for the Recognition
of Human Rights". Individual rights and corporate rights, at the very least
conflict, and often are in downright opposition to one another. In the court
system, often individuals must sue corporations. In America, in order to protect
corporations, we have seen a steady stream of rules, decisions and laws to
protect corporations and to limit the rights of the individual by lawsuit and
other redress. These rules, decisions, and laws have always been justified on
the basis of the need for corporations to have profit in order to exist.
Number three on Britt's list is the identification of scapegoats or enemies
as a unifying cause. Often the government itself becomes the scapegoat when
the government is the regulator of the corporations. Often it is lawyers or
administrators who take on the corporations. Often it is liberals who champion
the rights of individuals, or terrorists who might threaten state stability or
corporate profit. Any or all may become scapegoats for the state's problems
because they pose problems for corporations.
Other notable characteristics of fascism described by Britt which are directly
produced by corporatism are:
<> The suppression of organized labor (organized labor is the bane of
corporations and the only real check on corporate power other than
government or the legal system);
<> Supremacy of the military (it is necessary to produce and protect
corporate profits abroad and threats from abroad);
<> Cronyism and governmental corruption (it is very beneficial to have
ex-corporate employees run the agencies or make the laws that are supposed
to regulate or check corporations);
<> Fraudulent elections (especially those where corporations run the machinery
of elections and count the votes or where judges decide their outcomes);
<> Nationalism (disdain for other countries that might promote individual
rights);
<> Obsession with national security (anti-corporatists are a security risk
to the corporate status quo);
<> Control of the media (propaganda works);
<> Obsession with crime and punishment (anti-corporatists belong in jail); and
<> Disdain for intellectuals and the arts (these people see corporatism for what
it is and are highly individualistic).
All of these characteristics have a fairly obvious corporate component to
them or produce a fairly obvious corporate benefit. Even Britt's last two
characteristics, the merger of state with the dominant religion and rampant
suppression of divorce, abortion and homosexuality produce at least some
indirect corporate benefit.
In sum, it's the corporate state, stupid.
As I have pondered what could be done about America's steady march toward the
fascist state, I also have pondered what can be done internally to stop it. The
Germans couldn't seem to do it. The Italians couldn't seem to do it. The only
lesson from recent history where an indigenous people seemed to have uncoupled
the merger of economic power with governmental power is the French Revolution.
The soft underbelly of consolidated economic power is that the power resides in
the hands of a few. Cut off the money supply of the few and the merger between
economic power and government becomes unglued. The French systematically took
out their aristocracy one by one. It was ugly; the French couldn't seem to
figure out when there had been enough bloodletting to solve the problem.
The thought of an American twenty-first century French Revolution is ugly. But
the thought of an American twenty-first century fascist state is far uglier. It
would be a supreme irony that the state most responsible for stopping worldwide
fascism would become fascist sixty years later. But far worse than this irony is
the reality that an American fascist state with America's power could make Nazi
Germany look like a tiny blip on the radar screen of history.
For some years now we have lived with the Faustian bargain of the corporation.
Large corporations are necessary to achieve those governmental and social
necessities that small enterprises are incapable of providing. The checks on
corporate power have always been fragile. Left unchecked, the huge economic
power of corporations corrupts absolutely. Most of the checks are badly eroded.
Is there still time to get the checks back in balance? Or will we be left with
two unthinkable options?
Wirelessenabled has it right- over 200 of Bush's judicial nominees have been allowed to pass by the Dems- compare that to the real obstructionism by a Repub Senate during Clinton's second term...
And only the ten most objectionable attempts have been blocked. Repubs get over 95% of what they want, and still have the nerve to whine... apparently, that radical reactionary 5% fringe is what really matters, right?
As a Democrat, I say that if Frist tries to suspend the 60 vote rule that Dem Senators should stay away, deny the maroons a quorum, bring the distribution of corporate pork and the rest of the govt to a screeching halt.
AFAIK, there's no provision of federal law to "bring 'em in" in chains, as in Texas... Let GWB declare martial law, instead, rule by decree, bring on Biblical Rule and Armageddon- have at it, and good luck- you'll need it.
And only the ten most objectionable attempts have been blocked. Repubs get over 95% of what they want, and still have the nerve to whine... apparently, that radical reactionary 5% fringe is what really matters, right?
As a Democrat, I say that if Frist tries to suspend the 60 vote rule that Dem Senators should stay away, deny the maroons a quorum, bring the distribution of corporate pork and the rest of the govt to a screeching halt.
AFAIK, there's no provision of federal law to "bring 'em in" in chains, as in Texas... Let GWB declare martial law, instead, rule by decree, bring on Biblical Rule and Armageddon- have at it, and good luck- you'll need it.
One problem with that. Not such a country has ever existed. So there is no such thing as fascism as defined there. Nazi Germany was ruled by Hitler and his government controlled companies. Italy's fascist government also controlled buisness. That right there is socialism.
Plus the whole 'corporitism' is just flat out wrong. Facism comes from the italian root word fascio, a band or group.
Plus the whole 'corporitism' is just flat out wrong. Facism comes from the italian root word fascio, a band or group.
dmcowen674
No Lifer
50.9% of America and growing is loving it so better get used to it.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
