The Peach

Proudly providing the reality-based community with the juice on politics, media, religion and culture

Tuesday, April 26, 2005


Keith Olbermann of Countdown noted in last night's broadcast that the Family Research Council, the right-wing group responsible for the theocratic, anti-filibuster rant that was "Justice Sunday," didn't used to have such an objection to the time-honored tactic. Indeed, they used to quite like it -- as long as it was being used to block the appointment of gay people.

Back in 1993, when Clinton and a then-Democratic majority in the Senate wanted to appoint the openly-gay James Hormel as ambassador to Luxembourg, the Senate minority blocked Hormel`s nomination for eighteen months with filibusters. At that time, Family Research Council senior writer, Steven Schwartz appeared on National Public Radio to wax effusive about the positive value of and need for the filibuster in public life. He said:
The Senate is not a majoritarian institution, like the House of Representatives is. It is a deliberative body, and it`s got a number of checks and balances built into our government. The filibuster is one of those checks in which a majority cannot just sheerly force its will, even if they have a majority of votes in some cases. That`s why there are things like filibusters, and other things that give minorities in the Senate some power to slow things up, to hold things up, and let things be aired properly.
The Peach cannot fathom how the SCLM could have missed this striking bit of hypocrisy, or failed to include it in their reporting on the Justice Sunday event. On the other hand, perhaps it can be easily explained in terms of knowing which side one's bread is buttered on. These days, it seems clearer and clearer that it's the "right" side.

We urge readers to push this information out to mainstream media outlets. And while you're at it, demand to know why none of them has highlighted this spectacular flip-flop.


Post a Comment

<< Home