Philosophy
Pushing for economic stimulus, Obama makes significant alterations to draw support from Republicans -- adding tax cuts economists have said are not going to work, stripping out funds for contraception -- asks that they not adopt the Rush Limbaugh line, and sits down on their home turf for face time. The response? Bohner and Cantor before the meeting preemptively demand that the entire package be opposed.
Anyone who has not lived in a cave for the last eight years knows that the GOP sees compromise as weakness. The minute you try to give them an inch, they demand everything or nothing. They've never bought into post-partisanship. They reflexively oppose anything Democratic whether it would work or not. Their proposals are the same ones that created the mess we're trying to solve. But, of course, they are. Would anyone expect anything different?
It is generally a bad idea to attribute stupid motives to smart people. But you have to wonder what Obama is doing. Seems to be three possibilities:
1) The naive possibility -- He thinks that the some portion of the GOP has read the writing on the wall from the last two elections, expects that they will put country before party, and believes that he can create a truly bipartisan effort to get the country's economy back on track.
2) The earnest possibility -- He thinks it unlikely that some portion of GOP has read the writing on the wall from the last two elections, expects that they will put country before party, but will legitimately do his best to try to "change the tone in Washington" by engaging in good faith attempts at bipartisanship. If they don't come along, he has the votes, but he will do his level best to try to heal the partisan chasm while he does what he knows need to be done.
3) The cynical possibility -- He knows that GOP will never read the writing on the wall from the last two elections, knows that they will not put country before party, and is doing what Israel does with the Palestinians, put up something you know they won't support and then have plausible deniability by saying, "We tried, we have no partner here."
Is he getting played by the Republicans or is he setting them up knowing their knee-jerk reaction is exactly what Rush Limbaugh enunciates -- oppose everything and hope it fails because if it goes through and works then Democrats get the credit and we'd rather see people lose their jobs and homes than concede a political point? Is this a strategic move to marginalize Republicans or is it a good faith, but naive effort?
- The Party Of Hard Work And Personal Responsibility: An Athropologist From Mars Looks At The Election
Sometimes it's good to step back and take a broad look at things and see if they make sense. O.k, so let me see if I understand what is happening here with the Presidential campaign. Take the two presidential candidates and the last two Presidents....
- Is Rush Limbaugh The De Facto Leader Of The Gop?
Rahm Emmanuel has been setting Rush Limbaugh up as the bogeyman to position the President's agenda against because Limbaugh, they argue, is the head of the Republican Party. Some argue that it is a cheap political tactic. It is. But is it true? D.L....
- Obama, Ben And Jerry's, And Logical Fundamentalism
Ay asks, "Is Obama the first candidate to have his own symbol?"No, branding with symbols certainly precedes this election. Last time around, the W with the flag was Bush's symbol. Before that, it was usually an emblematic writing of the names of those...
- Buckley And Obama
William F. Buckley is dead, long live William F. Buckley. Buckley's smart, stylized prose galvanized a beaten conservative movement that had been mired in Henry Ford-styled diatribes. Bringing panache and wit to defenses of the seemingly indefensible,...
- Is The Thread Of The Fabric Beginning To Unravel...michael Steele?
To: Michael Steele [Republican National Committee chairman.] "I ask you to consider, over this July 4 weekend, doing an act of service for the country you love: Resign as chairman of the Republican party." From: William Kristol [Conservative columnist...
Philosophy
Is Obama Being Strategic or Naive?
Pushing for economic stimulus, Obama makes significant alterations to draw support from Republicans -- adding tax cuts economists have said are not going to work, stripping out funds for contraception -- asks that they not adopt the Rush Limbaugh line, and sits down on their home turf for face time. The response? Bohner and Cantor before the meeting preemptively demand that the entire package be opposed.
Anyone who has not lived in a cave for the last eight years knows that the GOP sees compromise as weakness. The minute you try to give them an inch, they demand everything or nothing. They've never bought into post-partisanship. They reflexively oppose anything Democratic whether it would work or not. Their proposals are the same ones that created the mess we're trying to solve. But, of course, they are. Would anyone expect anything different?
It is generally a bad idea to attribute stupid motives to smart people. But you have to wonder what Obama is doing. Seems to be three possibilities:
1) The naive possibility -- He thinks that the some portion of the GOP has read the writing on the wall from the last two elections, expects that they will put country before party, and believes that he can create a truly bipartisan effort to get the country's economy back on track.
2) The earnest possibility -- He thinks it unlikely that some portion of GOP has read the writing on the wall from the last two elections, expects that they will put country before party, but will legitimately do his best to try to "change the tone in Washington" by engaging in good faith attempts at bipartisanship. If they don't come along, he has the votes, but he will do his level best to try to heal the partisan chasm while he does what he knows need to be done.
3) The cynical possibility -- He knows that GOP will never read the writing on the wall from the last two elections, knows that they will not put country before party, and is doing what Israel does with the Palestinians, put up something you know they won't support and then have plausible deniability by saying, "We tried, we have no partner here."
Is he getting played by the Republicans or is he setting them up knowing their knee-jerk reaction is exactly what Rush Limbaugh enunciates -- oppose everything and hope it fails because if it goes through and works then Democrats get the credit and we'd rather see people lose their jobs and homes than concede a political point? Is this a strategic move to marginalize Republicans or is it a good faith, but naive effort?
- The Party Of Hard Work And Personal Responsibility: An Athropologist From Mars Looks At The Election
Sometimes it's good to step back and take a broad look at things and see if they make sense. O.k, so let me see if I understand what is happening here with the Presidential campaign. Take the two presidential candidates and the last two Presidents....
- Is Rush Limbaugh The De Facto Leader Of The Gop?
Rahm Emmanuel has been setting Rush Limbaugh up as the bogeyman to position the President's agenda against because Limbaugh, they argue, is the head of the Republican Party. Some argue that it is a cheap political tactic. It is. But is it true? D.L....
- Obama, Ben And Jerry's, And Logical Fundamentalism
Ay asks, "Is Obama the first candidate to have his own symbol?"No, branding with symbols certainly precedes this election. Last time around, the W with the flag was Bush's symbol. Before that, it was usually an emblematic writing of the names of those...
- Buckley And Obama
William F. Buckley is dead, long live William F. Buckley. Buckley's smart, stylized prose galvanized a beaten conservative movement that had been mired in Henry Ford-styled diatribes. Bringing panache and wit to defenses of the seemingly indefensible,...
- Is The Thread Of The Fabric Beginning To Unravel...michael Steele?
To: Michael Steele [Republican National Committee chairman.] "I ask you to consider, over this July 4 weekend, doing an act of service for the country you love: Resign as chairman of the Republican party." From: William Kristol [Conservative columnist...