Monday, May 09, 2005

If I was Condoleezza

Augh, I’m not sure if I should be more frustrated with the Senate or with the media. Most likely both will endure my wrath. I am sick and tired of hearing the words: judicial appointments, filibustering, and attacking judges on faith. At least I am sick of hearing them in the same sentence.

Ok if I was in a position of power or influence, both of which are not true, except wait I am because I am a constituent who votes. So I elected my Senators and my representative and I voted for President Bush so people up in Washington listen up because I helped put you there and therefore I have a say.

And this is what I have to say:

Vote. Senators you may not like the judges that President Bush appoints to the bench but too bad you aren’t in a position to appoint judges. That is a responsibility of the executive branch. You as the legislative branch are to serve in a capacity to identify any major issues that would negate said appointee from doing their job. Those major issues would fall in the realm of: illegal activity, accepting funds from say a terrorist organization, disregarding the constitution (as written not as you choose to view it because legislature you do not interpret the constitution the judicial branch does), or any instances of treason. If you have a personal issue or a difference of opinion on how you think the constitution should be interpreted (once again not the legislatures job in the first place) then you can vote against the appointee but you must vote.

Filibustering can be and is a powerful tool in the democratic process but it can also be the equivalency of a child throwing a tantrum, stomping their feet, and yelling “I don’t want to go to bed”. Filibustering should not be used to avoid the democratic process. Certain senators (or at least their media representatives or the media outlets speaking as if they know the minds of senators) say that they oppose the President’s appointees because of ideological issues that are hot topics in judicial topics. They also say that they are protecting the people from an ideological right wing conspiracy to fill the judicial benches with conservative judges.

I have a few problems with this line of thinking:
1) All people have ideological leanings, all people have personal opinions, and all people should be able to separate these to a certain degree to be true to the position they are placed in. Does this mean that judges should be robots? No we want them to have an opinion to be human, just like us, but we expect them to work within the confines placed on their scope (i.e. the constitution and other such laws).
2) If the senators in questions are concerned about protecting the people of the country they need not worry. We voted, and we each individually and as a country placed those senators and that president in office that now have the majority to appoint and confirm these judges. The nation has spoken and the answer is that the majority voted for President Bush, thereby giving him the authority to appoint judges, and the majority of each state voted to place their individual senators which make up a majority that seem to favor the confirmation of the appointed judges. For the minority to hold up the process of confirmation is to silence the voice of the people who formed this political make up and created this majority/minority situation.

Now on a different side of the issue I do not think filibustering to prevent the appointment vote is an attack on my faith. I am the target audience of this campaign and let me tell you I’m not scared that this political issue is going to limit my faith or create an atmosphere that hinders my ability as a Christian American. This is the type of mixing of politics and church that feeds the fire that there should be a complete separation of church and state. Taking a political issue that is debunk for political sakes and making is a religious issue to stir up fire is a quick way to take the focus off the issue that our legislature is trying to skirt a vote and making it a three ring circus of politics vs. religion and my spirituality vs. your spirituality.

So back to my original idea. If I could wield some power over the senate I would say, “Vote for gosh darn sakes. Do what the constitutes of your states elected you to do. If you don’t like the outcome, then blame it on the people of this nation because we created the dynamics for this to occur. And if you still don’t like it, then work harder in the next congressional elections and help those with your line of thought and therefore vote win a majority and you can block the appointments with an actual majority instead of a hissy fit.”

16 Comments:

Blogger Pallbearer said...

The Democrats are frustrated and trying to screw up Congress because they lost two virtually impossible tl lose elections with bizarre, loser candidates. Try Joe Lieberman or quit whining.

5/09/2005 3:43 PM  
Blogger Ben said...

KATIE FOR PRESIDENT!

5/09/2005 4:06 PM  
Blogger Katie said...

Ha Ha

I was afraid that now that I went all opinionated on everyone that noone would comment. It seems the funny brings more comments than the serious but if I want to edumacate the world to my future dictatorship then I need to get my ideas out there. Really I do want to encourage (shame) my fellow friends who are a little less political or current even minded than me to know what is going on and to be able to discuss the issues in an educated manner.

5/09/2005 4:10 PM  
Blogger Katie said...

This also means being able to articulate your position on issues or even people without an "I don't like them, just becasue" or "I don't agree with that issue, just becasue".

5/09/2005 4:11 PM  
Blogger Ben said...

Katie, your views are SO right on it's not even funny. Did you hear me?? You are NOT even funny. (Ha Ha)

I agree though... this fillibustering just to keep the person you don't want out, is ridiculous. And clearly the liberal left have things all wrong. Our founding fathers never ment to keep religion out of the state, but the state out of religion. Our historical documents are grounded in Christian principles; to deny this indicates their ignorance on the subject...

Well said.

5/09/2005 4:52 PM  
Blogger jes said...

KT. i must admit that this is one of those posts that i just scanned through, thinking, "Gosh. I've really lost touch with my political side." and, "I really have no idea what KT is talking about." and, "i feel guilty for not reading the whole thing."

and then i glanced at what time you posted it, 1:38 pm, and at my own clock, 4:53pm, and i thought, "wow. only another half hour and i can go home! how did i not find KT's new post sooner?"

but, at least i'm admitting that i didn't read the entire thing, i just read select sentences like any good speed-reader does.

AND i left a long comment. so we're still friends, right? ;)

5/09/2005 4:55 PM  
Anonymous javier said...

Jes - you are a riot, KT, this post was sumo long... but I read every single word, every sentence - twice.

Not because I am a brown noser, but because I had no idea what you were talking about - you lost me at filibustering.

Creative genius I am, Political Pundit - I am not.

5/09/2005 4:59 PM  
Blogger jes said...

KT, i just read your comments to this entry. you want to edumacate your friends, eh?

and what will you do with your friends like me?

5/09/2005 5:00 PM  
Blogger jes said...

okay, okay. i felt guilty enough to read the whole thing.

keep in mind that i kept skipping ahead, and saying to myself, "no, jessica, you said you were going to read the whole thing. so go back and finish that sentence."

i finally finished, and though i have no idea what sparked this sudden rant about the folks in Washington doing their job, or how that affects Condoleezza Rice's job responsibilities, i can proudly say that i read it.

filibusters: isn't that the term for that thing that occurs when a person is giving a speech in the house or wherever and they start reading the telephone book? right?

5/09/2005 5:06 PM  
Blogger Amanda Sue said...

i didn't read the whole thing, and i don't feel guilty. i am super behind on my blogging and i have a ton of ironing to do tonight!

but i do have something that you may find humorous KT!

a friend told me that on "Jaywalking" on Jay Leno the other night, a student from SFA (the college in my town) was shown a picture of Mrs. Rice and asked her name. the student said, "uh, yeah... that's um....um.... MONA LISA RICE!"

seriously.

5/09/2005 6:36 PM  
Blogger jes said...

Mona Lisa Rice. Classic.

5/10/2005 12:17 PM  
Blogger Edgy Mama said...

I agree on the filibustering, but not on the choice of President. Thus, staying out of the fray...

5/10/2005 12:59 PM  
Blogger Katie said...

EM - thanks for the comment, I respect all other voters and thier choice and I would rather hear that you voted for someone, anyone, instead of not voting at all (you did vote didn't you, please tell me you voted). My main point was that the fillibustering is not serving the people and the senate and house of representatives are elected to serve the people. So someone needs to kick them in the pants (all of them, not just dems or reps) and tell them to get to work.

5/10/2005 1:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah but...I was told there were cookies over here.

5/10/2005 2:11 PM  
Anonymous Genuine said...

Get that cookie guy outta here this is serious content with serious comments.....

5/10/2005 2:12 PM  
Blogger Katie said...

I'm not above baking cookies for the entire world if it means they would listen to me. You have to give the people a snack every once and a while.

And my cookies alone might get me elected. Really they are that good.

5/10/2005 2:16 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home