March 16, 2004

Is "progress" the opposite of "Congress"? It's posturing, and it won't get anywhere, but if any Monkeys happen to live in Kentucky's Second District, you need to contact your representative now and tell him to knock it off. [via Atrios.]
  • this seems to be the outrage ju jour, it's being discussed over on mefi too. it's a house bill, it's been shoved into committee, it'll die there. rest assured.
  • you know, I hadn't even looked at Mefi yet today...oh well. My apologies to those who saw it there first...
  • Would anyone like to tell me (and any other ignorant monkeys out there) how exactly congress and the supreme court and the senate and all that work, and what they do. Well, if its simple enough to be explained in a couple of paragraphs, anyway. Otherwise maybe just point me some articles or something. (Why yes, I am a lazy little bastard). My knowledge of the American governmental system is what it should be, I suppose (or maybe it is exactly what it should be, I don't know).
  • sorry, ambrosia, i certainly wasn't snapping at you! just pointing out that folks needn't worry about this much as it has virtually no chance of passage. [hands over banana of apology] dng, here is a good, basic, consise explanation of the yank system of government
  • Cheers SideDish.
  • (oh! and i meant to say "outrage du jour." i have no idea what "ju jour" is, although it sounds like something on "queer eye for the straight guy.")
  • Ju jour -- guesstimating a mixture of du jour and jejeune?
  • oh! and here's further explanation of that bill.
  • precisely, bees!
  • sidedish - from your link: "These actions usurp the will of the governed by allowing a select few to conclusively rule on issues that are radically reshaping our nation’s traditions." so, uh... if a few people think that america should be run one way, and 2/3rds of the congress disagrees, then this act would allow them to overturn the court ruling. ok. lemme think on that a bit: if we give one branch of the government supreme power they can dominate the workings of the country. the judicial branch can't make any laws, all they can do is decide whether the laws are fair given the current interpretation of the written constitution. if we just allow the law-making body of congress to write an illegal law, have it struck down, then force it into legality against the constitution our country is based on, then jeezus people, what the hell ever happened to checks and balances? and how the hell can any sane person interpret passing this law as being something congress is allowed to do, given the checks and balances supposedly inherent to the system in the first place? i swear at least once a week some fuckwit in the american government pushes me that much closer to washing my hands of the whole affair and just moving to Canada.
  • it is an election year, no?
  • blogrot: summed it up in a nutshell, you did.