Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Superbelt
That method, man v. man, doesn't always seem to work correctly *(will of the majority) nationally though.
NCB, did you think it was disgusting when the Senate Republicans refused to release Clinton's nominees from committee?
The Senate is a check on Bush's choice of judges. The Senate democrats who represent a majority of america (even though all their constitutents didn't vote for them, they still represent a majority) are right to look out for the majority of america's interest.
|
The Constitution says "advise and consent". Not "supermajority", et cetera. The Senate has an OBLIGATION to say "yea" or "nay". Refusing to let nominees come up for a vote is an abuse of their constitutional perogative.
It's amazing that some people claim that the Democrats still represent the majority of Americans. Given the consistent losses that the Democrats have taken in election after election since 1994, it's also not a very rational viewpoint. I'm reminded of that picture of Tom Dascle after one of the elections, sitting alone backstage, with his head in his hands.