Powered By Blogger
A power to advance the public happiness involves a discretion which may be misapplied and abused.



James Madison, Federalist 41



Monday, February 1, 2010

We Have A Republic, Sir.

WARNING: Do not break the law before, during, or after reading anything I mention.



On Sunday morning we got a tasty treat on ABC's "This Week," in which Roger Ailes, Titan of Fox News, dug in on enemy ground and defended his character, his business, and conservative values. One of the many interesting statements that caught my attention, though, was Paul Krugman's statement:


KRUGMAN: Well because we have a super majority system. Because we have a system in which you cannot at this point get anything done without 60 points in the Senate. I mean, what I've been thinking about right now is at this point, the House of Representatives has passed a health care bill and has passed a strong financial reform bill. It has passed a strong climate change bill. In any other advanced democracy, that would mean that all of these things would have happened. But in the U.S. system, it takes 60 votes in the Senate to accomplish anything and because the Democrats nominated somebody in Massachusetts who didn't know her Red Sox, that entire agenda has run aground -- incredible.

Read more: http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/01/31/paul-krugman-and-arianna-huffington-v-roger-ailes/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+timeblogs/swampland+(TIME:+Swampland)#ixzz0eKvGSpcA

We have a Republic, Sir. The House of Representatives is the more democratic branch, since it is attached to the people in numerous districts. The Senate is more closely aligned with the states, and have distinct executive and legislative features, which, at times, serves as a buffer against hasty majorities in the House. The real significance of Krugman's views is that they do not appreciate our governing system. The arrogance is there for all to see and hear too, and the utter contempt for the prudent citizens of Massachusetts, as if they voted simply based on baseball. To even suggest that was a motivating factor of voters, on national television, performs a gross disservice to the journalism profession, and human reason, whatever they are these days.