The Issue of a Majority

It’s been widely speculated (and assumed) that the Democrats will, with the election of Barack Obama, take a veto-proof majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. To some, this will be a welcome change from the Republicans’ hold on Congress during the peak Bush years.

Not so fast — we saw the destructive capabilities of a huge majority in Congress the first time around with Bush (if one wants to look back farther, look at the Johnson administration). What would the Dems do, if confronted with a filibuster-free majority? They would indulge in their wildest whims, possibly to the point of poisoning the country even more. It’s like letting a starving man loose onto an all-you-can-eat buffet: he’ll gorge himself until he gets sick, and by then it will be too late.

Despite those that hate most of the Republicans, we need them, so the Democrats can’t pass destructive bills, much like we thought we needed more Democrats during the height of Bush’s reign. There are two parties for a reason, and that is to prevent one from gaining too much power over the government (then again, the people are electing them). What’s lost in the fold, however, is that the Democratic Congress led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi currently has an approval rating of 9%. What makes anyone think that electing more Democrats is going to make the situation better?


add to :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: Digg it :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! :: add to simpy :: seed the vine :: :: :: TailRank :: post to facebook

    Leave a Reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

    You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

    Google photo

    You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

    Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: