Welcome to politics. Clinton was the nastiest we had seen in a long time. Then we got Bush, and that was the nastiest we had seen in a long time. Then we got Obama, and THIS is the nastiest we have seen in a long time. And guess what...when we get Romney, it's likely going to be more of the same. That's sadly the age of politics we live in and it's going to take some kind of major shake up to change that. People point that there's been a "record" number of fillibuster's used during Obama's term. And that's true. However, it's also a snap shot that people are trying to suggest have some critical historical significance that proves the Republicans are acting in some dastardly unusual way. Do you know under what President the previous historic high was with? George Bush early in his presidency. And do you know who had the record before that? Clinton. Then the first Bush. That's in terms of actual cloture and voting. In terms of filing, it went up under Clinton, then down, then back up over Obama...howevere, the entire stretch since Clinton has been sigificantly higher than anytime before. The rise in the use of Fillibuster's began in 1990 and has been mostly making an updward movement since then, depending on the senate makeup. Democrats and Republicans have routinely been contesting the other for who gets to hold the record. Both sides have been playing the investigation and witch hunt game...the only difference between them is their views on the legitimacy of each witch hunt and investigation. Namely, Liberals in general think the ones they have done were worthy, justified, completely legitimate investigations and everything the Republicans have done were political witch hunts...and vise versa for Republicans. The cries of "Stop it already" is going to sound rather hollow, in part becuase this happens every freaking election cycle in recent memory and in and of itself...especially given your tone...sounds like it's as much a political motivated ploy as many of the things you complain about rather than some kind of principled stand. It makes it sound like this is something you're bitching and complaining about and asking people to stop not because you honestly have a probelm with it...but because you have a problem with it because it's YOUR guy and its things YOU don't think matter. Your tone and rhetoric give the impression that if this situation was reversed that you wouldn't be suggesting the actoins are rising to the point of hysteria and getting out of hand and asking people to stop it but would be arguing about how legitimate it is, how necessary it is, and telling people to "deal with it, it's what people have done in the past"...you know, like the way you justified the one thing you acknowledge was actually done problematic in your post above. So I can't really blame people for basically treating your post the exact same way it appears, by your own post, you would treat it if the situation was reversed. I hope and wish we get to a point where things aren't QUITE this contentious, but I sadly don't see it happening anytime soon and I highly doubt that whatever action that turns things around will occur during a major election cycle.
well then this is apropos indeed. Because Jon Stewart ripped the DoJ and the President for exerting executive privilege over Fast and Furious.
