Talking Filibuster with Teabaggers? Quote the Founders!

[Proud Public Servant]

Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 75:

“ ... all provisions which require more than the majority of any body to its resolutions, have a direct tendency to embarrass the operations of the government, and an indirect one to subject the sense of the majority to that of the minority… And the history of every political establishment in which this principle has prevailed, is a history of impotence, perplexity, and disorder.”

James Madison, Federalist 58:

“It has been said that more than a majority ought to have been required for a quorum; and in particular cases, if not in all, more than a majority of a quorum for a decision....

In all cases where justice or the general good might require new laws to be passed, or active measures to be pursued, the fundamental principle of free government would be reversed. It would be no longer the majority that would rule: the power would be transferred to the minority. Were the defensive privilege limited to particular cases, an interested minority might take advantage of it to screen themselves from equitable sacrifices to the general weal, or, in particular emergencies, to extort unreasonable indulgences.”

That's right: Madison and Hamilton, who often disagreed, agreed that supermajorities were a bad idea. (Warning: this may cause 'bagger head explosions; protective rain gear is advised).

Tip o' the tricorn to Jay Bookman at The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/jay-bookman/2013/nov/21/filibuster-senate-voting-restore-wisdom-founders/

[underpants]

1. Awesome

[immoderate]

2. The proverbial horse's mouth!

--imm

[zeemike]

3. No, they will just ignore it and go on with claiming it is a power grab.

One must never underestimate the power of a cult to deny the obvious or any fact that is presented to them.