-
The Staggering Rise of the Filibuster
Tweet Share on Facebook November 25, 2009 Comment (11)By Robert Schlesinger, Thomas Jefferson Street blog
What to do about the filibuster? Frustration with the fact of having to cobble together 60 votes to pass anything of significance in the senate (and the frequently long odds against doing so) is spurring grumbling about whether a 60 vote filibuster is still a good idea. Filibusters are both well known in history (civil rights) and in contemporary politics, and that combination makes it easy to suppose that finding the votes to overcoming a filibuster has always been a regular step in the legislative process. Not so.
The fact of the matter is that the frequency of filibusters has increased by a factor of 50 since the days of (then Democrat) Strom Thurmond jaw-jacking for 24 hours to stop a civil rights bill. So too has the general use of delaying tactics on major pieces of legislation. Consider some data points.
-
Republicans Push European-Style Political System
Tweet Share on Facebook November 23, 2009 Comment (114)By Robert Schlesinger, Thomas Jefferson Street blog
In their ongoing attempt to purify the GOP, a group of Republican National Committee members are cooking up a resolution which would lay out a 10-point platform against which would-be GOPers would be measured. Excessive divergence--getting more than two issues wrong--would result in excommunication from the party.
This is completely reasonable political party behavior ... in Europe, where parties are much more platform- and issue-driven than here in the United States. And it just makes me ask: Why do these Republicans hate the American political system?
-
Sarah Palin's Crass Patriotism
Tweet Share on Facebook November 15, 2009 Comment (49)By Robert Schlesinger, Thomas Jefferson Street blog
The Sarah Palin book tour is revving up, and along with it the media-Palin co-dependent relationship. Where would she be without the press to kick around? With a lot less to say. (And don't think that as a blogger I'm not delighted to have her back in the spotlight.) Just this morning, Palin posted on Facebook about—wait for it—the press. Her post also touches on another one of her favorite topics: How much she loves the United States of America. To wit:
-
Reading Too Much Into the Politics of V (Spoilers)
Tweet Share on Facebook November 4, 2009 Comment (10)By Robert Schlesinger, Thomas Jefferson Street blog
A charismatic leader promising hope, change and universal healthcare ... a complicit press ... and hiding a terrible secret that you might have read about on the Internet ... a new Beck/Limbaugh biography of Barack Obama? No! It's V, the ABC remake of the classic early 1980s alien invasion mini-series. MSNBC just reported that the show's creators deny that they're taking a shot at Obama. But of course they are: The aliens bring healing technology that they'll share with all. "You mean universal healthcare!" the co-opted reporter responds, as if anyone had not yet made the political connection.
But the politics aren't all conservative. As the show's first episode reaches its dramatic climax, a character reveals that the aliens have been here for years, quietly infiltrating human society in order to set the stage for their takeover. Among their nefarious actions were "unnecessary wars"--apparently George W. Bush is a space alien. (Well maybe not Bush; maybe Rove or Cheney. Oh definitely Cheney.) And as Jonah Goldberg points out, one could argue that "much of the stuff about the dangers of 'devotion' and promises of miraculous cures amounted to an indirect shot at faith-healing evangelicals." (He's also right about this: "If I were 17 and the super-hot alien blonde wanted me to put on a German gay disco doorman's jacket, I would have done so.")
So is V thinly veiled GOP propaganda? Nah.
-
NRA Official: People Arming In Case Politicians 'Attack'
Tweet Share on Facebook November 3, 2009 Comment (28)By Robert Schlesinger, Thomas Jefferson Street blog
Today's Washington Post has an interesting piece on skyrocketing sales of guns and ammo (12 billion—that's billion, with a b—rounds sold in the last year, up from 7 to 10 billion in an ordinary year). Whichever side you're on in the gun control debate, it's an interesting read. And buried deep in the piece is this arresting explanation for the phenomenon:
"I think it's Katrina. I think it's terrorism. I think it's crime. And I also think that it's people worrying about [whether] they'll be attacked by politicians," said Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association. "They're suspicious, and justifiably so."
Attacked by politicians? Now presumably he means that people think politicians are going to push gun control laws, and so "attack" their right to bear arms. But presumably as a long-time participant in this particular debate LaPierre understands the importance of picking the right words (especially since every other example he gives involves a real, physical threat). Couple LaPierre's comment with the assertion by North Carolina GOP Rep. Virginia Foxx that healthcare reform is a greater threat to the United States than "any terrorist right now in any country."
The message all around? Be scared.
-
Hey Pawlenty: Is George W. Bush a Republican?
Tweet Share on Facebook November 3, 2009 Comment (8)By Robert Schlesinger, Thomas Jefferson Street blog
GOP12 has some interesting video where the Morning Joe gang tries to nail Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty down on whether Olympia Snowe is welcome in his Republican Party (that, GOP12 smartly argues, should be a 2012 Republican debate question: Do you want Snowe in your party?). Pawlenty dodges and weaves, repeating a mantra about what disqualifies one as a Republican. The list includes being for tax increases "repeatedly" (one can, apparently increase taxes if you don't inhale while doing it), being for card-check, being a friend of ACORN, being for the stimulus bill and being for bank bailouts.
But ... weren't the bank bailouts an idea originated by Republican President George W. Bush? The answer is that Pawlenty says that being wrong on these issues in totality is a sign of non-Republicanism. But it's striking that in his mind one of the signature domestic policy initiatives of the last Republican president is a bright line litmus test for ideological purity for Republicanism. Not conservatism, mind you, but Republicanism.
