Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dale Baker who wrote (408)	6/7/2005 1:27:04 AM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541330

The Senate 14 is an interesting example because they stepped in to stop a zero-sum process vote on the filibuster. The leadership was ready to play chicken with Hummers and see who would swerve first. Prior to 1975 the Senate required a 2/3 majority for cloture. The majority leader, Robert Byrd, used a simple majority to change the rule (XXII) to 60 votes by simple majority. It is interesting he was for changing the rule then, now he is for preventing the same sort of thing. He was in the majority, and was against minority rights, now he is on the opposite side of both. The 14 Senators used the opportunity to generate publicity for themselves. We would only know if the 14 hung together as players in future issues. The alliance was broken the next day when the confirmation of John Bolton was brought forward. One of Bolton's serious offenses was insisting that Syria had more WMD capabilities than was widely known. Syria proved Mr. Bolton was correct over the weekend when they shot off three SCUD missiles. As politics got uglier in the 80's and 90's, most of those types retired. Who needs the grief? Serious term limits might be the only solution. Now, only those who want to be in politics for the power are willing to withstand the muckraking every politician is subjected to.