An Open Letter to President Obama About the Republicans (From a Former Republican)

[Pharaoh]

Dear President Obama: I know that from time to time you read Huffington Post because you've written for it. As a Huffington Post reader you'll know that no one on this web site has more faithfully supported your candidacy and now your presidency than me. As a former lifelong Republican, son of a co-founder of the Religious Right; my late evangelical leader father, Francis Schaeffer, I'm in a unique position to tell you a few things about the Republicans from inside perspective. (As you know I left that movement in the mid 1980s.)

The lack of cooperation you're getting from the Republican Party will continue. You were right to indulge in a little bit of tokenism when you had to Pastor Rick Warren pray at your inauguration. But if you think that the Republicans in Congress and the Senate are going to do more than their utmost to obstruct everything you are and what you stand for you're dreaming.

As someone who appeared numerous times on the 700 Club with Pat Robertson, as someone for whom Jerry Falwell used to send his private jet to bring me to speak at his college, as an author who had James Dobson giveaway 150,000 copies of my one of my fundamentalist "books" allow me to explain something: the Republican Party is controlled by two ideological groups. First, is the Religious Right. Second, are the neoconservatives. Both groups share one thing in common: they are driven by fear and paranoia. Between them there is no Republican "center" for you to appeal to, just two versions of hate-filled extremes.

The Religious Right supply the kind of people who at McCain and Palin rallies were yelling things such as "kill him" about you. That's the constituency to which your hand was extended when looking for compromise on your financial bailout bill.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-schaeffer/an-open-letter-to-preside_b_165359.html:dem: :dem: :dem:

[Richard D]

1. That's speaking the truth.

KR

[RoyGBiv]

2. Tokenism ...

This is a good word to use.

I don't know Obama's mind any more than any of us do, but I've watched how he works, and we all witnessed his campaign. I think this could teach us a few suggestions about what he could be doing if we're willing to open up and pay attention.

I don't believe, deep down, that Obama truly believes any such thing regarding the willingness of Republicans by and large to work with him or compromise. However, as a matter of political strategy, it's important that he appears that he does. Since at least Clinton, whenever Democrats are in positions of power, the Republican have chosen one of two tactics to blunt that power. They either smear, or they obstruct.

Obstruction is a funny thing that Democrats understand too well for their own good. If you do it poorly, you look like a fool. And, Democrats do it poorly. Republicans, on the other hand, based on years and years of hard experience as a minority party, at least in Congress, got very good at it. The key to being an obstructionist is to create situations where policies fail and then blame those failures on your opponents. Witness the Clinton years for clear examples of this in action.

Obama knows this, and he also knows there is a counter to this tactic. Force your political opponents up front to own their own actions. By bending over backwards in an apparent attempt to reach out to the right, Obama has left them owning ever word they've uttered and every action or non-action they've committed. "We opened up the floor to you," he can now say, "but your strategy all along, as shown by internal memos, was to obstruct no matter what." Which side "wins" this battle involves a lot of variables, but Obama's actions so far have kept him on the playing field and in a very strong position politically.

It's interesting to note that as far as the stimulus bill is concerned, Obama asked for one thing. The House passed another, and a version of that bill then entered the Senate. The "watered down" version of the bill that passed the Senate in turn looked a lot more like the things Obama originally said he wanted, and it *appeared* to be a compromise that Republicans then refused to vote for. Indeed, this is one reason they didn't vote for it despite so-called concessions to their position. They are aware of what Obama is doing and are swinging in the wind to try to react to it.

And there's another key word, "react." Reactionaries have a long history of failing.

In short, Obama is keeping the initiative thus far, and he much needs that.

I appreciate what the author of this piece is saying. I also agree, regarding the stimulus bill, that it is imperfect and should have been much more expansive. However, from Obama's perspective, that more expansive bill is not what he initially asked for, so, for him and his plan, he got close to what he wanted in policy and most of what he wanted in the realm of political theater.

[ellenfl]

3. K & R! eom

[ggould1]

4. If you're suggesting that Obama give up his attempt

for bipartisanship, I'd have to disagree. It makes him look good and they are revealed for the sullied creatures they are.