Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Rahmbo: From Now On, Policy First, "Bipartisanship" Second

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-13-09 03:33 PM
Original message
Rahmbo: From Now On, Policy First, "Bipartisanship" Second
Rahmbo: From Now On, Policy First, "Bipartisanship" Second
By Big Tent Democrat, Section Obama Administration
Posted on Fri Feb 13, 2009 at 02:25:35 PM EST
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2009/2/13/152535/863

From Jane Hamsher, good to see the Obama team recognize what some of the President's supporters refuse to see:
http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/13/house-passes-stimulus-package-and-bipartisanship-is-dead/

Mr. Emanuel owned up to one mistake: message. What he called the outside game slipped away from the White House last week, when the president and others stressed bipartisanship rather than job creation as they moved toward passing the measure. White House officials allowed an insatiable desire in Washington for bipartisanship to cloud the economic message a point coming clear in a study being conducted on what went wrong and what went right with the package, he said.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123449249590080699.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Beetwasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-13-09 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
1. The ONLY Reason They Can Say This NOW Is Because THEY TRIED
Edited on Fri Feb-13-09 03:36 PM by Beetwasher
very hard to be bipartisan FIRST. It gave them cover to put it on the back burner now.

Maybe this was the brilliant plan all along, maybe this is learing from mistakes, but the doing this NOW after having tried so very hard to be bipartisan first, makes this MUCH easier to do now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigdarryl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-13-09 03:39 PM
Response to Original message
2. Right on it should now be clear to the President these ASS WIPE republicans
have no intention of working with him. I think Obama made a big mistake thinking he could get these idiots to go along with him enough of this bipartisan bullshit Mr. President
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BOSSHOG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-13-09 03:42 PM
Response to Original message
3. BIPARTISANSHIP to the party led by rush limbaugh
you have to agree with us 100% of the time, otherwise we will whine that you are not being fair. Since they have whined since the President attempted to play, fuck them intensely from now on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tatiana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-13-09 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
4. They can say they tried. Now it's time to lay down the law and make them cry like babies. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-13-09 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
5. Works for me. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mucifer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-13-09 04:53 PM
Response to Original message
6. Huff Post: Rahm: Obama Lost Control Of Stimulus Debate
White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, in an interview with reporters, conceded that President Obama lost control of the stimulus debate by focusing too much on bipartisan outreach. The Wall Street Journal reports:

Mr. Emanuel owned up to one mistake: message. What he called the outside game slipped away from the White House last week, when the president and others stressed bipartisanship rather than job creation as they moved toward passing the measure. White House officials allowed an insatiable desire in Washington for bipartisanship to cloud the economic message a point coming clear in a study being conducted on what went wrong and what went right with the package, he said.

According to Emanuel, the White House "lost" control of the message for four days. He suggested that the president decided to change his tone after the House vote, when not a single Republican voted for the bill.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/13/rahm-obama-lost-control-o_n_166692.html

Rham is looking better today!

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-13-09 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. HuffPo misquoted the WSJ
The Original WSJ article used the phrase "Obama Team," not just "Obama," and Emanuel repeatedly used words like "we."

Emanuel didn't say Obama lost control. He said the team did. Including himself.

Just a clarification.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-13-09 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Thanks....next you'll hear that Rahm and Obama hate each other
and Rahm wishes he'd never taken the COS position. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mucifer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-13-09 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. The important thing he said was "screw bipartisanship" that made me happy.
I know I know "screw bipartisanship" isn't an exact quote. But, I say screw bipartisanship! :bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 02:12 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC