The liberal equivalent of this defunding tactic is if the Dems threatened to defund the defense budget every time they disagreed with it (probably 100% of the time, given their unending criticisms of the "military industrial complex" and just about every new weapon system). Unless Congress has enough votes to override a veto, defunding is a losing tactic if pushed to the ultimate conclusion - a departmental shutdown. Thanks to the weeks of debate prior to the defunding effort, the issue of Obama's unilateral amnesty has been publicized. The public knows what's at stake. It's time to stop ragging on the Congressional leadership for merely doing what is necessary to keep the essential elements of government going. Not everyone's a Freeper. If a large-scale terror attack had occurred during an actual DHS shutdown, the GOP would have caught a lot of flak.
Anyone who thinks defunding is a way for Congress to get around the need for a veto-proof margin against a hostile president is profoundly mistaken. For Congressional majorities to prevail more of the time, steps must be taken to reduce the power of the presidency by passing a constitutional amendment (1) reducing the margin needed to override (i.e. 55% or 60% instead of 66%), or (2) requiring the election of several co-presidents, in the style of the Roman triumvirates, such that a veto only goes into effect if a majority of the co-presidents exercise their veto power.
You are leaving out the fact the defunding effort was not because they disagreed with the budget, but to reign in a President who has gone rogue, thumbing his nose at the Constitution, and usurping power he doesn’t have. Do you really think if a Republican president starting exceeding his constitutional authority as commander-in-chief the Democrats wouldn’t try to stop him by denying funding? I believe the Republicans would join them readily. If I remember right, the Democrats did try, or at least call for defunding the Iraq war.
The Republican leadership decided this was the best method to stop Obama, after they gave him everything he wanted in the “Cromnibus” bill. They were obviously lying to America, and simply buying time to surrender while creating the scenario that they couldn’t win.
The fact is, the Republicans started surrendering this battle as soon as it was announced. They could have very easily gotten the same information out to the low information voters if they had stood firm, and aggressively attacked the President, and his over reach. Granting amnesty to illegal aliens is unpopular, and cuts across party lines. The Republicans wanted this outcome, and they wanted people to be able to defend them with some degree of credibility that they couldn’t win. The truth is, they set up the unwinnable situation, they weren’t victims of it.