Obama’s Bipartisanship Is One Sappy Dream: Margaret Carlson

[SuperTrouper]

EXCERPT:

Feb. 19 (Bloomberg) -- In his long and sometimes snarky campaign, John McCain took to ridiculing Barack Obama and his supporters for imputing messianic qualities to the upstart candidate, mockingly referring to the Democrat as “The One.”

New evidence suggests McCain was on to something. In less than a month, Obama has breathed life back into a Republican Party the whole world took for dead.

Skeptics will argue that the GOP wasn’t really deceased, only knocked unconscious by a devastating blow otherwise known as the November election. Yet even Republicans were heard to mutter about whether their party could be revived. Who knew they’d soon be given mouth-to-mouth resuscitation by the miracle worker himself?

Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina shouted on the floor, “This bill stinks!” The de facto leader of the party, Rush Limbaugh, said he had only four words for the new administration. “I hope Obama fails.”

If chasing bipartisanship with Republicans wasn’t enough, Obama also sought it with the other branch of government, known as congressional Democrats.

Pelosi Takes Charge

Rather than dictate legislation from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., Obama gave over the drafting of the stimulus bill to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. If ever there was an instance to trust but verify, this was it.



http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601072&sid=aZdXr65lO_kk

[Captain Hilts]

1. It's good for the Prez to make a 'go' of bipartisanship.

It's good politics. And ultimately will be good for policy.

I would like him to be a tougher bargainer, but, in time, he will be. And I say that of ALL the Dems on the Hill. We've pasted the Rs in two consecutive national elections. Act like it!

This column is crap.

[EraOfResponsibility]

2. Obama has breathed new life into the Republcans

I don't THINK SO!

[depakid]

12. Not sure what planet you're on

But he most certainly has both emboldened them AND watered down the stimulus plan at the same time.

That was a lose/lose -as is his administration appearing o punt away the fairness doctrine and responsible media regulation.

No need to even mention the matter with Gregg.

[Cha]

13. Oh, you're predictable..if there's

anything negative about Obama..there you are piling on like the dog shit Planet.

[depakid]

16. Just calling it how I see it -and not being a yes man

Carlson was spot on- as was Peter Hartcher in the Sydney Morning Herald a couple of days ago.

The "bipartisan" game is a loser game, especially when the person playing it has unprecidented political capital and a madate for change.

[damonm]

35. Quite the contrary -

Carlson is wrong, as are you.
Obama has our support locked in.
Obama will NEVER have the far right.
He needs to hold the middle, and the middle hates, Hates, HATES partisan bickering.
When Obama tries bipartisanship, he looks like the good guy, doing what the middle wants.
When the Rethugs slap him, they look like the bad guys playing the partisan games the middle hates.
Obama GAINS support - Rethugs LOSE support.
Dems running for Congress in 2010 bask in Obama's popularity, and we gain the 60+ seat majority in the Senate.
Republicans become whiny afterthought.
Obama enacts full agenda.
America is better.
Repugs are shown to be true idiots.
Dems run country for 40 years again - longer, if we avoid a Vietnam-class error such as Johnson made.
Don't know how much simpler I can make it.

[Baltoman991]

15. Go take

a look at the polling for Congress. There you'll find out how the new and improved bold Republicans are playing to the American people.

[depakid]

17. Fact is, polls don't matter much to these folks- especially at this point

Fair or not, Obama's presidency will be judged on how well the economy responds to his initiatives. Republicans (who are far better plaeyers at the political game than Dems) know this well, and will do whatever they can to ensure that his programs don't work.

That's the reality- and the sooner Obama's team (and the "leadership" in Congress clues in on this- the better for all of us).

[Baltoman991]

18. I disagree

The Republicans WERE far better players at one point. The problem they have now is, and it started in 2006, the American people told them the game they were playing wasn't working. Did it change them? Nope, they played the same game for 2 more years and were told again in 2008, in bigger numbers that the game they're playing isn't working.

So no, the Republicans aren't far better players at the political game. They're the far better players at playing the losing game and the American people are continuing to tell them that. But they don't know any other way so they will continue to to lose elections until the wake up and figure out a new way to play the game.

[depakid]

20. THey STILL manage to beat the Dems at the policy level

Part of the reason for that is they're more skilled (and more ruthless) with parliamentary procedure and especially party discipline- and accountability for "sell out" members.

Glen Greenwald and John Judis wrote about this and its converse the other day:

Obama and Liberals: A Counter-Productive Relationship

The New Republic's John Judis today has an excellent analysis of the politics behind the stimulus package -- one which applies equally to most other political controversies. Judis argues that the stimulus package ended up being far inferior to what it could have been and points to this reason why that happened:

But I think the main reason that Obama is having trouble is that there is not a popular left movement that is agitating for him to go well beyond where he would even ideally like to go. Sure, there are leftwing intellectuals like Paul Krugman who are beating the drums for nationalizing the banks and for a $1 trillion-plus stimulus. But I am not referring to intellectuals, but to movements that stir up trouble among voters and get people really angry. Instead, what exists of a popular left is either incapable of action or in Obama's pocket. . . .

A member of one liberal group, Campaign for America's Future, pronounced the stimulus bill "a darn good first step." MoveOn -- as far as I can tell -- has attacked conservative Republicans for opposing the bill, while lamely urging Democrats to back it. Of course, all these groups may have thought the stimulus bill and the bailout were ideal, but I doubt it. I bet they had the same criticisms of these measures that Krugman or The American Prospect's Ezra Klein or my own colleagues had, but they made the mistake that political groups often make: subordinating their concern about issues to their support for the party and its leading politician.

By extremely stark contrast, Paul Krugman today explains why Republicans are so unified in their opposition to this bill and their willingness to uphold the principles of their supporters:

One might have expected Republicans to act at least slightly chastened in these early days of the Obama administration, given both their drubbing in the last two elections and the economic debacle of the past eight years. But it's now clear that the party's commitment to deep voodoo - enforced, in part, by pressure groups that stand ready to run primary challengers against heretics - is as strong as ever.

Much more: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/02/13-3

[Baltoman991]

23. Seriously

where has all this gotten them since 2006? It's gotten many of them sent home. I'm not disputing how ruthless they are or anything else.

What I'm disputing is that it's working or going to work. The American People are tired of the bullshit from the Republicans and all the games they play.

[depakid]

25. Givien the abject failure of all of their policies- brought home in no uncertain terms

by the economic meltdown, they did surprisingly well. And they're still mucking up the Democrats policies- or watering them down- keeping them off the table just as they have been since 2006 when the Dems ostensibly took back both houses of Congress.

Contrast that with how the Democrats performed during the 12 years of Republican rule in Congress and 8 years of the Bush administration.

[Juche]

24. I do think so

I hope Obama is just playing politics, knowing full well the GOP would never cooperate unless the dems caved into their ineffective policies and let them write the bills despite the fact that they lost by huge margins. At least that way Obama can go to the public and say 'I tried to be civil and be bipartisan, but they wanted to practice failed policies that only benefit the wealthy. So now we have to bulldoze the GOP to revive the economy and help the public'.

I think/hope that was his goal, as that is the result. Now the liberal base is angry about bipartisanship, the GOP has painted itself into a corner of mindless obstructionism, the public realized the GOP won't cooperate and are desensitized to it and Hoyer is pissed that Reid won't fight back against the GOP.

So hopefully this was all a big gambit by Obama to trick the GOP into being obstructionists that paid off in spades. But it honestly could just be a screwup on his part. No idea.

[damonm]

36. Come, now.

Given that we are talking about a Chicago-bred politician who came from virtual obscurity to beat the "inevitable" candidate, and then turned virtually every attack on him into a positive while trouncing the GOP hate machine, you HONESTLY think this is a screwup?
That makes about as much sense as a screen door on the space shuttle.

[WeDidIt]

3. Could Carlson nbe further off the mark?

I'd call it serious political ju-jitsu. "Bipartisan" is an election year buzz word. Noibody expects politicians to actually attempt it.

Obama breaks the mold and attempts it, relegating the GOP to the position of the bad guys.

[leftynyc]

4. I haven't read this woman's stuff

since I saw her say how much fun it was to make fun of Al Gore and that was why the press was so much harder on Gore than on Bush during 2000. She and the rest of the moronic media has much blood on their hands because "fun" was so much more important than facts. She's a worthless human.

[Jennicut]

21. Agreed. Lovely how so called "Dems" push this crap.

Its ridiculous. The Rethugs have not been emboldened, they have looked like fools. The Rethug govs who would not take the money a second ago are now changing their tune, not so surprising. Plus, Crist and Arnold are going to bat for Obama and the stimulus. The Rethugs are idiots and would let the country rot. People of all political backgrounds are starting to pick up on this. Also, if anyone is surprised by their "emboldened actions" one needs to go back to watch Clinton's early days. They did the same thing to him. They think it will work again. We lost control of Congress back then but this time I think the consequences are too big for politics. They may have just painted themselves in a corner. Obama, by trying to at least appear to be bipartisan comes off way more classy.

[Canuckistanian]

22. Yup, I can never forgive what she did to Gore

Of course, she was just being one of the "kool kids", but a journalist she ain't.

[alcibiades_mystery]

5. Carlson, Like Cokie Roberts, spends 10 hours of every day

Trying to figure out a way to make Democrats look bad.

She's an imbecile, and a flunkey.

[damonm]

6. Let her think so.

She's making the EXACT same mistake the GOP is - underestimating a guy who cut his political teeth in Chicago.

[Better Believe It]

7. This was a pretty good article, I couldn't find much in it to disagree with

Everyone should actually read the full article before commenting on it.

After Obama's election, Pelosi and Reid indicated they were not going to be mere rubber stamps for President Obama.

Just forget that fact that they acted like doormats for President George W. Bush.

Now, they have suddenly developed some backbone to assert congressional independence from the President. But they haven't abandoned their ability to surrender to the demands of so-called "moderate" Republicans in the Senate.

Well, Obama has certainly learned something from the early screw-ups of Pelosi/Reid and as the leader of the Democratic Party should assert that leadership. He will play the music and if Pelosi and Reid don't dance that will mark the end of their political influence and careers.

Pelosi or Reid were not elected the President of the United States.

[emulatorloo]

8. Agreed - best to read the whole thing before commenting

Carlson makes some great points, and she does it with a sense of humor. Happily I think Obama gets it too.

[damonm]

9. I find it interesting that...

whenever someone disagrees with your take on an article, you assume they didn't read all of it.

I did - I found LOADS to disagree with, including the basic premise.
To expect Rethug cooperation at this point would be to totally misread their mood. Such misreading is inconsistent with Obama's demonstrated ability to be attuned to public opinion, which is what got him elected.
Therefore, I reject the notion that Obama is ACTUALLY SEEKING bipartisanship at this phase. It is my opinion that he DOES seek it over the long haul - on HIS terms. And he is accomplishing this by letting the GOP hang itself. he knew damn good & well that Pelosi would load it up - thereby making room for cuts and negotiation. And whn the dust cleared, out from conference came a bill that was almost EXACTLY like what he's proposed to start with. And the Rethugs, despite concessions and outreach, voted against it - which was EXACTLY what Obama wanted.

Asked what he had learned from the stimulus tussle, Obama said again that “old habits are hard to break,” and added:

Now, just in terms of the historic record here, the Republicans were brought in early and were consulted. And you’ll remember that, when we initially introduced our framework, they were pleasantly surprised and complimentary about the tax cuts that were presented in that framework. Those tax cuts are still in there. I mean, I suppose what I could have done is started off with no tax cuts, knowing that I was going to want some, and then let them take credit for all of them. And maybe that’s the lesson I learned. But there was consultation. There will continue to be consultation.

Fifty years ago, the civil-rights movement understood that nonviolence can be an effective weapon even if—or especially if—the other side refuses to follow suit. Obama has a similarly tough-minded understanding of the political uses of bipartisanship, which, even if it fails as a tactic for compromise, can succeed as a tonal strategy: once the other side makes itself appear intransigently, destructively partisan, the game is half won. Obama is learning to throw the ball harder. But it’s not Rovian hardball he’s playing. More like Gandhian hardball.

Contrary to the premise of this article - that Obama's strengthened the Rethugs - he has in fact WEAKENED them, and the polling deltas show this unmistakably.

The author and you are making precisely the same error as the GOP - assuming he's a naif, and forgetting that Obama cut his political teeth in perhaps the toughest arena in America; Chicago.
This error will doom the GOP to back-bench status by this time in 2011.
You heard it here first.

[biopowertoday]

10. I would not discount the Repugs. They do seem to a new life lately.

[GinaMaria]

19. People usually rally once while dying

a burst of energy to say goodbye... not worried, I hear the death rattle. Hope the end isn't drawn out too long.

[biopowertoday]

27. yes, they do.

[Better Believe It]

14. Do you have inside information, Obama's confidence, or is it just wild speculation?

I don't mind your speculation about what is actually happening in Washington. But just don't present your guesses as the final word on political events that all of us must accept as the "gospel truth"!

[biopowertoday]

26. I never asked you to accept my opinion as the gospel truth.

[Better Believe It]

32. I don't Because I believe you are way off base with your wildly speculative guesses ....

and have failed to produce any documents, credible sources or facts that lend credence to your assertions.

[damonm]

37. And you're responding to the wrong person, methinks.

Talk about off-base.

[biopowertoday]

39. methinks you are right. Sorry for the confusion.

[biopowertoday]

38. Sorry to the confusion as I just realized I was responding to

the wrong person. very sorry.

[damonm]

33. It's called logic.

Based on:
1)Obama's victory
2)The poll data
and
3)Knowledge of just how tough a political arena Chicago is.

I cannot believe for a nanosecond that someone who started his political career there, ran a primary campaign that defeated the Clintons - that ALONE a herculean task, mind you - and then defeated the RW noise machine is such a naif as the Carlson article, along with others you've posted, paints him to be. Such an individual wouldnot be capable of what he's achieved to date. Given his track record to date, I trust his instincts far more than I do yours.

[Phx_Dem]

11. Margaret, buy some bigger glasses so you can see the big picture.

Margaret's message is, "if it isn't easy, don't even try." Dumbass.

[democracy1st]

28. thanks for posting I can deal with constructive criticism

[snot]

29. SO k&r'd.

[Hekate]

30. Margaret Carlson is carrying RW Kool-ade, I do believe. Rachel's take: GOP in Exile. nt

[dbmk]

31. Oh no!

Lindsey Graham shouted “This bill stinks!”!

The GOP won!
Game over, man. Game over.

If only Obama hadn't tried the bypartisan way. Then the Lindsey Graham would not shout things like that. I am sure.

I am willing to agree to some degree on the final conclusion. But the rest of the article is below elementary school level. She has _nothing_ and tries to create a story from it.

[IGotAName]

34. Carlson is just a terrible political analyst.

I've never heard a single insightful thing come out of her mouth.