<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How Shelby&#8217;s Hold Exposes Obama&#8217;s Failure</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frumforum.com/how-shelbys-hold-exposes-obamas-failure/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frumforum.com/how-shelbys-hold-exposes-obamas-failure</link>
	<description>Building a conservatism that can win again</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 17:50:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: RobF</title>
		<link>http://www.frumforum.com/how-shelbys-hold-exposes-obamas-failure/comment-page-1#comment-82542</link>
		<dc:creator>RobF</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:55:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frumforum.com/?p=22090#comment-82542</guid>
		<description>I think the evidence of your counter-examples is not nearly as strong as you believe. You have built a case demonstrating that a 60-vote supermarjority requirement does not imperil the most popular of unfunded government give-aways and that it does not impede the occasional throttling of egregious pork-barrel politics. Fine. Point conceded. However, the filibuster does adversely impact the ability of the Senate to address difficult systemic issues involving entrenched interest groups. I notice that your list of legislative accomplishments from the George Bush era includes Medicare Part D, but makes no mention of Social Security reform or immigration reform. 

The filibuster does not stand in the way of our ability to increase deficits and debt. It does stand in the way of our ability to address some of the most pressing issues confronting us today -- issues like entitlement reform, climate change, and, yes, healthcare reform.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the evidence of your counter-examples is not nearly as strong as you believe. You have built a case demonstrating that a 60-vote supermarjority requirement does not imperil the most popular of unfunded government give-aways and that it does not impede the occasional throttling of egregious pork-barrel politics. Fine. Point conceded. However, the filibuster does adversely impact the ability of the Senate to address difficult systemic issues involving entrenched interest groups. I notice that your list of legislative accomplishments from the George Bush era includes Medicare Part D, but makes no mention of Social Security reform or immigration reform. </p>
<p>The filibuster does not stand in the way of our ability to increase deficits and debt. It does stand in the way of our ability to address some of the most pressing issues confronting us today &#8212; issues like entitlement reform, climate change, and, yes, healthcare reform.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

