| Kasz216 said: I'd buy that arguement if it wasn't for the fact that Obama had 2 years of super majority, anything democrats agree on passes. Aside from which, the behind the scenes talk suggests that it was actually the democrats unwilling to compromise on the deficit deal. |
A. It shouldn't take a super-majority to get things passed. This has never consistently been the case until January 2009 and was not the intention of the Constitution.
B. I actually take it as a postive that the Democratic party as a whole didn't just turn into a rubber stamp for the president and/or Pelosi and Reid. A few hundred Congresspeople and Senators in one party should NOT be lockstep on every idea/policy/bill. That's quite dangerous. There are too many votes along party lines now, and though I disagreed with some of the no votes - and some of the yes votes - I respected that some people are willing to break form the party and cast their own votes. That's their job. (Now, the REASON for doing it at times was bad. TO protect their jobs versus what they thought was right, but that's another discussion.)
C. As for "compromise" - - the GOP says we want $50. The Dems say you can have $30. Gop says "No. $50." Dems say "$40". GOP says " Still want $50." Obama says, "Fine. Give them $50 in exchange for a minor progressive policy point." GOP says "Now it's $1000." And then the GOP, especially Boehner and McConnell, says the Dems don't want to compromise. We've seen this a hundred times during this administration. It's completely disingenuous.
Can't we all just get along and play our games in peace?
