You see, most liberal newscasters, writers, bloggers, etc. complain about the constant filibuster techniques being used by the 40 senate Republicans. This brings me to my first point for Jamie. That number would be 41, if the Senate Democrats hadn't already stalled for 13 days in the process of swearing in Scott Brown. Secondly, there would be no filibuster if Democrats had drawn up a good, solid bill that all 60 Democrats could agree on. However, the far left Dems drew up an original bill that was so extreme, many of the more moderate Dems were against it. When they finally did come close to reaching a bill that the Democrats, and only the democrats, agreed on, it was too late. The American people, represented by the DEMOCRAT state of Massachusetts said no. They elected a Republican senator, because even in one of the most liberal states in the country, the people did not want the healthcare bill. What does that tell you about the Democrats in Congress? They are being anything but bipartisan.
Maybe if Obama, or a single one of the Democrats in Congress stopped and thought about their policies for just one second, they would maybe, just maybe realize that their policies are so far to the left, the Republicans have no choice but to actively oppose them. Very few people in America want nationalized health care in the from the Democrats are proposing. At this point, those 41 Republicans are representing the United States better than the 59 Democrats.
In short, what this country needs from Obama and his fellow cronies in congress, is pure bipartisanship. Obama promised to be bipartisan throughout his campaign, but once he saw he had a Democratic Congress, he entirely forgot his promises. If Obama, and his fellow Democrats in Congress want any hope of saving the country, and being re-elected, they need to draw up a bill that is so good, it gets near unanimous support, from both sides of the aisle. However, given their mono-partisan views in the past 380 days, I have severe doubts as to whether that will happen.
