GOP obstuctionism
nlm:
let me start off by pointing out that I'm some what of a fan of obstructionism - it slows government down and stops them from doing a bunch of "stuff".
That said, I'm interested in where people think the unheard of levels of Republican obstructionism will lead. This session, they are on pace to mount 153 filibusters, the previous record is 58.
Does the strategy of not letting Congress get anything done while screaming about Congress not getting anything done pay off for them, or does it end up backfiring?
Minority whip Trent Lott stated, "The strategy of being obstructionist, can either work or fail ... and so far, it's working for us."
I tend to agree with Trent that to this point it has worked (at least in terms of the very short term) for the GOP from a political stand point. I have my doubts that it will continue to work from a political stand point, as people become more and more aware of why things are not happening in Congress. Though I am surprised the Dems haven't been screaming "obstructionism" louder and more often, it seems like they would have learned a lesson or two from the GOP when the situation was reversed.
Undisguised Sockpuppet:
We have enough space in the southwestern deserts(plus more as the midwest goes desert when global warming gets really bad) to dump everyone who is a registered republican behind razor wire...
MODU:
Quote from: Гаэл Лхэрмин on August 03, 2007, 08:28:58 AM
We have enough space in the southwestern deserts(plus more as the midwest goes desert when global warming gets really bad) to dump everyone who is a registered republican behind razor wire...
hahaha . . . I'll give you a matching number of Democrats in exchange for John Warner, and you've got a deal. :P
Undisguised Sockpuppet:
Matching number? No. I'm locking up the conservative/communitarian parts of the electorate.
Person Man:
Fine. They can lose three more senate seats and 15 more house seats.
52-2-46 and 247-188 sound nice to me.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page