The American Spectator

Reader Mail

(Page 7 of 13)

We're in the fifth consecutive year of Democrat obstructionism. Republicans allow that through their wimpy, inept governance. Essentially, Democrats run the government through their obstinacy and Republicans' impotence.

So, when, pray tell, is a good time to challenge that obstructionism? When the Republicans are no longer in power? Is that when they'll have the liberty to be stronger?

p>If something doesn't change, the benches will be empty because no one can be confirmed. "Under extraordinary circumstances" is the pact's Achilles heel and the Democrats are just the ones to bite it. Surely Mr. Healy understands that. br> -- C. Kenna Amos Jr. br> Princeton, West Virginia /p> p> Mr. Healy, my sincere thanks for injecting a little common sense into this debate. The libertarian style conservatives (both of us) appreciate your efforts. We can always count on our friends at Cato for a sane and rational view of what conservatism used to be before being co-opted by the evangelical community. Congressional Republicans, drunk with power and beholden to the religious right, have now failed in the Schiavo case, FMA (so far), the filibuster and Social Security reform. Time for the moderates to re-take the Republican Party and begin working on meaningful legislation and leave the social issues alone lest we be led by another Clinton in 2008. br> -- Ben Berry br> Washington, D.C. /p> p> Mr. Healy, With all due respect, you don't get it at all. Article II Sec. 2 is clear. A simple majority is all that the Constitution requires for the confirmation of judicial nominees. It has been my contention that an arcane Senate rule on cloture to end debate does not supersede the Constitution. Hence, the filibustering of judges is an Unconstitutional act. I believe the Senate parliamentarian would agree. Your argument as to filibustering legislation is specious. Nowhere in the Constitution is the right to any piece of legislation articulated. Other than the few exemptions congress has carved out, legislation is subject to the filibuster under the rules. If you can find the specific Constitutional section that guarantees individual legislation, please let us all know. Your in good company however, the "Gang of 14" doesn't understand the Constitution either. br> -- Anthony F. DiPentima

topics:
Health Care, John McCain, Social Security, Books, Constitution, Law, Supreme Court, Military, NATO, Conservatism, Medicare