Rules? We don’t need no stinken rules!

Posted: December 17, 2009 by datechguy in opinion/news
Tags: , , , ,

I’m detecting a pattern here:

Your candidate dies before the election, decide “he” still qualifies for the ballot and appoint someone else!

You candidate is about to lose an election in the Senate? Fudge the rules and put a different one up, deadlines be damned!

Want to push Global warming and grab a big chunk of the worlds money? Fudge the data and the info.

Acorn supports your candidates but congress votes to cut off funding? Rule that Acorn has a constitutional right to those funds.

Conservatives use the rules of the senate to slow things down? Ignore them.

…about three hours into the reading, Sanders withdrew his amendment, and this stopped the reading of the bill — even without unanimous consent.

“In allowing Sanders to do that, it appears the parliamentarian has broken the standing rules of the Senate,”

The rule in question?

“Reading: Under Rule XV, paragraph 1, and Senate precedents, an amendment shall be read by the Clerk before it is up for consideration or before the same shall be debated unless a request to waive the reading is granted; in practice that includes an ordinary amendment or an amendment in the nature of a substitute, the reading of which may not be dispensed with except by unanimous consent, and if the request is denied the amendment must be read and further interruptions are not in order; interruptions of the reading of an amendment that has been proposed are not in order, even for the purpose of proposing a substitute amendment to a committee amendment which is being read. When an amendment is offered the regular order is its reading, and unanimous consent is required to call off the reading.” (Riddick’s Senate Procedure, P.43-44)

Notice a pattern here? Over and over the rules or the laws or the standards are not amenable to their liberal cause. So rather than changing the law, or the rules or the standards our liberal friends decide to ignore them or fudge them.

There is an important lesson for conservatives here. If in the senate they are willing to play with the rules to stop delaying tactics they will be willing to change the rules to pass this bill or any other. The only rules are to win right now, immediate gratification.

And realize this doesn’t just apply to republicans, remember the misogyny and the tactics used against Hillery Clinton during the primaries in 08? If conservatives had used them we would have been pariahs.

Conservatives better understand the rules of engagement because if we bring a shield to a sword fight we are going to get cut.

I really think this is symptomatic to a decision made just over a decade ago but I think that is a post for another day when I want to make a speech.

Comments
  1. […] the Senate it took breaking rules to get the bill passed (by exactly 60 votes) before […]