Saxby Chambliss! Go Saxby! I wonder if that is short for something, like Sebastian. Hmmm.
Well, Chambliss has won the re-vote and taken with him the possibility of a Democratic supermajority in the Senate. You know what that means... we held on to Leiberman for nothin'. Oh sure, there is always the possibility that we'll talk a couple of Republicans over to our side for some specific vote, (Leiberman, for example - *rimshot*) but Alf's Dad has somehow managed to stay in our living room, raiding the fridge and hogging the remote, basically on the promise that he'll do a little yard work once in a while. And he won't do it if his conscience forbids.
The interesting thing about this situation is it's a real power struggle. Leiberman's motivation is the desire to chair a few committees, which he would never be able to do as an Independent. However, that position is dependent on remaining in the good graces of a skeptical but kindly Democratic leadership, so he has to bow to them and vote the way they want him to. Joe Leiberman IS Tantalus.
Well, he was smart to negotiate his position before the recounts and re-votes, obviously. Maybe he's actually Donald Trump.
'...we held on to Leiberman for nothin'...
ReplyDeleteDoes that mean since Chambliss won (again), and the possibility of a D super-majority is over, that Franken & the Dem's will do the right thing now, and stop trying to change the will of the Minnesota voters?
Or does the electoral process mean nothing to Democrats (see CA court overturning the will of the voters re gay marriage)
How does stopping a recount better serve the will of voters?
ReplyDeleteAs for Prop 9, that amendment was essentially the majority taking rights away from the minority. Not a terrific precedent there.
Well, how about this for an answer:
ReplyDeleteWhen extremely suspicious bags of ballots are 'found' days & weeks after the election - in an election official's car-trunk, no less (forgot they were there!) - and ALL of them are for Franken, after he already lost the race, so that he can scream for a re-count, that doesn't serve the will of the people.
When Franken's OWN attorney's publically admit that he LOST the race and should concede, but Franken has Dimocrat Reid state that the House will look into the matter, that doesn't serve the will of the people.
As for prop 9(?) I thought it was Prop 8, but what do I know), again the WILL OF THE PEOPLE - you know, we still live in a democracy, where MAJORITY rules - already voted to ban gay marriage previously.
However, unlike your version, Piker, the MINORITY (CA court) took away the CLEAR MANDATE of the people - the majority. Clearly, the masses don't know what they want, so let's change their vote for them! How does that serve the will of the people?
Not a terrific precedent there.
So, in a terrific waste of time, money and effort, voters had to, ONCE AGAIN, make their wishes known, and AGAIN, vote to ban gay marriage.
I wonder how long it will be before the will of the people is changed, by the minority, again?
Not a terrific precedent there.
That's a lot to chew on there, GWK! And since it's off topic in two directions, I'm doin' my chewin' in a new post or two.
ReplyDelete