“It’s called precedent,” the Senate Judiciary Committee chair said of violating the same rule that Republicans ignored to move forward with judicial nominees.

  • MonsiuerPatEBrown@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    49
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This does not make me happy.

    This is why using precedent and RROO is bad mojo for US American parliamentarianism. Very few act in good faith for a legal fiction that is the United States of America. And when the leader, the person in The Office Of The President, acts in bad faith we are fucked for generations if not permanently.

    Now the representatives are abandoning their structure and tradition because the other side did, too.

    We are done here.

    The Hard Left needs to consider revolution.

    edit: maybe i don’t mean the revolution … but the Senate of Rome became vestigial doing the same thing.

    The question for me is this: who will be our person to go from Octavianus to Octavian in front of the world ?

    • DrDeadCrash@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I doesn’t make me happy either, it’s also the right thing for them to do in the circumstance. They can’t pretend as though things didn’t change, as consequences of the recent decades of Republican treachery.

      It’s tough to see a way out.

      • agent_flounder@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        11 months ago

        Though tempted to view these breaches of precedent by Republicans in isolation, I have to remind myself that the reasons they wanted to do so and got away with it are systemic. I mean, years ago, some of these things might have resulted in pressure from their own constituents. The Republicans have been chipping away at everything for decades to sculpt the nation into a shape that enables them to act with impunity. You can trace the progression in Congress starting with, say, Newt Gingrich. It’s like an abusive sociopath overstepping boundaries little by little until they’re in complete control.

        That said, there was a time when politics broke out in fist fights. Thinking long term, it may not always be like this. But we can’t expect a single election, or mere voting, to fix this.

        • DrDeadCrash@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          You’re absolutely correct, they’ve been working hard at creating this situation. I think the left will need to get mean for anything to change, maybe this is a step in that direction.

        • SoleInvictus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Yep, it’s been the boiling frog for decades now. It’s surreal to compare 1970s Republican politician antics to what they’re doing now. Back then, much of their current bullshit would have outraged their constituency and the nation in general. It would be the headlines of every paper. Now their supporters cheer for it, the corporate news spins it in a positive light if they report on it at all, and many more progressive voters just tune it out.

    • Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      11 months ago

      Now the representatives are abandoning their structure and tradition because the other side did, too.

      So the Democrats should just keep adhering to rules that allow the Republicans to block their every move despite the fact that the Republicans ignore those rules whenever they see an advantage to doing so?

      That foolish mindset is why we now have the judicial cluster fuck which is putting our very Democracy is at risk. We are in a fight for our lives and freedoms and you don’t go into such a fight with your hands tied behind your back. It is long past time the Democrats should have come out swinging.

    • hansl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      US American parliamentarianism

      USA does not have a parliament.

      the leader, the person in The Office Of The President

      The POTUS specifically is NOT the leader. That’s the whole point of checks and balances; the three branches of government are equal in power and can veto each others. This very different of other countries with a Parliament system.