The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016
Just because a particular president can't get his nominees approved is not adequate reason to amend the Constitution, in my opinion. Obama is reaping some of which he's sown. The Sotomayor confirmation is evidence enough that "the system" works.
Thank you, Quazi!
It seems anytime the Republican's use the rules, Liberals go out of their minds. I don't get it. This is how our system was set up. If you don't like the rules, make an amendment.
"We ain't a sharp species. We kill each other over arguments about what happens when you die, then fail to see the ******* irony in that." - Justin Halpern
Using parliamentary procedures to block an act is as old as democracy itself. Those procedures place protections in the process to keep stupid and rash things from being done, to keep the minority from being totally steamrolled, and so on. To equate it with sabotage is silly.
“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert”. – J Robert Oppenheimer.
The problem is not the rules themselves, it is how the rules have been abused. How can you have a functional government when many important positions have not been filled because the candidates for these positions are not even given a hearing or a up or down vote?
Of course we are taught these facts in school, however the rules go beyond that in several ways. The president is nothing, the congress (House and Senate) and veto anything, the SCOTUS can veto the president.
The President has little to no power - he is nothing more than a spokesman - he just gets a lot of time on TV.
-I don't trust a man who talks about ethics when he's picking my pocket.- Time Enough For Love - Robert A Heinlein
My avatar created by Feliza Estrada firstname.lastname@example.org