Friday, July 01, 2005
Elections matter: In comments for the post below, we wrote: Many people, including this blog, said that the 2004 presidential election was going to be the most important one in many decades. Republicans in control of the presidency, Senate, and House meant no restraints and hard-right policies. The message went out. Many chose to ignore it.
We don't want to see people "taught a lesson," but that's what will happen. It's too late to stop.
Sure, some legislative issues like Social Security can be fought. But Bush has a totally free hand with the nomination. He'll get someone very conservative on the court.
At some point you've got to admit that the game is over and all that's left is to witness the consequences. And John Cole has similar thoughts: At any rate, I have to admit to finding the Democratic response a little amusing. They can sign 92 billion petitions, get a million volunteers to to form a human wall around the Supreme Court, and the simple fact of the matter is it just does not matter what they think or what they want. Elections mean things, and the Democrats are the minority party. Their only recourse is the filibuster, should they find a nominee objectionable.
posted by Quiddity at 7/01/2005 12:48:00 PM
8 comments
What you (and Cole) say is true to a limited extent. Bush will push some right-wing lunatic for the empty seat (and Rehnquist's seat when he cals it quits or croaks).
But dumb and complacent as the American people are, they do tend to be pretty active when aroused. A complete right-wing agenda may get pushed through, but the eventual electoral backlash will effectively remove Republicans from power for decades to come. The handful of "grownups" in the party realize this. Unfortunately, the rest of the party is locked in an echo chamber. Only when voters break down the door and throw them out will they see the error of their egregious behavior.
And that day will come sooner, rather than later. Americans really do abhor extremism.
Derelict
Just a little reminder. If the Court had a conservative majority, the principle of eminent domain would not have been destroyed last week. Liberals betrayed the little guy and now people no longer own their property -- they're just caretakers until some big guy comes along who wants it.
This kind of reasoning can also be used the other way. Did we liberals abuse our power in previous decades, leading to this situation where we are removed from power from decades to come?
Are we waiting for the backlash, or is this it?
As to the eminent domain decision, I haven't met ANYONE yet, liberal or conservative who thought that was a good decision and wasn't completely dismayed by it.
We were all betrayed on that one.
The problem is: even with rethuglicans swept from power for decades, a loony right-wing supreme court can effectively kill every progressive move and overturn any past decision. And those decisions were made to STOP or at least mitigate the far-right ideology. So the right can reach its main goals without new laws by simpy killing old ones.
anonymous wrote, Did we liberals abuse our power in previous decades...
What power was that? When did actual liberals control all three branches of the federal government?
Note that southern Democrats under e.g. LBJ were for the most part not liberals (LBJ himself was an exception). I wouldn't consider Jimmy Carter, at the time he was president, a liberal; at most a centrist who leaned a teensy bit left.
Clinton a liberal? Nah...
anonymous wrote, As to the eminent domain decision, I haven't met ANYONE yet, liberal or conservative who thought that was a good decision and wasn't completely dismayed by it.
Yes, the decision was a bad one. On the other hand, the idea that people can own land without the State recouping all or most of Ricardian land rent---as many people believe ought to be---is at least as grotesque.
Insisting that the absence of absolute control is an absence of power is just stupid. If we never had power, then how did we achieve the things that will imminently be torn apart?
The appearance is that there are a substantial number of people who are upset about these achievements, and the result is that we've got a government with no checks or balances which is about to take all those things away. The hard work of four generations gone in two presidential terms.
|
