The stimulus package wasn't written using 'regular order' and did not come up through the committee and subcommittee process. There was a good reason for this...expediency. But that doesn't change the fact that the Republicans had no opportunity to influence the bill in committee.

This is a partially bogus claim.  The part that did not come up through regular order was the drafting; there were no hearings, no Republican participation in the drafting.  Not as egregious as Republicans are claiming.

Republicans participated in committee in markup, offering amendments, discussing issues with the bill, and showing themselves to be as interested in how much and how fast money would come to their districts as Democrats were.  Some of their amendments were incorporated into the bill that went to the floor.  On the floor, Republicans offered extensive amendments, some of which were passed.  The Republicans dominated the Senate process, with exactly the right number allowed to sign on to the bill.  And Republicans were on the conference committee.

There is a little, but very little, to support the Republican whining.  I comes nowhere near to the way that Democrats were shut out of the legislative process for six years.

It is political posturing, pure and simple.  The first time I heard the words "regular order", it was from John Boehner on the floor of the House.  Before that House floor vote there was not a peep.

50 states, 210 media market, 435 Congressional Districts, 3080 counties, 192,480 precincts

This is meant as a question rather than a pronouncement:

You've voiced this theory before, and it makes sense. But does it take in the Limbaugh factor, which is pushing from the other direction? If a congressperson thinks the wingnuts in his district are crucial to reelection, then by that logic no accomplishment need be demonstrated other than having opposed Obama at every turn. This may be a kamikaze approach, but I would hardly put that past them. In other words, either there may be some logic to continuing to oppose Obama, or there may not, but if not, I wouldn't necessarily assume they are  making rational choices. Maybe they are allied with or at least scared of Limbaugh, who is just trying to do asmuch damage as possible.
    Those who stay with this approach will certainly be marginalizing themselves nationally, but will continue to make a lot of noise and get disproportionate attention.
   

I have another theory about why the Republicans are taking an obstructionist stance.  At the moment, the Democrats have an extremely popular President, a big margin in the House, and a fair margin in the Senate.  If things go well in the first year or two of the Obama Presidency, the GOP could get obliterated in the 2010 mid-term Congressional elections, reducing them to a totally irrelevant party for the forseeable future.  So they have calculated that they must throw the kitchen sink at Obama now, to prevent him gaining the political momentum that would prove fatal to the GOP.

Okay, so how long do we wait to determine is this is the pattern and at what point do we have to go to a new theory?

I still maintain the Republican Party of the United States must be obliterated, it's institutions dissolved, it's members scattered and a new party, one that actually believes government can be a positive in people's lives, comes to power. Call if a liberaltarian wing, call it Tories, or even Real Conservatives but the modern Republican party must be dissolved.

150 years is long enough. Only the Democratic party can evolve and change to meet the times for eternity.*

*Couldn't help it, triumphalism! Ha.