<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Dysfunctionocracy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://organon.jimhufford.com/2010/02/dysfunctionocracy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://organon.jimhufford.com/2010/02/dysfunctionocracy/</link>
	<description>An instrument of Jim Hufford</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 19:02:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Hufford</title>
		<link>http://organon.jimhufford.com/2010/02/dysfunctionocracy/comment-page-1/#comment-68</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Hufford</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 23:08:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://organon.jimhufford.com/?p=550#comment-68</guid>
		<description>I wouldn&#039;t be too sure that folks won&#039;t notice or care if the Democrats were to nuke the filibuster. A move like that could be perceived as changing the rules in the middle of the game--which is in fact exactly what it would be. Americans may not know how many votes it takes to break a filibuster, but they understand that there are rules of procedure. And changing the rules to reach an outcome that couldn&#039;t be achieved otherwise is paradigmatically unfair conduct. That&#039;s playground stuff that everyone would recognize. &quot;Cloture&quot; doesn&#039;t mean much to the public at large, but everyone understands cheating. And if it&#039;s not widely believed that the current rules are unfair or undemocratic, then nuking the filibuster is going to look like cheating.

That said, I&#039;m planning to write some more about the different ways we could abolish the filibuster.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wouldn&#8217;t be too sure that folks won&#8217;t notice or care if the Democrats were to nuke the filibuster. A move like that could be perceived as changing the rules in the middle of the game&#8211;which is in fact exactly what it would be. Americans may not know how many votes it takes to break a filibuster, but they understand that there are rules of procedure. And changing the rules to reach an outcome that couldn&#8217;t be achieved otherwise is paradigmatically unfair conduct. That&#8217;s playground stuff that everyone would recognize. &#8220;Cloture&#8221; doesn&#8217;t mean much to the public at large, but everyone understands cheating. And if it&#8217;s not widely believed that the current rules are unfair or undemocratic, then nuking the filibuster is going to look like cheating.</p>
<p>That said, I&#8217;m planning to write some more about the different ways we could abolish the filibuster.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Len</title>
		<link>http://organon.jimhufford.com/2010/02/dysfunctionocracy/comment-page-1/#comment-67</link>
		<dc:creator>Len</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 23:02:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://organon.jimhufford.com/?p=550#comment-67</guid>
		<description>I agree with Lee. People want results.  I can see where the filibuster maybe was a a good idea to stop truly heinous legislation but the way it&#039;s threat is deployed today on legislation that GOPers supported 15 years ago is nuts. Harry Reid appears to be not too popular among  the citizens but maybe that&#039;s because he is perceived as weak. If he actually broke the filibuster and said &quot;Democracy now!&quot; then maybe he&#039;d get some credit for it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Lee. People want results.  I can see where the filibuster maybe was a a good idea to stop truly heinous legislation but the way it&#8217;s threat is deployed today on legislation that GOPers supported 15 years ago is nuts. Harry Reid appears to be not too popular among  the citizens but maybe that&#8217;s because he is perceived as weak. If he actually broke the filibuster and said &#8220;Democracy now!&#8221; then maybe he&#8217;d get some credit for it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee</title>
		<link>http://organon.jimhufford.com/2010/02/dysfunctionocracy/comment-page-1/#comment-65</link>
		<dc:creator>Lee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 03:03:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://organon.jimhufford.com/?p=550#comment-65</guid>
		<description>which is exactly why Dems should just nuke the filibuster altogether (I believe Republicans refer to it as &#039;the Constitutional Option,&#039; right? haha).  Certainly among political types heads would explode, but most Americans wouldn&#039;t care.  And, hey, even if they failed the hysterics from the chattering class would at least serve to educate the rest of the country about this stuff.

ps. i responded to the comment you left over at my place</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>which is exactly why Dems should just nuke the filibuster altogether (I believe Republicans refer to it as &#8216;the Constitutional Option,&#8217; right? haha).  Certainly among political types heads would explode, but most Americans wouldn&#8217;t care.  And, hey, even if they failed the hysterics from the chattering class would at least serve to educate the rest of the country about this stuff.</p>
<p>ps. i responded to the comment you left over at my place</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

