The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The Largest Selection of Liberal-baiting Merchandise on the Net!
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Reader Mail
Print Email

Reader Mail

Cut & Shoot Republicans

FILIBUSTER CATERWAUL
Re: David Boaz's Filibuster Flip-Flops:

Mr. Boaz appears to be lost in the daily Washington tit-for-tat mentality that most American's find abhorrent. The caterwaul de jour of the chattering class is the "rediscovered" concern for "minority rights." Funny, I don't seem to remember this being a concern when the Democrats had a monolithic majority in congress for 40 years. But I digress. What Mr. Boaz and his ilk, including many timid Senate Republicans, fail to understand is that the use of the filibuster on judicial nominees is an unconstitutional act. The Constitution is explicit on this point. What is so hard to understand about this? An arcane Senate rule does not supersede the Constitution. Furthermore, the precious use of the filibuster is not prohibited in matters of legislation simply because there is no constitutional right to legislation. Each party is free to filibuster legislation to its hearts desire. I do not recall when Republicans have engaged in a filibuster against judicial nominees. Minority rights are alive and well. It's when they are used in shameless derogation of the Constitution that people who know better should wake up and take notice.
-- Anthony F. DiPentima, Esq.

I just don't understand why when this is talked about, it is not made plain that the only filibuster the Republicans are talking about getting rid of is the one for Judges. No one has talked about getting rid of it for bills. The Democrats are the ones that have changed the rules, now let's get them back the way they have been for over 200 years.
-- Elaine Kyle
Cut & Shoot, Texas

VERMONT CIRCUS
Re: Sean Higgins's Silly Jim:

Sean Higgins article is probably the best I've seen on Jeffords "retirement." If you believe the local rag, his leaving has left a power vacuum in Washington, etc. About the only ones here who still believed in him were some of the farmers up north in Franklin County and a few groups around the Burlington area. Yes, his career was quite unremarkable to say the least, even by Vermont standards. He was always in Leahy's shadow and Bernie's way. Bernie Sanders is the current favorite to replace him. Is that really a bad thing? Sanders is a socialist, that is true. He will also be a junior freshman senator and while smarter than Jeffords, he is more openly radical. Sanders is good at rhetoric. In fact, between his mouth and his political machine here, he is quite the person but he's nothing more than smoke and mirrors as far as I'm concerned. Like Jeffords, Sanders career in the House has been rather unremarkable also. He can get elected to the Senate from here but he will be just as useless as Jeffords, though more colorful. So all in all, the status quo will remain the same. Vermont will continue as the laughing stock of the nation and we'll have "Jumping Jim" back up here rocking on the porch.
-- Pete Chagnon
Vermont

Neither side trusts a traitor. What was his name? Forgot already.
-- David Govett
Davis, California

THREE'S COMPANY
Re: The Prowler's Rahm Aims to Destroy:

"Emanuel has reached out informally to former President Bill Clinton for advice"

Clinton's advice: "Do what I did, get a conservative independent to make it a three-way race. After all, I only got 43% of the vote in 1992. I couldn't have won either race without Ross Perot."
-- John Matthews
Abilene, Texas

LICENCED COMMENTARY
Re: Jed Babbin's Gilligan's Ghost:

Just a quick update for Secretary Babbin on Conservative policy towards the BBC.

Last year, the Conservatives hired a broadcaster and administrator called David Elstein to produce a report into the BBC's future. The UK's analogue TV signal is to be turned off by the end of the decade. Elstein's suggestion was that in the future digital age, the BBC should become subscription only. This would enable it to continue with its niche "public service" remit, while removing the burden of the licence fee.

Jed is dead right about the iniquity of the licence fee, of course. My fiancee and I had the pleasure of buying our first home together last month. Later today, I will be going to the offices of the borough in which we used to live to ensure that we will both be able to vote on May 5, having been informed by our new borough that we have moved too late in the year to qualify to vote there. Hopefully, we will both be able to exercise the franchise, the right of my fathers, in a two weeks time.

Setting up a new licence fee took just a phone call.
-- Martin Kelly
Glasgow, Scotland

EXPANDING ON 1787
Re: D. Kelly Jones's Springtime in Paris:

Page: 1 2 3   Last ›

Letter to the Editor

topics:
John McCain, Hillary Clinton, Business, Religion, Islam, Environment, Constitution, Law, Supreme Court, Iraq, NATO, Oil

Comments

Leave a Comment

Related Articles

ADVERTISEMENT

Stupak's Deal

W. James Antle, III

* * * *

'A Tragedy for America'

Robert Stacy McCain

* * * *

Re: Thus Caveth Stupak

Philip Klein

* * * *

Thus Caveth Stupak

W. James Antle, III

* * * *

And So it Begins...

Philip Klein

* * * *

Why Obamacare Would Fail

Philip Klein

* * * *

Democrats in the Deathmobile

Robert Stacy McCain

* * * *

On the Brink of Depression

Ben Stein

* * * *

A Peace of Obama's Mind

Jay D. Homnick

* * * *

Thinking About Bombing Iran

George H. Wittman

* * * *

Newspaper Days

Christopher Orlet

* * * *
ADVERTISEMENT