Feeling Squeezed by Political Correctness

Written by Terry Mitchell

Continued from page 1
The Right tells us: (1) The actions of a conservative Republican president should never be questioned but it is quite okay and even encouraged to bash a liberal Democrat president for every little peccadillo. My take: This is complete hypocrisy. (2) Whenrepparttar President decides to takerepparttar 136885 country to war (or is even contemplating it), criticizing or protesting that decision is un-American, unpatriotic, and even borders on treasonous. This kind of stuff gives aid and comfort torepparttar 136886 enemy and there should be certain consequences for those who do this. You should followrepparttar 136887 President in mindless lock-step when he decides to go to war. Whether or not that decision makes any sense to you is irrelevant. My take: One of our most valued rights as U.S. citizens is to protest anything thatrepparttar 136888 government does that we don't agree with, including making war. (3) The Second Amendment is absolute and cannot be infringed upon but more limits need to be placed onrepparttar 136889 First Amendment. Allrepparttar 136890 sex, violence, and vulgarity on TV, inrepparttar 136891 movies, and in video games are not doing anyone any good and must be curbed substantially either through boycotts, intimidation, and/or government intervention. Not only must children be protected from this filth, but adults need to be as well. After all, this kind of stuff causes people to commit crimes such as murder and rape. My take: The people who spend so much time worrying about what someone else is watching, hearing, or reading would be better served to just turn off and/or avoidrepparttar 136892 stuffrepparttar 136893 they claim offends them and endangers their children. If they did, a lot of it would disappear for lack of a market/audience. Parents are ultimately responsible for monitoring their children's reading, listening, and viewing habits. It is not my responsibility and it's notrepparttar 136894 government's responsibility. In fact, whenrepparttar 136895 government gets involved, it is nothing less than censorship. Also, there is not any credible evidence that sex and violence inrepparttar 136896 media causes people to commit crimes. Even if there was,repparttar 136897 principle of personal responsibility dictates that those crimes should not be pinned on anyone or anything other thanrepparttar 136898 criminals themselves. (4) Laws should be written with a bias toward "family values", even if these laws cause single people with no children to feel like second class citizens. For example, tax laws, drug laws, zoning laws, etc. should be geared towardrepparttar 136899 benefit of traditional family units. Also, there are certain actions that should be illegal, even if they appear onrepparttar 136900 surface to be victimless crimes. The real victim of these actions isrepparttar 136901 traditional family unit and it must be protected in order to maintain a free and prosperous society. My take: The "equal protection under law" provision of our Constitution requires that everyone be treated equally. Any bias toward traditional family units is not only a violation ofrepparttar 136902 Constitution but also stems from a misapplication of biblical teachings (which know nothing ofrepparttar 136903 ofrepparttar 136904 kind of “family values” being pushed on everyone byrepparttar 136905 Right). In addition, no action that is without a clear and direct victim should be illegal. The fact that it might be vile and repulsive is not alone enough to justify making it illegal. Any evidence ofrepparttar 136906 effect of victimless crimes onrepparttar 136907 traditional family is only anecdotal at best. That's just a small sampling from both sides but you getrepparttar 136908 picture. We will have true liberty in this country only when no one is allowed to impose his or her will on anyone else and everyone can be free to speak his or her mind withoutrepparttar 136909 fear of retaliation or censorship. Political correctness on both ends ofrepparttar 136910 political spectrum isrepparttar 136911 one thing that's standing inrepparttar 136912 way of this lofty goal.

Terry Mitchell is a software engineer, freelance writer, and trivia buff from Hopewell, VA. He also serves as a political columnist for American Daily and operates his own website - http://www.commenterry.com - on which he posts commentaries on various subjects such as politics, technology, religion, health and well-being, personal finance, and sports. His commentaries offer a unique point of view that is not often found in mainstream media.

What Is The Filibuster All About?

Written by Garry Gamber

Continued from page 1

Debate Rule XIX does not limitrepparttar number of Senators who may speak on an issue. The rule does, however, limit each Senator to two speeches per legislative day on each issue. During a filibuster periodrepparttar 136180 presiding officer will typically call a recess rather than an adjournment atrepparttar 136181 end ofrepparttar 136182 calendar day, keepingrepparttar 136183 legislative day alive whenrepparttar 136184 Senate reconvenes. This tactic effectively limits each Senator to a maximum of two speeches on each issue. It is possible, however, for a Senator to offer an amendment in order to create a new debatable question, on whichrepparttar 136185 Senators may make two more speeches.

A relatively recent provision in Rule XIX, calledrepparttar 136186 “Pastore Rule” in honor of Senator John Pastore of Rhode Island, requires that debate on a question must be germane torepparttar 136187 question. During filibuster periods this rule is enforced to prevent Senators from making meaningless, off-topic speeches. Duringrepparttar 136188 1930’s throughrepparttar 136189 1950’s several Senators, such as Huey Long and Strom Thurmond made long filibusters which included readings of recipes,repparttar 136190 Congressional Record,repparttar 136191 Declaration of Independence, and other non-germane topics.

While a Senator is speaking on an issue he or she must remain standing and must speak more or less continuously. During a filibuster-length speech this requirement creates fatigue inrepparttar 136192 speaker. However,repparttar 136193 speaker may yield to a question from another Senator without losingrepparttar 136194 floor. The other Senator can provide relief by asking a very long question followed by a short answer, followed by more long questions. In this manner a group of Senators can work together to extendrepparttar 136195 length of a Senator’s speaking period.

Senate Rule XXII

The procedures for invoking cloture for purposes of wrapping uprepparttar 136196 floor debate and bringingrepparttar 136197 question to a vote are contained in Rule XXII. The process requires a motion that is signed by at least 16 Senators and presented torepparttar 136198 presiding officer whilerepparttar 136199 question is being debated. The rule requires thatrepparttar 136200 cloture motion must be seasoned, meaning that it cannot be acted upon untilrepparttar 136201 second day after it is presented.

One hour afterrepparttar 136202 cloture motion has matured onrepparttar 136203 third dayrepparttar 136204 presiding officer interruptsrepparttar 136205 Senate proceedings and presentsrepparttar 136206 cloture motion torepparttar 136207 Senate for a vote. At this point an automatic roll call vote is required.

In 1975repparttar 136208 Senate voted to changerepparttar 136209 number of votes needed to invoke cloture to 60% fromrepparttar 136210 previous 67%. A compromise was struck, however, because some Senators feared that if changingrepparttar 136211 Rule was too easy thatrepparttar 136212 majority needed to invoke cloture might be reduced further inrepparttar 136213 future. Therefore,repparttar 136214 Senate agreed that to make future rule changes, including changingrepparttar 136215 cloture rule itself, would requirerepparttar 136216 traditional 67% majority vote.

Ifrepparttar 136217 motion to invoke cloture is defeatedrepparttar 136218 Senators can reconsiderrepparttar 136219 vote or file a new motion to invoke cloture. For example, in 1988 there were eight cloture motions on a campaign finance reform bill and all eight motions were defeated.

If a motion to invoke cloture is successful, thenrepparttar 136220 effect of invoking cloture only guarantees that a vote onrepparttar 136221 question will take place eventually, but not immediately. Afterrepparttar 136222 successful cloture motion has passedrepparttar 136223 Senate is said to be working under cloture. Rule XXII imposes a maximum cap of 30 additional hours for debate, quorum calls, parliamentary inquiries, and other proceedings prior to an actual vote onrepparttar 136224 question. During this cloture period each Senator is entitled to speak for a total of not more than one hour.

Once cloture has been invoked under Rule XXII,repparttar 136225 point of a filibuster is largely lost. Without exception, proceedings are wrapped up in less than 30 hours andrepparttar 136226 question is brought to a vote.


The filibuster speech inrepparttar 136227 Senate has enjoyed a long tradition and has been used for several purposes. On one handrepparttar 136228 filibuster has been used to persuade others ofrepparttar 136229 validity ofrepparttar 136230 minority position on a question. Open and unlimited debate can change minds and sway opinion. The filibuster speech process may help to defeat an issue once a vote is taken.

Onrepparttar 136231 other hand,repparttar 136232 filibuster has been used to stall or prevent a vote on an issue. The filibuster speech orrepparttar 136233 threat of a filibuster may causerepparttar 136234 issue to be tabled or withdrawn and not brought to a vote onrepparttar 136235 floor.

The minority party inrepparttar 136236 Senate counts onrepparttar 136237 use ofrepparttar 136238 filibuster as a means to preventrepparttar 136239 majority party from wielding too much influence. Such a tool encouragesrepparttar 136240 two major parties inrepparttar 136241 Senate to work in nonpartisan ways to resolve differences. The filibuster creates a need for compromise. It has been suggested that withoutrepparttar 136242 filibuster toolrepparttar 136243 Senate would be much less productive in producing legislation.

Garry Gamber is a public school teacher. He writes articles about politics, real estate, health and nutrition, and internet dating services. He is a founding member of http://www.GoodPoliticsRadio.com and the owner of http://www.TheDatingAdvisor.com

    <Back to Page 1
ImproveHomeLife.com © 2005
Terms of Use