# The obstructionist-GOP narrative... can we test/prove it? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 31, 2014, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071 "2014-08-31T20:15:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/61 "2014-09-02T16:18:00Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > Yes, I agree that that’s part of what makes this issue tough to quantify. Proposing a law which you are absolutely certain your opposition will filibuster/veto/whatever just to put them on the defensive when you propose your NEXT law, but meanwhile it’s making THEM look like the obstructionists, is a crafty strategy, but one which muddles conversations of this sort. That said, Occam’s razor says that if party A proposes a law and party B opposes it, the most likely situation is that party A actually DOES support that law, since after all that’s what they are fundamentally trying to do, pass laws. I don’t see what the last sentence has to do with the first two, or the point we’re discussing (or anything else, frankly). > [@](#): > > In any case, your claim that it’s the Dems who are constantly raising the obstructionism stakes is very strong belied by the filibuster-use graph that I just posted. Not so. There’s no fundamental difference between filibustering one bill and filibustering two. There’s no red line being crossed if you increase the number of filibusters. It makes for an interesting graph, but it’s not breaking new ground. The instances I raised were instances of new ground being broken. Which is in addition to the fact that filibusters don’t happen in a vacuum. Supposing Party A tends to advance more moderate positions to begin with while Party B goes all out for their core positions, then Party A will tend to be in the position of having to filibuster Party B’s bills (or nominees) more often than the reverse - which per your logic would then be a measure of Party A’s obstructionism. And in addition, the Republican claim at this particular time is that Reid has changed the rules on them in not allowing them to offer amendments on bills, which leaves them with no option other than filibustering, which was not the case previously. Assuming this is true, then number of filibusters is a partial and misleading measure. Although the counterargument would presumably be that the Republicans have expanded the use of amendments as an obstructionist tool. To which the counter-counter argument would be that no they haven’t (or that the Democrats did the same thing). And so on. All of which leaves us back where we started. > [@](#): > > (And note that the “nuclear option” is not a way to BE obstructionist, it’s a way to FIGHT obstructionism…) It’s a way to shove your positions down your opponents’ throats without having to give up on what you want. The focus on obstructionism is overly narrow, in context. The question - as you put it earlier - is how much you’re willing to bend in order to work with the opposition. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/62 "2014-09-02T16:33:33Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > There aren’t any Democratic office-holders spewing crap like implications that the President supports jihadists, or that the President is not a citizen, etc. Right. The old “but the other guys really _are_ crazy” routine. That’s what makes efforts to resolve this in an objective manner so futile. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/63 "2014-09-02T16:37:30Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Emphasis added. > > “Challenge” = “Obstruct”? Yes, in context that is pretty obvious. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/64 "2014-09-02T16:37:45Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > There aren’t any Democratic office-holders spewing crap like implications that the President supports jihadists, or that the President is not a citizen, etc. There were Democrat office-holders spewing crap like the 9/11 truther conspiracy theories (Cynthia McKinney, Mike Gravel). Democrat office holder MD Alam claimed the conspiracy theory that no Jews died in 9/11, several times, in several public interviews. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/65 "2014-09-02T16:48:27Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > There were Democrat office-holders spewing crap like the 9/11 truther conspiracy theories (Cynthia McKinney, Mike Gravel). It’s Democratic, not Democrat. You are making this mistake on purpose and repeatedly, and I will call you out each time. I said there aren’t any, present tense – and you found one in the past. Gravel hadn’t been in office for decades when he was spouting his nonsense. And McKinney rather quickly found herself unwelcome in the Democratic party. King, Bachmann, Gohmert, and the like are, apparently, very comfortable and accepted in the Republican party. There is no equivalent right now in the Democratic party. > [@](#): > > Democrat office holder MD Alam claimed the conspiracy theory that no Jews died in 9/11, several times, in several public interviews. What Democratic office did MD Alam hold? All I could find is failed candidacies. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/66 "2014-09-02T16:50:55Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Right. The old “but the other guys really _are_ crazy” routine. > > That’s what makes efforts to resolve this in an objective manner so futile. Wait – did I say something false? Or do you just not like the tone of it? You said that extreme opinions by Democrats are not criticized in the media as much as extreme opinions of Republicans. I countered this with examples of (IMO) extreme Republicans that have no current equivalent in the Democratic party. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/67 "2014-09-02T16:51:47Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > It’s Democratic, not Democrat. You are making this mistake on purpose and repeatedly, and I will call you out each time. Feel free. > [@](#): > > I said there aren’t any, present tense Apples to apples. Present tense is about Obama being a Kenyan. Past tense equivalent is Bush causing 9/11. > [@](#): > > What Democratic office did MD Alam hold? All I could find is failed candidacies. Democratic Party Committeeman of the 26th ward 2010-2012 National Chairman of US National Democratic Party Asian American Caucus ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/68 "2014-09-02T16:54:16Z")
Very impressive find, **Terr**. ;D ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/69 "2014-09-02T16:55:53Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > There aren’t any Democratic office-holders spewing crap like implications that the President supports jihadists, or that the President is not a citizen, etc. Just the Clinton campaign in 2008.😃 ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/70 "2014-09-02T16:58:34Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Apples to apples. Present tense is about Obama being a Kenyan. Past tense equivalent is Bush causing 9/11. So you can’t find any current Democratic office-holders who said equivalent things about Bush? > [@](#): > > Democratic Party Committeeman of the 26th ward 2010-2012 Thank you for using the correct descriptor! I guess you learn your lesson fast. 😃 > [@](#): > > National Chairman of US National Democratic Party Asian American Caucus Neither of these are elected political offices, which is what I was talking about. I’ll be clearer next time. If we go this deep on the Republican side, we could probably find hundreds who have made racist and anti-semitic statements. But that would be silly. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/71 "2014-09-02T17:00:23Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Just the Clinton campaign in 2008.😃 I don’t think I get the joke… they didn’t say Obama supported jihadists or that he wasn’t a citizen. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/72 "2014-09-02T17:04:38Z")
They didn’t say it, but on the downlow they were the ones behind investigating the rumors and taking advantage of them. [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/8478044/Birther-row-began-with-Hillary-Clinton.html](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/8478044/Birther-row-began-with-Hillary-Clinton.html) ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/73 "2014-09-02T17:11:28Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > So you can’t find any current Democratic office-holders who said equivalent things about Bush? Let me explain it slowly since you didn’t seem to understand last time. Apples to apples. Presently Democrat President, presently Republican conspiracy theorists. Past Republican President, past Democrat conspiracy theorists. Whether they are in office years later is irrelevant, just like it is irrelevant whether present Republican conspiracy theorists will be in office years from now. > [@](#): > > Neither of these are elected political offices, which is what I was talking about. You didn’t mention “elected”. And yes, one of these political offices was elected. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/74 "2014-09-02T17:15:52Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Let me explain it slowly since you didn’t seem to understand last time. Apples to apples. Presently Democrat President, presently Republican conspiracy theorists. Past Republican President, past Democrat conspiracy theorists. Whether they are in the office years later is irrelevant, just like it is irrelevant whether present Republican conspiracy theorists will be in office years from now. Democratic, not Democrat. You fixed yourself for one post, but now you’re back to the incorrect descriptor again. We are talking about the parties and their office-holders in the present. There are several present-day examples in the Republican party of such extremism, and no present-day examples in the Democratic party. It’s absolutely relevant if they’re still in office, because McKinney was chased out of the Democratic party precisely because of these crazy statements (and good riddance!). The Democratic party has a record of booting crazy-spewing people from their ranks. The Republicans (at present) have a record of not chasing them out. King, Bachmann, and Gohmert have not been chased out of the Republican party. I’ll ask you personally – do you want King, Bachmann, Gohmert, and the like holding office as Republicans, or not in the party? > [@](#): > > You didn’t mention “elected”. And yes, one of these political offices was elected. It was implied. And an elected party office is not an elected political office. You know very well I was talking about an elected government position. Going this deep in the woods will not bode well for the Republican party, as you probably know. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/75 "2014-09-02T17:20:53Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > They didn’t say it, but on the downlow they were the ones behind investigating the rumors and taking advantage of them. > [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/8478044/Birther-row-began-with-Hillary-Clinton.html](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/8478044/Birther-row-began-with-Hillary-Clinton.html) You really need to click on your own links. Even getting past the headline which falsely claims Hillary herself was behind it, the story itself places the origin with > [@](#): > > Andy Martin, a perennial local candidate and litigant and > [@](#): > > Phil Berg, an ex-deputy attorney general for Pennsylvania and a renowned conspiracy theorist Then Donald Trump embraced it and pumped it up, in his own inimitable way. IOW you \*should \*know better. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/76 "2014-09-02T17:21:48Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > They didn’t say it, but on the downlow they were the ones behind investigating the rumors and taking advantage of them. > [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/8478044/Birther-row-began-with-Hillary-Clinton.html](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/8478044/Birther-row-began-with-Hillary-Clinton.html) Stop the presses! They were investigating rumors about someone they were running against? Honestly bro, do you even try to weigh points before posting them? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/77 "2014-09-02T17:21:30Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > They didn’t say it, but on the downlow they were the ones behind investigating the rumors and taking advantage of them. > [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/8478044/Birther-row-began-with-Hillary-Clinton.html](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/8478044/Birther-row-began-with-Hillary-Clinton.html) “They” were some nutty supporters of Clinton, not the Clinton campaign. They should have more definitively shot it down at the time, but they weren’t responsible for Birtherism. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/78 "2014-09-02T17:24:39Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > We are talking about the parties and their office-holders in the present. There are several present-day examples in the Republican party of such extremism, and no present-day examples in the Democratic party. Of course not, with a Democrat President. When there is a Republican President, there won’t be Republican conspiracy theorists, but there definitely will be Democrat ones. > [@](#): > > I’ll ask you personally – do you want King, Bachmann, Gohmert, and the like holding office as Republicans, or not in the party? Don’t much care. I am not a Republican, and I don’t live in their districts. > [@](#): > > It was implied. And an elected party office is not an elected political office. Huh? It is elected, and it is definitely political. It is an elected political office. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/79 "2014-09-02T17:27:26Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > It’s absolutely relevant if they’re still in office, because McKinney was chased out of the Democratic party precisely because of these crazy statements (and good riddance!). The Democratic party has a record of booting crazy-spewing people from their ranks. The Republicans (at present) have a record of not chasing them out. King, Bachmann, and Gohmert have not been chased out of the Republican party. That’s not really true. It’s not their fault, in America a party cannot control its membership. Cynthia McKinney is actually significantly less nutty than Sheila Jackson Lee. > [@](#): > > I’ll ask you personally – do you want King, Bachmann, Gohmert, and the like holding office as Republicans, or not in the party? I’ll take up that one. I’d prefer that the GOP do a better job of selecting intelligent people of good character to run for Congress. The Democrats do a better job. I also believe though, that despite the image Democrats try to project, they are less of a grassroots party than the GOP, at least when it comes to candidate selection. There are no Democratic Dave Brats. The GOP’s crazy reflects the crazy of the base, and since we live in a democracy, I grin and bear it. I prefer it to party bosses handpicking candidates and only going to the voters for ratification of said hand-picked candidates. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071/80 "2014-09-02T17:31:55Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Of course not, with a Democrat President. When there is a Republican President, there won’t be Republican conspiracy theorists, but there definitely will be Democrat ones. Democratic, not Democrat. You got it right two posts ago – did you forget already? It’s relevant because the Democrats chased McKinney out of the Democratic party. _The Democrats chase out crazy-spewers. The Republicans welcome them._ > [@](#): > > Huh? It is elected, and it is definitely political. It is an elected political office. It’s not a government position. If you want to play these semantic games, then I’ll changed “elected political office” to “elected government office”. My point stands – you found one: McKinney. And she was chased out of the party. You found none still in the party. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-obstructionist-gop-narrative-can-we-test-prove-it/697071.md?page=5)