Interesting ... potential DoD bill clusterfu*k

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

And if it doesn't pass, that might be even better, because he can tar Democrats with the "OBSTRUCTIONIST!" brush.

[/ QUOTE ]

I try to follow these threads but I haven't heard much about the Dems other than Mr. K's comments on immigration above. Doesn't this same logic mean the Dems are going to do as much as they can to stay out of the way so that they won't be labeled obstructionist?

And that, with infighting rather than the Dems taking the blame, the Republicans absolutely have to find a way to compromise and pass this bill so that they don't appear incompetent? Historically, the Republicans always seem to be able to unite at the end of the day.

[/ QUOTE ]

The "meaty" issues from a campaign politics standpoint are things like the wiretapping bill and some of the piecemeal immigration policies that Congress could consider this week. These are digestible chunks of policy that lend themselves well to soundbytes, whereas the public will roll its eyes at words like "authorization" and "appropriations". Under any scenario this week, a number of "must-pass" bills will not in fact pass until after the elections, and the public largely won't know or care.

However, I think Hastert may perceive the opportunity for a soundbyte if there's a blow-up of some kind on the DoD Authorization this week, particuarly if Senate Democrats like Dick Durbin refuse to roll for him. Of course, this is ironic on a couple of levels, not least of which because Hastert's gambit is far more likely to hold up the legislation than anything the Democrats might do. But "obstructionist" is one of those labels that just seems to stick to Democrats, just like "flip-flop" does.