Dear Proxy,

Allow me to give you a recent quote:

According to the "Los Angeles Times,"
"Last week the Democratic senator for
Indiana announced his retirement from
politics, saying he couldn't take
Washington's "brain dead" hyper-partisanship
any longer. "For some time, I have had a
growing conviction that Congress is not
operating as it should," he declared.
"There is too much narrow ideology. Even
at a time of enormous challenge, the
people's business is not being done."
Few would disagree. The sort of cross-party
"comity" that characterised past congresses
is entirely absent today: senate democrats
couldn't count on EVEN A SINGLE REPUBLICAN
to break ranks and support their healthcare
reform proposal!"

"Here we go again," said Charles Krauthammer
in, "The Washington Post."

"Extreme partisanship is not new to US politics,"
said Peter Beinart in "Time," magazine.
"There's no doubt the OBSTRUCTION OF LEGISLATION
for party-political advantage has risen dramatically
in recent years. Take the filibuster, for instance.
In the early days of the Senate, politicians only
resported to this tactic to block bills about once
a decade. As late as the 1960s, senators filibustered less
than 10% of legislation. Last year, by contrast,
Republican senators blocked a "stunning 80% of MAJOR
LEGISLATION." Republicans in particular are
deliberately sabotaging effective government, knowing
voters will take out their anger on the party in
charge...To break this "vicious-circle politics,"
America needs to tapp into public disenchantment
with the present system..."

I do my research prior to posting.
I also research more than one source.
I quote from experts who know what they are talking
about. I respectfully suggest that you do the same
in future.

By the way,
In any discussion, once you have to resort to
personal attacks - you've lost the argument - and end up
looking foolish or at worst - stupid!

At least you provide comic relief - which I suppose
counts for something! I should allow you to keep it up,
but I feel sorry for you - so I'm trying to give you
some advice in "saving face!" next time!

Foxy,
<<I quote from experts who know what they are talking about.
I respectfully suggest that you do the same in future.>>
You have unwittingly nominated Krauthammer as an expert so I'll quote him:
"the Democrats failed because, thinking the economic emergency would give them the political mandate and legislative window, they tried to impose a left-wing agenda on a center-right country. The people said no, expressing themselves first in spontaneous demonstrations, then in public opinion polls, then in elections -- Virginia, New Jersey and, most emphatically, Massachusetts.
That's not a structural defect. That's a textbook demonstration of popular will expressing itself -- despite the special interests -- through the existing structures. In other words, the system worked."

"The rage at the machine has produced the usual litany of systemic explanations. Special interests are too powerful. The Senate filibuster stymies social progress. A burdensome constitutional order prevents innovation. If only we could be more like China, pines Tom Friedman, waxing poetic about the efficiency of the Chinese authoritarian model, while America flails about under its "two parties ... with their duel-to-the-death paralysis." The better thinkers, bewildered and furious that their president has not gotten his way, have developed a sudden disdain for our inherently incremental constitutional system."
http://townhall.com/columnists/CharlesKrauthammer/2010/02/19/ungovernable__nonsense?page=full&comments=true

Of course, Krauthammer wrote this before Pelosi and Obama managed to underhandedly ram Obamacare through, by making false promises to Stupak, the Democrat pro-life dissident and his 30 Democrat followers.

Nevertheless, Krauthammer is saying the opposite of what your quote from him implies.
You should actually read more Krauthammer, as I do. You might learn something.

As for the moral posturing, I have lost count of the number of times you have called me ignorant, so cut the hypocrisy.

PS I like Krauthammer's dig at your hero Tom Friedman, who wishes that, just for a day, America could adopt the Chinese system so that they could more easily ram through unpopular legislation!

Dear Proxy,

The information that you've given me is
not relevant to what's being discussed.
Do try to keep up.

What is being discussed is current events.
And the information that I quoted, was issued
on 5th March 2010.

As for your being ignorant?

Did I really say you were?

Actually, - other adjectives
come to mind.

See you on another thread,
I'm done with this one.

Cheers.

Foxy,
I'm glad we've finally found something that we can both agree on!
Charles Krauthammer is also one of my favourite "experts who know(s) what (he is) talking about."

Here he is on Obama's arrogance and lawlessness:
"The arrogance and near lawlessness of this administration"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj7Kp5ZJL70

Here he is on Obama the con artist:
"Obama is selling snake oil"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sccH53-3Rw&NR=1

Dear Proxy,

You still awake?

My goodness, give it a rest -
Go to bed, have a good night's
sleep, relax.

This is a discussion that I'm trying to end.
I've said all I wanted to on the subject.

Sleep tight.

Foxy,
<<Republicans in particular in the US are
deliberately sabotaging effective government,
knowing voters will take out their anger on
the party in charge. Sound familiar?>>
(not attributed)
Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 26 May 2010 10:57:40 PM
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3655&page=0#88571

<<“Republicans in particular are
deliberately sabotaging effective government, knowing
voters will take out their anger on the party in
charge”>> attributed to Peter Beinart
Posted by Foxy, Thursday, 27 May 2010 8:17:40 PM
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3655&page=0#88665

Hmmm…
Sound familiar?
Or sound like plagiarism?