I see your point and don't necessarily disagree except for the '94 revolution when Gingrich and the GOP House were able to strike a reasonable budget deal with Clinton, who was pragmatic enough to move to the center. Of course there was never really a budget surplus, but at least they were able to work together and cut a few reasonable bipartisan deals - unlike the current situation.Pilgrim, if history was only 6 years old we'd be all set. Problem: It goes on a good deal longer than that. Further, it's not Washington-specific. Watching these parties over a longer time, it does look like they're part of the same beast.
I voted solid Republican during the Republican Revolution of '94. Republicans won by a significant margin, controlled both houses of Congress, only the POTUS was in Democrat hands. You'd never know Republicans won though, they still acted like they had to kowtow to the Democrats. They got nothing done, and later seemed more interested in not losing than in really winning anything. Even when GWB took the White House in 2000, it took forever to get anything done in Congress-- with both houses AND the Presidency firmly Republican, they STILL had a tendency to act as if they were the "Loyal Opposition" rather than the government-- and Dems could still get their way by angry looks.
So-- now both houses are Republican-controlled again. I wonder why I don't expect Earth-shaking differences this time.
What gives the GOP a chance to accomplish something significant in the coming two years is three major problems created by Obama and the Democrats since his election: (1) Our record level of national debt (2) the illegal immigration mess and his threat to make it worse, and (3) ObamaCare and the impending collapse of our national health care system. If they have the spine to seriously tackle these issues the Stupid American Voters will go for them in a big way in 2016. If not, a 3d party candidate could arise and make some serious waves in the presidential election.