This is one of those times when more than one of the above selections (in fact, all but one) would be my answer were that choice available.
I voted, "No, because the two major political parties are too stubborn". However, I figure before falling back to their entrenched, "it's all the other guy's fault" positions, letting sequestration take place, they will pass yet another short-term continuing resolution to continue the pretense of the two parties seeking a route to a compromise neither party is interested in.
BTW Sequestration amounts to Congressional recognition that they aren't capable of doing their job when that job involves more than pandering for votes in the next election. This isn't a Democrat or Republican thing, this is an across the board unwillingness by the members of both parties to do anything other than campaign for office.
Comments
This is one of those times
This is one of those times when more than one of the above selections (in fact, all but one) would be my answer were that choice available.
I voted, "No, because the two major political parties are too stubborn". However, I figure before falling back to their entrenched, "it's all the other guy's fault" positions, letting sequestration take place, they will pass yet another short-term continuing resolution to continue the pretense of the two parties seeking a route to a compromise neither party is interested in.
BTW Sequestration amounts to Congressional recognition that they aren't capable of doing their job when that job involves more than pandering for votes in the next election. This isn't a Democrat or Republican thing, this is an across the board unwillingness by the members of both parties to do anything other than campaign for office.
Robert Ireland (PUFL)