.. if you want to read more detail of the GOP plan to destroy bipartisanship in American politics read that one .. it's the fist link in the one this post replies to ..
"Seven Years Late, Media Elites Finally Acknowledge GOP's Radical Ways"
See one article from that series link at the bottom of this post. Chuckle.
Imperfect Union: The Constitutional roots of the mess we're inIn “It’s Even Worse Than It Looks,” Washington-based scholar/pundits Norm Ornstein and Tom Mann remark several times that the way to look at the dysfunction and gridlock of recent years is that the U.S. political parties are behaving more and more like parties in a parliamentary system, but the American system does not work with that style of partisan behavior.
Because of their structures, parliamentary systems are relatively gridlock-proof. Our system — absent the grease of partisan cooperation and compromise — is particularly gridlock-prone.
[...]
I know that the Constitution has the status of sacred text. I know that it is also almost impossible to amend. So in describing the relative advantages and disadvantages between a parliamentary and a presidential system, I know that the chance is nil that the United States would consider the kind of fundamental structural changes necessary to move in the parliamentary direction.
Never forget the GOP's reaction to the election of a black president. What was that reaction? Well, all should know before now, but just in case it hasn't been set in neuronal concrete yet...
Democrats Duped by the Caucus Room Conspiracy
By The Daily Take Team The Thom Hartmann Program
Published November 6, 2014
Obama for America/Christopher Diltz)” width=”640? height=”426? />
Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. (Photo: Obama for America/Christopher Diltz)
Dear Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Schultz,
You’ve been played for a sucker by the Republicans, and it worked.
Tuesday night’s blow to Democrats could have been prevented; in fact, you could have won big, nationally. But you lost, and here’s why.
Back on the night of January 20, 2009, when most US citizens were out celebrating the end of the Bush years, and Barack and Michelle were dancing at the inaugural balls, a group of powerful Republicans was planting the seeds of your loss this week.
At the Caucus Room restaurant here in Washington, DC, Republican leaders drew up a plan to sabotage President Obama at every point possible and deny him any sort of legacy.
Over juicy steaks and fancy cocktails in a private room in the back of the restaurant, the Republican bigwigs promised each other that they would filibuster and obstruct any and all legislation supported by President Obama.
Congressman Pete Sessions, who was at the four-hour long dinner, even promised to use “Taliban-like” tactics to achieve those goals.
Kevin McCarthy, now the Majority Whip, said that they’d obstruct every single piece of legislation. That includes things the Republicans used to support.
The Caucus Room conspiracy had three major objectives.
The first was to use obstruction – knowing the corporate media would call it “gridlock” as if the Democrats were responsible, too – to prevent President Obama from having any legislative success.
The second was to sabotage any legislative victories that the president did manage to win – like Obamacare – and convince US citizens that they were actually failures.
And the third was to blame all the economic damage caused by Republicans on BOTH parties and then come out in a critical election like 2014 and say that Republicans are the party that will make things right in Washington as if the state of the economy was the Democrats’ fault.
Based on Tuesday night’s shellacking, it looks like the Caucus Room conspiracy was a success.
But here’s the thing.
Democrats could have pointed out the relentless obstruction by Republicans.
They could have highlighted the constant filibusters by Republicans in Congress with regular political theater by doing stunts in front of the Capitol building every time the Republicans filibustered or refused to consider a bill.
Democrats could have called out what was going on for what it was, sabotage and they could have made the Caucus Room conspiracy a household phrase.
Instead, Democrats played right into Republicans’ hands, so the Caucus Room conspiracy was wildly successful.
Democrats didn’t point out the Republican obstruction. Democrats didn’t point out the real cause of all the so-called “gridlock.” And Democrats didn’t point out what Republican voter suppression and obstruction efforts were really all about.
And, to make matters even worse, as the New York Times points out, US citizens had absolutely no idea what either party stood for in this election.
Neither party really ran on the issues affecting US citizens.
Instead, Republicans near universally ran on the President Obama’s inability to overcome the Caucus Room conspiracy, and it worked like a charm.
Meanwhile, Democrats failed to show Us citizens how they were different from Republicans.
Democrats failed to run on their platform, and to publicize the issues that US citizens really care about.
In 2012, the Democratic Party published their platform. Among other things, it outlined the party’s plans to put people back to work, grow the middle-class, reform Wall Street, reel in campaign spending and enact sensible tax reform.
Where was all the talk about these issues in this last election? Why wasn’t this platform out there for the US people to see? Why weren’t candidates across the country highlighting these issues, and their plans to tackle them?
If Democrats had clearly shown the US people what they stood for, and called out the Republicans every time they tried to obstruct legislation that the people want, then the Caucus Room conspiracy would have backfired on the Republicans.
But while that’s now all in the past, there’s still time for Democrats to turn things around for 2016.
That turn-around starts with Democrats clearly showing the US people what the party stands for.
Democrats need to take a page out of the Truman playbook, and make the differences between Democrats and Republicans as clear as night and day.
If Democrats can get that right, it’ll put the terms of the 2016 election in the landscape of traditional Democratic positions and values, which the US people – even in the deep south – overwhelmingly support.
Just look at the ballot measures – raising the minimum wage won hugely in Arkansas, for God’s sake.
Meanwhile, Democrats also need to step up and embrace their progressive base, instead of marginalizing them.
Republicans are great at embracing their base, and Democrats need to start doing the same thing with the progressive movement.
For proof of the potential success of such a strategy, look at Al Franken and Jeff Merkley – it was progressives who came away with the biggest wins for Democrats on Tuesday.
So, Chairwoman Schultz, yes Tuesday was rough, and yes, Democrats took quite the beating.
But there’s still time for the party to turn things around, and to learn some valuable lessons from 2014.
The Caucus Room conspiracy may have worked this time, but let’s make sure it doesn’t happen again.
REUTERS/Jim Bourg The current expectation for 2015 is that the Republicans will hold onto a substantial House majority and the Senate will settle somewhere near 50-50.
Writing for the current Harper’s, French historian Jean-Philippe Immarigeon offers a bold suggestion for U.S. constitutional reform that’s captured in a deliberately provocative essay title: “Dissolve Congress.”
Unlike some frustrated Americans, he doesn’t imagine the members of the U.S. Congress being dropped en masse into a boiling cauldron of acid. By “dissolve,” he means that the United States should do what most democracies around the world do when their governments are deadlocked: adjourn the current session and call an election based on the issues that are causing the gridlock. Of course, the U.S. Constitution doesn’t allow for such a thing, but Immarigeon thinks it would be good if it did.
“There is nothing more tiresome to an American than to be lectured by a Frenchman,” Immarigeon acknowledges with good humor (and considerable accuracy). But he notes that this feature is common to most democracies around the world. It doesn’t always produce the desired result, which presumably is a period of constructive action (or perhaps constructive inaction, if that is what the electorate has endorsed) in the government.
It’s widely assumed that nothing very substantial will happen in 2014, while we wait for an election that in all likelihood won’t settle anything anyway.
The current expectation for 2015 (pending the next this-changes-everything moment, like the government shutdown, or like the Obamacare rollout snafu, which like those previous this-changes-everything moments won’t change everything) is that the Republicans will hold onto a substantial House majority, the Senate will settle somewhere near 50-50, and Obama — this is not speculation — will remain in the Oval Office through mid-January of 2017. In other words, the situation will remain high in gridlock potential.
Immarigeon didn’t even go into that. He doesn’t address the fact our system creates multiple power centers, all chosen on different schedules and different bases. He merely thinks it would be a good idea to let the electorate choose a new Congress with fresh democratically-produced instructions on how to proceed.
Too many unanswered questions. Sen Feinstein gave Prof Ford's letter with concerns about Brett Kavanaugh's character to the FBI last June... -what did the FBI do with the letter from Sen Feinstein? -did the FBI inform Trump there was a problem in Kavanaugh's background? -did Trump ignore the FBI because he doesn't like the FBI, and just plowed ahead with the Federalist Society's candidate? Jamming Brett Kavanaugh's SC appointment through is coming back to bite the GOP... THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU TRY TO JAM THROUGH A SUPREME COURT APPOINTMENT By Dana Milbank Columnist September 17 at 8:04 PM Insert excerpt: And Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) was resolutely silent until late Monday, when the architect of the plan to deny President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland, a hearing for 293 days went to the Senate floor and complained that Democrats didn’t follow “standard bipartisan process” by raising the allegations earlier. But he said the allegations would be reviewed “by the book.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/this-is-what-happens-when-you-try-to-jam-through-a-supreme-court-appointment/2018/09/17/2400f25c-babf-11e8-a8aa-860695e7f3fc_story.html?utm_term=.71df9002b2d3 https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=143669654
BOREALIS, latest Gallup has Trump at 38% approval so it looks basically only his bigoted, don't give a shit about Trump's fascist-like nature, cult core are happy with the idea of Kavanaugh being on the Supreme Court. "36 percent of adults surveyed did not want Kavanaugh in the Supreme Court" Yet it appears at the moment the Dems. may need to press even harder if they want to keep Kavanaugh out. POLITICO Playbook: GOP pushing Kavanaugh nom back on track https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=143669656
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
