Bipartisanship

Ed Morrissey wrote today at Hot Air:

"Here in Minnesota, we’re accustomed to the progressive definition of “bipartisanship.”  As my NARN radio partner Mitch Berg often points out, it usually means a Republican who supports higher taxes, spending increases, and criticizing everyone who opposes either or both.  We call those folks “Arne Carlson Republicans,” or “Democrats” for short.  Put another way, with apologies to Laura Ingraham, it’s the “shut up and spend” kind of bipartisanship."

Barack Obama Could Not Bipartisan His Way Out Of A Wet Paper Bag

*********************************
What is bipartisanship anyway? Don’t ask Barack Obama. Sure he talked a lot about how he will be bipartisan during the election. And it had it’s desired effect for him. It made him look like a uniter and the Republicans look like dividers. Well, good for his lying campaign . Just don’t look any closer or Obama does not come off looking so good. He had essentially no history of ever behaving in any bipartisan manner. And once elected, in spite of the promises he engaged in no bipartisanship.
By means of his surrogates he engaged in a scorched earth policy toward any and all opponents. It was all a lie. It was merely a campaign slogan. He is such a knife in your back partisan that he might not be able to work with the other party if it meant saving his own skin. So it is good that he virtually has kept his hands off what is happening in congress. So that if bipartisanship is ever necessary and possible he will have little influence to mess it up. Thankfully he is remains ignorant about the workings of Congress and why he might help himself there. And he is not building bridges. His main effect over there this session has been, by his presence at close elections, to help in the election of candidates hostile to himself and his party. That can’t be building his influence with the Democrats in either house.
Actually the majority of Americans would be, if they examined their beliefs and preferences, glad that Obama has been a total washout at the bipartisanship thing. Because of Obama’s lack in this area we have been spared cap and trade and it’s inflationary and recession producing monster attack of nation killing taxes. We have been spared card check. We were recently saved from an appointee to the NLRB who feels that workers should be denied the right to vote on whether or not they desire union membership: this man if given his druthers would have only allowed workers to vote on which union would represent them. And I hear Democrats are already experiencing buyers remorse on their thoughtless and little discussed appointment of Sonia Sotomeyer. But the main victory of our total lack of bipartisanship in Congress is Obama’s health care reform hoax. Partly because Obama could not bipartisan his way out of a wet paper bag that brutal atrocity of a misbegotten piece of legislation lies in two different but equally ugly and recession threatening pieces in the separate houses. Pelosi and Reid have little chance of putting Humpty Dumpty together in a passable bill without incurring the sure and certain wrath of the electorate. So, I guess thoughtful Americans who care about the preservation of their country and the economy that keeps it going should be thanking Barack Obama for being so much more a man of words than a man of action. Thank you, Barrack
Scott Brown is a better example of bipartisanship Democrats and Republicans and independents getting together to let Katy Couric, the president and his little friend Stephanopoulos know how they feel about their elite butts that don’t listen to the voters This is bipartisanship. This is political action that benefits everyone involved. And at this point the great ones in Washington are ignoring this as much as they think they can get away with. They are looking at it kind of like the fat girl looking in the mirror: they ignore the unsightly and life threatening fat and practice their long perfected ability to just look at the make up being applied.
Here’s one of the main lesions of this whole thing. If Barack is acting reasonable or like a uniter and his lips are moving he is lying. This is how he thinks he can best get over on the American public. Most of us have been smart enough to have learned our lesson. But you will continue to hear this BS from the MSM. That reasonable leader BS along with divisive and groundless accusations of racism and now birtherism. They are truly desperate. But they do not think themselves far enough gone to engage in true bipartisanship.

How Will We Know if Obama Is Serious About Bipartisanship?

If his surrogates ever quit going for the throat of every Republican they see.

"I'll Talk with Anyone Who Agrees with Me" Might Not Be the Absolutely Best Start on Bipartinship

Something groundbreaking happenrd yesterday. The post-partisan, transparency via CSPAN president got together with the other party in front of the CSPAN cameras. As we are painfully learning there is not a 100% agreement between what President Obama says and what he means. “I am post-partisan and believe in transparency,” actually means, “I will listen to the other party and open up to the public only if absolutely nothing else short of declaring martial law will get me what I want.” When he says, “I will accept responsibility,” what he means is, “I will tell you which Republican to blame.” Fair enough, now that we know we just need to make a 175 degree correction of everything he says and we have a clear clue as to what he will do.
Job creation and deficit reduction were major topics in the president’s discussion with the opposition party. But I felt frustrated that the important item facing our nation was not addressed. Muslim militants continue to launch operations to kill large numbers of Americans. No one has yet told Barack Obama or Janet Napolitano about this ever looming threat. Out national security team is asleep. They will remain asleep if it is up to Obama and J-Nap. We need congress to put some pressure on the White House to get its national security act together. There is little or no chance of that pressure coming from any Democrats in Congress. So the Republicans need to get it together. Our confused president has been allowed to set the agenda so everything is off balance.
In spite of all his big talk about bipartisanship Obama has really never tried it. So he needs help. Maybe someone needs to explain to him that saying you’re open to input followed by ideological attacks on most any input does not always cause you opponent to agree with you immediately. But he is really new at this. Maybe he just needs patience and understanding. A LOT of patience and understanding.

Obama's History of Bipartisanship

Obama has NO history of bipartisanship. He had no history of any bipartisanship when he promised to govern in a bipartisan manner. And he has done nothing to keep that promise. He thought saying that would help him get elected so he said it without the least intention of keeping the promise. He has been given a complete pass on this by the MSM. The same 'free' press that had not a word of criticism of his bald faced lie that he would run a publicly funded campaign. All of this and much else cause me to have no problem with Rush Limbaugh calling them the state sponsored media. This short video clip is from a show broadcast not long before the end of the primary season of 2008. The man doing most of the talking is a congressman from Georgia.

My President Promised Me Bipartinship And Postpartinship And All I Got Was . . .

Stop the ACLU has a good piece that analyzes two recent editorials about Obama and bipartisanship. I especially enjoyed this paragraph:
“But, the differences in the two are not just in conclusion but in the journey it took to get there. Sadly, the journey the Dunkelman piece took to get to its conclusion went through Obamamania, into the Obamagobsmacked tunnel, then it took The One turnpike, and ended up parked squarely in Obama’s southern port… if you know what I mean? In other words, it was based solely on a sycophantic love affair with the Obammessiah instead of on solid political analysis.”
But I recommend reading the whole thing for a quick journey among Federalists, Antifederalists, the Civil War, Reconstruction, Obamamania and some recent home truths. Go. Enjoy.

Better to Shoot the Conservative Bastards Like Rabid Dogs

Recently the Think Progress site ran an interesting piece. The writer expressed disgust that the same conservative writers with whom Obama had dinner recently had the nerve to publicly disagree with him. Implied therein is a strange belief that these conservatives should have been won over by spending an hour with the great man. How could mere mortals not be so enchanted by the physical presence the great Obama? And how could their way of life and thinking have not been transformed by being in his Presence?
The writer and many commenters seem to feel that these few minutes spent with these few writers is what Obama meant when he promised bipartinsanship in the election. Basically he spent a few minutes on the effort and all of the tens of millions who voted against him didn’t change their tune so f___ ‘em. He has now officially been bipartisan. He kept his promise, it didn’t work and now we know that change might not be such a great idea.
It is difficult to be bipartisan when your base thinks it’s a ridiculous, maybe traitorous cause. And a reading of the comments makes this pretty clear. It’s a long comment thread. Much of it degenerates into petty and endless squabbling between pairs of commenters that frequently characterizes the dregs of the net. I will copy intact some of the comments that show the hate and antipathy to even allowing basic human dignity to those on the right that seems to characterize lefty discourse.
Before I do the copy and paste I have a couple of quick observations. Obama spent much, much more time bragging about this promise on the campaign trail than he probably will spend implementing it. It was merely a campaign promise. A campaign promise in the great tradition of, “You weren’t stupid enough to believe that were you?”

Each comment below is exactly as it appeared.

lokidog Says:

I hope President Obama has learned a simple lesson: reaching out to rabid dogs will only get your hands ripped off.
Better to shoot the bastards and put them out of their misery - and help the nation out at the same time.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:21 pm



==========================


grover nerdkissed Says:

let’s hope he doesn’t bother kissin’ those pimply asses again.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:26 pm


================================

WaltB Says:

Barak had to give it a try. He can easily say he tried to reach out to these fools, while all they can do is whine and complain. Now he can go back to reminding them who won.
Come to think about it, now he could also use some of Bush’s favored strategies, invoke the Patriot Act on them and send them all (Rush especially!) to Gitmo!
January 25th, 2009 at 12:31 pm ===================

=============================================

Klem Kiddilehopper Says:

Let’s start playing hard with those as*holes!
First take Krauthummers wheelchair away, and let him crawl around forever!
Make Brock work as the towelboy in gay bathhouse, never to leave!
Kristol should be put in a round cage with Malkin, both of them butt-naked and roll them from one Repug meeting to the next one!
January 25th, 2009 at 1:19 pm

===============================

TXProgressive Says:

Obama did the right thing in dining with them. It’s not Obama’s fault that his dinner guests have the mental and intellectual maturity of 7 year olds.
January 25th, 2009 at 4:42 pm

Hat Tip/NewsBuisters

New Game

This is copied and pasted entirely from Patterico's Pontifications.

Bipartisanship
Filed under: Obama, Politics — DRJ @ 7:25 pm
[Guest post by DRJ]
Let’s play a game called Bipartisanship. These are the rules:
Read one paragraph.
Identify which politician is acting in a bipartisan manner.
Here we go:
“Acting at Barack Obama’s behest, President George W. Bush on Monday asked Congress for the final $350 billion in the financial bailout fund, effectively ceding economic reins to the president-elect in an extraordinary display of transition teamwork. Obama also sharply criticized Bush’s handling of the money and promised radical changes.”
Bonus question: Which of these politicians campaigned to restore bipartisanship in Washington? (Hint: It’s a trick question.)
Thanks for playing.
– DRJ