George Will is a serious intellectual, so just like other conservatives when he expresses a belief that protests and procedural gimmicks constitute an attempt to “repeal an election,” this must be based on deeply held principles, right? Well, let’s look at whether he believed that the most decisive presidential election year* since 1984 should be “repealed”:
“Great innovations,” said Jefferson, “should not be forced on slender majorities.”
Liberals say filibusters confuse and frustrate the public. The public does indeed mistakenly believe that government is designed to act quickly in compliance with presidential wishes. But most ideas incubated in the political cauldron of grasping factions are deplorable. Therefore, serving the public involves — mostly involves — saying “no.”
Liberals are deeply disappointed with the public, which fails to fathom the excellence of their agenda. But their real complaint is with the government’s structure.
Hmm, strange — if I didn’t know better, I’d think that his recent discovery that majorities are immediately entitled to get their way will be abandoned as soon as Madisonian institutions start working in his favor again. And did Will earn the Triple Crown of hackery by arguing that the filibuster was not merely bad but unconstitutional when Democrats used it? Three guesses and the first two don’t count!
*In 1988, the Democrats lost the presidency by a greater margin than McCain did, but broke even in the Senate and were +2 in the House.