[Nameplate] Fair ~ 29°F  
High: 42°F ~ Low: 29°F
Sunday, Dec. 28, 2014

Fillibuster

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

(Photo)
"When George Washington, James Madison and the other framers of the Constitution assembled at Philadelphia in the summer of 1787, they soon decided, without much discussion, to abandon their original task of revising the Articles of Confederation. Instead, they set about creating a new system of government.

"Since the delegates to the Philadelphia convention represented so many different interests, this would prove no easy task. There were Northerners and Southerners. There were men from big states and small. Some came from rural farming areas while others represented cities where manufacturing or trade dominated."

Constitutional Rights Foundation

www.crf-usa.org

Amazing, isn't it? A group of men from all walks of life (Northerners and Southerners) came together and put the framework in place for our country's constitution. A plan that has endured for 211 years.

As I read the above, I wondered if this could happen today. Could we actually find a group of men and women who love THEIR COUNTRY so much they could put aside pride, pig-headedness, arrogance and greed, to work together and develop such a constitution? Hardly seems likely, when we can't even elect a president without one side calling the other side a rotten, deceiving, ignorant POLITICIAN. (That's a four-letter word these days.) And, just to make sure we've made our point -- call them a bad parent. That ought to get a lot of attention in the media since it's so high on the list of qualifications needed to serve this country. Most likely, the only thing that could be accomplished today would be amendments, bills and a fillibuster that would last for weeks. I knew the definition for fillibuster was a long-winded politician but the dictionary also says, "the use of irregular or obstructive tactics by a member of a legislative assembly to prevent the adoption of a measure generally favored or to force a decision against the will of the majority."

I wonder if we could find a group of men and women in Sharp County who could sit down together and come up with a solution for the wet/dry issue? Not a constitution -- just one proposal: Should the people of Sharp County have the right to vote whether they want the county to be wet or dry?

Right here, I want to tell you I am not a resident of Sharp County. I live in Fulton County and have no vote about whether this issue should pass or not. I personally have nothing to gain or lose by this vote. But I do have an opinion when I start to see a crack in the constitutional rights of people.

Anytime one person, or two or three, or 500, has the legal right to stop something the majority wants -- we got a problem! Those who have filed a lawsuit in an attempt to prevent the voters of Sharp County from voting on the wet/dry issue haven't done anything illegal. I assume they are against alcohol in Sharp County and feel they need to stand up for their belief. That's a good thing unless it means tromping on everyone else. They are exercising their constitutional rights even though it goes against what several thousand people (38% of registered voters in Sharp County) have said they want. Sometimes it seems the majority does not rule.

So, now it goes before a judge -- one man to make a decision.

Sounds like there's a fillibuster in Sharp County.

My fear is not whether Sharp County allows the sale of alcohol or not. My fear and disappointment comes when the majority has the right to decide taken away from them.

It's the wet/dry issue today -- what will it be the next time?