Tyranny of the majority

http://www.redstate.com/2013/10/10/tyra ... -majority/


..."How about the Constitution, then? It was expressly written to thwart the tyranny of the majority, wasn’t it? Alas, you might have noticed it’s not sufficient. The problem is that any body of law is only as effective as the subject’s willingness to obey it. People obey laws they strongly disagree with because they want to be good citizens, or because they fear punishment.

Constitutional law is directed at the government – the document and its Amendments are a list of things the government may not do, not even if a huge majority of Americans desire it. The ruling class is very good at convincing itself that “good citizenship” involves ignoring Constitutional principles when they get in the way of a benevolent agenda, and they no longer fear any sort of punishment at all, except the loss of power through collapsing popular support – which is just another way of describing the tyranny of the majority, isn’t it?

A constitution is only as good as the system it governs. As the system grows, the constitution degrades into a set of principles, then a collection of abstract ideas, then a meaningless “living document” that can be changed through the exercise of temporary political power – the tyranny of the majority again! "...

You sometimes even see a tyranny of the minority when Obama will have his departments do things that the majority of Americans don't want. Like closing privately funded parks to citizens.

You mean like when a party that holds a majority of one wing can refuse to fund the government until it extracts whatever concessions are at the top of its respective wish list?
That kind of Tyranny of the majority?
So do you believe it is legitimate for one wing of the legislature to shut down the Government to obtain legislative change that it cannot obtain through the legislative process?

Photo-fish wrote: You mean like when a party that holds a majority of one wing can refuse to fund the government until it extracts whatever concessions are at the top of its respective wish list?
That kind of Tyranny of the majority?
So do you believe it is legitimate for one wing of the legislature to shut down the Government to obtain legislative change that it cannot obtain through the legislative process?

Do you care to comment on the substance of the oped or just quote left wing talking points?

PF, it is called checks and balances.

I laughed out loud now that you just asked that!
"Do you care to comment? :rofllol :rofllol :rofllol :rofllol :rofllol :rofllol :rofllol
When has that ever occurred to YOU?

FredHayek wrote: PF, it is called checks and balances.

Bulls**t

It boggles my mind that the GOP doesn't see how such a tactic radically empowers the people who most disagree the GOP's most dearly-held principals.
At BEST, such tactics become a perpetual cycle of stalemate.

PF,
Consider this. All revenue bills like ACA are supposed to start in the House of Representatives so if they want to de-fund it, they should be able to.

Photo-fish wrote:

FredHayek wrote: PF, it is called checks and balances.

Bulls**t

It boggles my mind that the GOP doesn't see how such a tactic radically empowers the people who most disagree the GOP's most dearly-held principals.
At BEST, such tactics become a perpetual cycle of stalemate.

And why exactly is that? IMHO it has to do with the polarization of pols on both sides of the isle. It doesn't matter anymore if a piece of legislation works or not, it has more to do with pushing bills into law no mater what even when both sides know it has a fart's chance in a whirlwind of working. I object to handing over my freedoms to an administration that won't bend on legislation that knows can't, won't, and probably never will work in reality.

Need an example? What happened to rail travel when AMTRACK came about? It limped around like a three legged dog and it's still propped up by the Gubment, it's not profitable in fact it costs all of us money every year to keep it operational. You're expecting something different from Barrycare or any other give away entitlement program? BTW, Google the situation on food stamps if you want to learn about the next train wreck coming down the line.

Photo-fish wrote: You mean like when a party that holds a majority of one wing can refuse to fund the government until it extracts whatever concessions are at the top of its respective wish list?
That kind of Tyranny of the majority?
So do you believe it is legitimate for one wing of the legislature to shut down the Government to obtain legislative change that it cannot obtain through the legislative process?

PF if you would go back and review congressional records it has been in use for millennia. So why shouldn't it be used now? It was specifically designed to stop abuses as perceived by those currently in Congress. If you or I don't like what current reps are doing then let's change it by voting in new representation in the House and Senate as per the Constitution.