For at least the last year, liberals of all shades have done their best to paint republitards as “obstructionists” who have done nothing but stall congress, keeping important bills from being passed, doing everything in their power to block Obama from being able to give us “free” unicorns and ponies. But it seems that festering under the liberal underbelly, is the knowledge that maybe that isn’t the case. WaPo:
Obama advocates argue that he is temperamentally ill suited to such a strategy [of triangulation between himself and the two houses of congress], both because he is more interested in broad change than small-bore tinkering and because it requires a level of deal-making that he has not appeared comfortable with.
Where Clinton developed decent working relationships with the GOP leadership, especially House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, Obama has not shown much interest in befriending congressional leaders of either party – and certainly not his political opponents, who are more openly hostile than even those in the 1990s.
I’ve always found the liberal argument of conservative obstructionism a bit odd, not only because it seems to me that the less congress “does” the better (especially when that “doing” encompasses enacting bits and pieces of Obama’s leftist agenda), but also because of the absolute fact that many bills have been passed without a single fucking republican vote (I.e., Obamacare). Obama and his completely democrat controlled congress can enact the single most controversial bill of my lifetime without one republican vote, but somehow republicans are at fault for stifling his efforts.
2010-10-30 » madlibertarianguy