Here's more proof that the Speaker believes she has a mandate for single party rule.
In short, the Dems can jam a fork in the opposition Party's eye at any time without fear of any negative consequences.
I find this puzzling.
Not only does it ignore the Law of Unanticipated Consequences (like what happens when the political winds inevitably shift), it doesn't even take into account normal human responses to overt threats--I think (check that...I hope) Republican members of Congress will choose "fight" over "flight."
I may be completely off base here, and I realize that the Legislature has always been able to establish it's own operating rules, but this strikes me as profoundly anti-democratic (small "d").
One would hope that the Republican Party can, in some way, explain to the public that this is a profound assault on free and open debate and empowers a small clique of ideological zealots on the totalitarian Left to affect the lives of Americans for generations, if not for good.
In the march towards serfdom, where equality trumps liberty, we will have no one to blame but ourselves. Alas, when the general public starts to chafe at the loss of their ability to improve their lot economically, decide how and who they should be cared for medically, save for their future, school their children, or even decide for themselves what they read or who they can listen to on the radio, it will be too late.
Shame on us. - Attila of Argghhh!
UPDATE: Something I forgot to mention...maybe where this is where bloggers can help their country in a profound way. Assuming the Dems don't bar GOP members or their staffs from committees or the House floor, perhaps debate CAN proceed via the blogosphere with a little help from the Representatives themselves, talk radio (before it's banned), reporters who still have a shred of integrity and any other media outlet that is willing to shine a light on what the Democrats are up to. Just a thought.
H/T: The Corner
In short, the Dems can jam a fork in the opposition Party's eye at any time without fear of any negative consequences.
I find this puzzling.
Not only does it ignore the Law of Unanticipated Consequences (like what happens when the political winds inevitably shift), it doesn't even take into account normal human responses to overt threats--I think (check that...I hope) Republican members of Congress will choose "fight" over "flight."
I may be completely off base here, and I realize that the Legislature has always been able to establish it's own operating rules, but this strikes me as profoundly anti-democratic (small "d").
One would hope that the Republican Party can, in some way, explain to the public that this is a profound assault on free and open debate and empowers a small clique of ideological zealots on the totalitarian Left to affect the lives of Americans for generations, if not for good.
In the march towards serfdom, where equality trumps liberty, we will have no one to blame but ourselves. Alas, when the general public starts to chafe at the loss of their ability to improve their lot economically, decide how and who they should be cared for medically, save for their future, school their children, or even decide for themselves what they read or who they can listen to on the radio, it will be too late.
Shame on us. - Attila of Argghhh!
UPDATE: Something I forgot to mention...maybe where this is where bloggers can help their country in a profound way. Assuming the Dems don't bar GOP members or their staffs from committees or the House floor, perhaps debate CAN proceed via the blogosphere with a little help from the Representatives themselves, talk radio (before it's banned), reporters who still have a shred of integrity and any other media outlet that is willing to shine a light on what the Democrats are up to. Just a thought.
H/T: The Corner
It is a naked attempt to return the Congress to a "winner takes all" tyranny of the 1%, as the voice of the minority is run over roughshod.
Clearly, Speaker Pelosi is tired of having any meaningful dissent get in the way of her agenda.
Debates are for those who like to watch CSPAN. The power is not on the floor of Congress. Bills are marked up at committee level by the all powerfull; meaning the Chairmen and the majority. The Dems have some long standing members in the house and they get the choice assignments. The committees are broken down by percentage of the house. Rangle is Ways and Means, the most powerful committee. Most chairmen are old time Libs.
And then there's Harry in the Senate who is working for veto proof control; which I think they just received with Minn going to Franken. What does Ried need veto proof against a liberal sitting Dem President? Can you say agenda???
Debates are for making campaign commercials, they don't sway a single vote. The votes are worked on by the Whips and back scratching. The conclusion happens way before anything is brought to the floor.
Our only hope are the Blue Dogs.
Debates may be no more than a cynical ploy to mollify the bumpkins back home as you suggest. However, to prohibit them and deny any counter proposal outright smacks of third-world thuggery one would expect from Hugo Chavez, not Nancy Pelosi. Oh, wait...
Moreover, if you read the referenced link carefully, you'll see how much the GOP gave the minority in terms of a stake in the outcome of the legislative process. If what you describe were accurate, none of the problems the GOP had in setting their agenda would have occurred to the degree they did.
In this case, however, the scenario you paint may indeed come to pass with a vengeance, alas.
-Attila
The point here is that a committed core of left-wing politicians are focused on imposing their will on the American people through any means necessary, up to and including the restriction of speech through Orwellian "fairness" laws, confiscatory tax structures that result in a minority paying ALL taxes, "multicultural" dicta that destroys our sense of exceptionalism and teaches our young that Michael Moore and Code Pink have a better understanding of what America is all about than Ronald Reagan did or any soldier who's fought in Fallujah does. Heil Obama!
Now sure, the FCC COULD try to regulate satellite radio content, but cable/satellite TV has been around for decades and that's still entirely unregulated...what leads you to believe that satellite radio will be any different?
Also, alternative distribution of talk radio (internet streaming and podcasting) are becoming more important, and if terrestrial radio were killed off, I think their growth would increase VERY rapidly. These are, at least, one form of media that is entirely immune to regulation, even if they're unlikely to ever replace radio.
As for your other points...yes, I agree entirely, and have been talking about them for years. I'm not terribly worried about the radio...but I sure as hell am worried about the social and economic damage that the left-wing radicals are trying to create.
Ummm...I dunno about comparing radio to TV in terms of exposure and audience growth. The television is now an important center of attention in households the way radio is not. It's "today's radio" the way the radio was in the 30s...the principle focus of attention for staying in touch with the outside world. I think the radio is now much more focused than TV is, insofar as entertainment value, content and variety is concerned.
I guess what I'm getting at is talk radio is a relatively small target, easy to hit, and its demise would affect a segment of the population dwarfed by the national TV audience. The national pain threshold vis-a-vis censorship would not be nearly as great if, say, Fox News was forced to adhere to the same statute. I certainly hope you're right in predicting people will be willing to privately "fund" talk radio, so to speak, via Sirius (or whomever) subscriptions and that SATRAD will be tomorrow's FM.
However, comma...
The precedent this would set is appalling, don'tcha think? Maybe Congress will replace "E Pluribus Unum" on the Great Seal of the United States with Exsisto Quietis Quod Colo" (Shut Up and color!)
And I agree that the precedent would be unthinkable. It would be a monumental step on the path leading away from liberty, freedom, and justice. I would be just about ready to march on Washington.
However, I don't think they'll do it. Not that I think they're above such filthy things, but because I think they're just too occupied with even filthier things to bother. It will suck if I'm wrong.