Bipartisanship sounds like an admirable quality. Is it?
When Obama wanted some Regressive Senators to sign on to his stimulus bill he had to make some deals. One of the deals was with Susan Collins. She thought $780 million for pandemic control was better spent on tax cuts.
Obama caved in the name of bipartisanship. If one side says white is white and the other side says white is black, what does the compromise look like? Pure idiocy.
Despite the idealistic glow surrounding the concept of bipartisanship, there could only be value in it if the Regressives could muster some ideas of merit. So far they haven’t. Could they? Not the bunch presently in Congress.
Those presently sitting on their heads on Capitol Hill are more concerned about scoring points against Obama or vitiating and eviscerating any proposal from the Oval Office or the other side of the aisle. Remember, we are actually paying these juveniles to indulge in their permanent snit at the results of an election that clearly showed the public was tired of their incompetence, greed and price tags.
Bobby Jindal, the clown from Louisiana, poked fun at spending money to study volcanoes a couple of days before the one in Alaska started spewing again. Perhaps Governor Palin should crusade against spending money on studying hurricanes. After all, these titans of scientific thought have made it clear that the problems caused by volcanoes, hurricanes, pandemics and a host of other matters can be readily dealt with by tax cuts. Also, tax cuts don’t require a syringe.
These leaders are truly anti-American. They want America to stand for ignorance, intolerance and torture. Their moronic ideology is more important to them than the lives and well-being of the people whose interests they were sworn to represent.
Obama needs to forget playing nice with the bullies. Senator Reid needs to remember that the majority is supposed to rule every once in a while. We have sufficient checks, balances and other mechanisms to protect the minority. We need not always cave to the minority, particularly when they are willing to let Americans die for their pitiful little isms.
{ 6 comments }
Awesome post, will be a daily visitor from now on!
Thanks, and bring a few along with you.
No, Crawford, I did not say being prepared for a possible pandemic was a luxury. Spending $780 million more over and above what is already being spent could be seen as a luxury.
Also the Democrats need to quit whining. the Senate has operated most of the time without either party having 60 assured votes. The majority party seemed to get things done without having filibuster proof control.
I’m not an expert on the costs related to pandemics. All of us have had our minds blown by the talk of billions and trillions. Millions now seems small change. I was accepting that it was put in the bill because some bean counter in the appropriate agency had convinced someone that it was necessary. In light of the shutting down of cities, schools, transportation, et al. in a pandemic, it needs to be addressed with countervailing, stimulative measures. For stimulus purposes additional funding would be required, not a luxury.
The problem concerning the 60 votes is that until Newt and his coven the rule was used with restraint and the filibuster was usually the work of an individual senator. It has grown as a partisan weapon so that now, except for certain budget bills, it comes into play for every bill.
I find these rules unconscionable in a democratic body. Why try to win elections if the losers are given the right to kill everything they don’t like or just to frustrate the other party? Should I post your earlier comment on gridlock?
Sorry, but this is an unfair criticism. First of all $780 million in case there is a pandemic is a luxury item, not a necessity. Secondly, Collins was attempting to exercise a modicum of fiscal responsibility, not picking a fight with Obama. And, thirdly, the Democrats control Congress. If pandemic control was so obviously necessary, they should have kept it in. Blame the controlling party, not the loyal opposition.
Come on now, Ed. The resources to deal with a pandemic are a luxury? Please explain. Exercising fiscal responsibility should be done responsibly. Surely there are other items that could have been cut instead, perhaps even a project or two in her state.
Because of the anti-democratic filibuster Obama needed 60 votes. He had to allow Collins and Specter to appear to be fiscally responsible by cutting something. He should have suggested alternatives. Maybe he did and one or both wouldn’t budge. We don’t know.
I’m certain they didn’t think a pandemic to be on the immediate horizon or, more likely, didn’t think of it in terms of affecting the stimulus. That illustrates the small thinking that pervades Capitol Hill, particularly.
True bipartisanship doesn’t play the blame game and loyalty is rarely an issue in Washington. Without 60 votes the actual control is in the hands of the minority.
Comments on this entry are closed.