Do you think handing brain surgery over to enthusiastic amateurs is a good idea too?
Bad analogy. And do you really want to encourage politics as a profession? I don't.
Exactly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You think being a representative is the same as brain surgery?
How is that even remotely the same thing?
A bad brain surgeon can kill or seriously disable maybe thousands over a career spanning decades. A bad representative can help do that and far more in the span of a single fifteen minute vote.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do you think handing brain surgery over to enthusiastic amateurs is a good idea too?Bad analogy. And do you really want to encourage politics as a profession? I don't.
Absolutely I want it encouraged as a profession. If it's important enough to matter it's important enough to do well.
Absolutely I want it encouraged as a profession. If it's important enough to matter it's important enough to do well.Do you think handing brain surgery over to enthusiastic amateurs is a good idea too?Bad analogy. And do you really want to encourage politics as a profession? I don't.
Do well?
How f#$*ing hard is it to:
1. Put the issues to your constituents.
2. Find out how they'd like you to represent them on the issue.
3. Vote the way your constituents asked.
I could train a goddamned chimpanzee to do the job that each Congressman is supposed to do. There is no need for a professional politician.
Absolutely I want it encouraged as a profession. If it's important enough to matter it's important enough to do well.
Yeah, gotta disagree. No career politicians, please.
I could train a g$~$~%ned chimpanzee to do the job that each Congressman is supposed to do. There is no need for a professional politician.
The problem with the chimp is that your laws are then decided by whoever is allowed to give the chimp the most bananas. (also the problem with the current system)
I know writing laws is something that looks easy, but there's a fair bit to it.
I think sometimes politicians need to rise above popularity polls and do the right thing.
The problem with the chimp is that your laws are then decided by whoever is allowed to give the chimp the most bananas. (also the problem with the current system)
Two words: Citizens United. :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think sometimes politicians need to rise above popularity polls and do the right thing.
If the right thing were inevitably the popular thing, we could abolish government immediately. Yet when we do that we get Somalia.
I submit that is extremely suboptimal.
...
I think sometimes politicians need to rise above popularity polls and do the right thing.
I take it you mean,
"A politician should do,what the people NEED,
and not what the people WANT."
I think people are assuming the parties are changing over time. Individual mandate Republican idea now the Republicans can't stand it. Same thing with cap and trade. Parties aren't constant over time. Also no career policitians gives lobiests more power.
...
I think sometimes politicians need to rise above popularity polls and do the right thing.I take it you mean,
"A politician should do,
what the people NEED,
and not what the people WANT."
Show me a man that knows better than others what they need and I show you a man that have fallen to hubris.
On a completely different note about ability of minority to defend themselves from oppression of majority... Sit down, younglings and listen to the elder wisdom of failed democracy that was choking on its own inability to act before yours have been born...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First of all... There is an attitude that politics should be judged by what NEW laws are made, indeed, how many new laws is often cited for efficiency. This is patently stupid. Since the end of the cold war, almost every piece of new legislation we have had, internationally speaking, is a putrid pile of politician poop. Every little piece of inertia in the system is something to be excessively grateful for. When you wish for the system to be more efficient, oddly a political virtue, understand that inefficiency is the only reason the Patriot act wasn't even more intrusive, and so on. In a perfectly efficient system, they could have voted away every sort of protection for your civil liberties in an afternoon. I intend no disrespect to you, Kelsey, but... Be careful what you wish for...
I can't stand Ms. Maddow, but if there is a trascript of it, I will read it.
*sigh* That's a shame. I'll just break down a timeline for you. You'll forgive me if the dates are slightly off, this basically from memory.
February 22, 2011. Debate begins on Act 10, a bill stripping all public sector unions from the right to bargain for anything but BASE wages. A union can no longer bargain for workplace safety, amount of vacation or sick leave, health benefits, etc. Called the Budget Repair bill, the bill was meant to cut spending across the board to make up for tax breaks given to multibillion dollar corporations since Walker entered office. The Democrats, lacking a majority or rather just beginning to try to debate the matter and persuade some moderate Republicans to cross the aisle and kill the bill, employ the classic stall tactic--the filibuster.
Febrary 24,2011-After successfully filibustering for 60 hours, the Republicans conspire to circumvent the filibuster rules by not allowing the Democrats to vote in the motion to end debate, and the session, and while the filibustering Democrats are still confused, walk out of the building. In other words, taking THEIR toys and going home.
Febrary 25,2011-14 state assemblymen flee the state, under pressure from the Republicans in the assembly as well as the Governor, who floats the idea of rounding them up using the State Patrol (to his credit, the head of the State Patrol declined to get involved in what was a legislative problem, not a criminal one).
March 10,2011-The assembly is left unable to vote on ANY legislation that has a fiscal impact on the state of Wisconsin, by the law of the land, without at least one Democrat present, thus forming a quorum. The Republicans take all "budgetary" items out of the "Budget Repair Bill", leaving ONLY the union-killing legislation. They then vote on that bill in the absence of a quorum. After arguing up hill and down dale that the stripping of union bargaining rights was NOT a political maneuver, but rather a necessary measure to cut state spending, they then argued THE OPPOSITE, that it would not have ANY fiscal impact, when it suited them politically and they needed to get it passed. It was unethical and disingenuous at the very best, and villainous at worst. Even should this be seen as legal, the open meetings law of 2007 states that 24 hours notice needs to be given before a vote is taken on any bill, period. No notice was given.
March 12,2011-The Wisconsin 14, lacking any further need to protest a bill that has already been passed, return to Madison to a cheering crowd of about 100k. I was there, and there was barely room to turn around for about 4 blocks from the capitol square.
Look, I'm perfectly happy to admit that, while not illegal, leaving the state in a huff was a questionably HONORABLE thing to do. But these were people trying to serve their constituents. They were basically slapped in the face and told to shut up, were told that procedure didn't matter since they were in the minority. In a battle of childish behavior, the Republicans struck first, last, and hardest.
I didn't mean this to be a big rant, but you bring up Wisconsin politics and you're apt to get me going :). And it is pretty on topic, being about an end-round around filibuster rules. I wonder, if Colorado Democrats had used the same (completely vile) tactic to shove through a legalization of gay marriage, how would the religious right be reacting?