More filibuster

Ezra notes an important politico-media dynamic:

When minority Democrats sought to slow the Republican agenda by asserting filibuster power far more infrequently, Republicans convinced the media to tar them as "obstructionists" unwilling to permit "yes-or-no votes." Conversely, the Democrats, facing a much greater display of intransigence, have been deemed ineffectual by the media, and the situation has been represented as if they are inexplicably failing to pass their agenda, rather than watching the Republicans act to block it.

Indeed. Whether it's that the media is intentionally complicit with the GOP or that Democrats are significantly clumsier manipulators of the media, or some combination of the two, the difference in coverage at least seems extremely stark. That said, the "obstructionism" charge didn't work out all that well in the end for the GOP--it looked pathetic compared to the (brilliant) "Do Nothing Congress" appellation--and even if the media shocked everybody and got the issue right, I don't suppose much would change.

Also, if you look closely at this chart, you'll notice something about the "obstructionism" charge that usually goes overlooked.

Back in 2006 when the Republicans were whining and whining about how stubborn the Democrats were (and threatening to eliminate the filibuster on judicial nominees and on and on), they were basically complaining about the Democrats' use of the same filibuster threats that they're using to gum everything up right now. You'd think, given all that noise, that the Democrats had set some sort of record in the 109th. But you'd be wrong. The Democrats did put up quite a show, threatening to filibuster 54 pieces of legislation over the course of the two year session. But the record at that point was an impressive 61, set during 107th Congress--better known as the last time the Republicans were the minority party in the Senate.