Comments on: Senators try new plan to douse partisan fires

By: Almandine

Almandine — Fri, 25 May 2012 02:05:48 +0000

Indubitably.

By: Jon

Jon — Thu, 24 May 2012 23:08:09 +0000

“At the “Fire Department” dinners there are no staff members, no lobbyists and no hangers-on. ”

Somehow it strikes me that the public isn’t exactly invited either.

What I’d really like to see is them invite also a few stenographers who then publish, exactly a week later (to get the ‘must have it NOW’ instapundits off the case), a complete and unedited transcript of who said what when.

Of course, that would only shut the whole thing down again as it all turns into talking points and bluster.

Smoke-filled rooms have advantages and disadvantages when it comes to government. I’d say the disadvantages exceed the advantages, but I’m not a Senator (in case you were wondering… ).

By: Issodhos

Issodhos — Thu, 24 May 2012 14:51:00 +0000

The senate does not seem to have any difficulty in finding bipartisan support for supporting the trappings of an authoritarian surveillance state, or supporting continued military adventures in other countries, or reducing unalienable rights to mere government-granted privileges to be set aside when inconvenient, so one would have to ask, “who would benefit from increased BIpartisanship in the senate?” The social engineering schemes of the modern faux liberal movement and the modern faux conservative movement are hindered by the current partisan environment. Given the inability of so many folks to control their inner fascist, that might be a good thing.
Yours,
Issodhos