Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ellisonz

(27,711 posts)
Sun Jan 15, 2012, 04:26 PM Jan 2012

Harry Reid wants end to GOP's 'obstruction on steroids'

By Lisa Mascaro

January 15, 2012, 10:02 a.m.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid hopes Republicans will return to Congress having learned a lesson from last year’s "obstruction on steroids" style of governing and will work toward compromise.

Congress's approval rating remains dismal as lawmakers return to Washington this week. Repeated rounds of political brinkmanship bruised both parties, but especially hurt Republicans during the year-end showdown over the payroll tax cut. The GOP has been divided all year by its "tea party" faction, which staked out conservative positions.

"I hope with what happened the last week of this last year in Congress that the Republicans have learned they can't be guided by the 'tea party,' because the 'tea party' is putting them right over the cliff," Reid said Sunday on NBC’s "Meet the Press."

The tea party movement as a political force is "dying out" as the economy improves, the Nevada Democrat said.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-harry-reid-gop-obstruction-on-steroids-20120115,0,3589382.story

I like Harry Reid's optimism and it's a clever attempt to try and build a bridge, but I think the GOP has picked its bone.

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

annabanana

(52,791 posts)
1. He can "hope" all he likes... If he keeps trying to kick Lucy's football
Sun Jan 15, 2012, 04:28 PM
Jan 2012

he will end up on his back again and again.

The RW reactionaries have no incentive to suddenly act rational.

DCBob

(24,689 posts)
2. There are indications of a rift between GOP leadership and the teaparty members.
Sun Jan 15, 2012, 04:40 PM
Jan 2012

We shall see how it plays out in the new year.

jaysunb

(11,856 posts)
3. The "compromise" frame is no good unless
Sun Jan 15, 2012, 05:58 PM
Jan 2012

it's put in to a "good for the Country" context.

To simply say that someone should compromise leaves way too much room to legitimize legislation that's bad for the nation as a whole.

We'd win lots more elections and favorable public opinion if we just send a clear message of where and what we stand for.

ellisonz

(27,711 posts)
4. We've got to pull in independent voters.
Sun Jan 15, 2012, 06:09 PM
Jan 2012

And acting like the Republicans, and engaging in polarization without the prospect for success, will lose us those independent voters who tend Republican at a higher rate.

"good for the Country" is stating the principle of compromise is always available; it is the foundation of our democracy, however, shamefully it has been applied in the past.

I don't want to just beat the Republicans, I want to change the game; I think that's what Barack has been after too. It's a rope-a-dope strategy.

P.S. Happy New Year!

 

AnotherMcIntosh

(11,064 posts)
6. "clear message of where and what we stand for" - For some, it's already understood as capitulation
Sun Jan 15, 2012, 07:24 PM
Jan 2012

by someone who claims to be a Centrist when we overwhelmingly voted for Democrats.

This allows for a continuing representation of the 1% to the detriment of the rest of us.

 

AnotherMcIntosh

(11,064 posts)
5. At any time, he could have ordered the Senate's business to proceed unless there was actual talking.
Sun Jan 15, 2012, 07:17 PM
Jan 2012

People are presumed to intend the natural consequenses of their action.

He never ordered the Senate's business to proceed because he did not intend to do so.

He, with the support of the MSM, created the fiction that his advance withdrawal of any meaningful Senate proposals was due to filibusters.

Saying that there are insufficient votes to invoke cloture under Senate Rule XXII, even if that is believed in good faith, is not equivalent to a filibuster.

There haven't been any filibusters. Not one. Nada. Zilch.

Of course some people, like those who are willing to call a cow a horse, are readily willing to accept the fiction and parrot the fiction that there were filibusters. They are willing to say and believe that modern filibusters don't require actual talking. They are willing to believe that those who point out that there have been no filibusters are just nostalgic for an old movie. These are the same type of people who would readily call a cow a horse simply because someone in a position of apparent authority explained to them that a modern horse is a cow. It's simple nonsense. It's in front of they eyes and it is still nonsense. The Emperor's new suit is not there no matter how many pundits in the MSM say that there is a new suit.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Harry Reid wants end to G...