U.S. Sen. Patty Murray reportedly wants more women elected to Congress, insisting that congressional gridlock could be overcome with additional women running things. "We are multi-taskers ... you know, we don't mess around," she was quoted as saying.

Setting aside the dubious plausibility of that statement and the stunning sexism that liberals profess to deplore, maybe she has a point. As prospects for office, I suggest Sarah Palin, or say, Liz Cheney, or former Bush press secretary Dana Perino or perhaps several lady tea party members.

Oh, you think that's not what the Senator had in mind? Would she not invite conservative women to participate? Would only approved left-wing radicals be welcomed into this efficient sisterhood Murray envisions?

Sen. Murray was the Democratic leader of the failed "super committee." She has shown no contrition for the embarrassing fiasco she helped to craft. Her party controls the presidency, the Senate and the press, but she's convinced it's that pesky House of Representatives that the voters saddled her with last year that's causing the grief.

Murray has done nothing to bring conciliation to government. Her own intransigence and mindless hyperpartisanship expressly share substantial blame for the stalemate she sanctimoniously denounces.

Henry Johnson, Kennewick