SoylentNews

It provides a way to shift blame from the majority in power when they fail to pass needed legislation to get things done.

If miss-used by the minority as merely a "log-jam" to prevent anything from moving downstream then yes, it does provide this, and this would be one of those miss-use aspects I spoke of.

But, if the minority does not use the filibuster, and the majority still fails to pass needed legislation to get things done, then its presence was not related to the minorities failing. This is where you have to be careful. When the majority accuses the minority of "log-jamming" the works, you have to fact-check the majority to see if the minority actually used a filibuster or not. If no filibuster was used (which should be the case in most instances, provided the rule is "must keep talking at the lectern") then the majority is just talking out their ass.

But your attitude is so typical of democrat thinking: "I want my candy, and I want it now" -- without regards to any other consequences of "getting your candy".