Thanks!

"The more things change, the more they remain the same," eh?

You may be right about pining it on them, but playing this game of placating these scumbags while the economy is falling to pieces is one of the things common people hate most about the DC Democrats! They need to quit playing such games and get on with it while we still have a chance of minimizing the effects of the coming depression.

While Obama goes through all this symbolic reaching out and giving them a chance to "get on board", they gut his economic recovery program and he barely complains about it. He appoints a Republican to Commerce who won't do it unless he gets replaced by another scumbag Republican and to top it off he refuses to support his own President's stimulus bill! That's just naive beyond belief. The miniscule benefit of saying "see they didn't act in a bipartisan way" during next year's elections is no consolation for watering down the stimulus and undermining every measure that needs to be taken. The Republican Party is as thoroughly discredited today as it was in 1932, perhaps more so. There is abolutely no need to play footsie with or make nice with them. It's time to get on with doing what we know needs to be done and not letting those assholes stand in the way, generally obstruct, slow down, water down, undermine and ruin the efforts of the President. It makes no sense. Any alleged benefit of this excercise in futility is nearly worthless.

As a reminder to people about the futility of working with these assholes, I strongly recommend reading Krugman's column from last August that can be found here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/08/opinion/08krugman.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

He concludes the column with the following:

"In any case, remember this the next time someone calls for an end to partisanship, for working together to solve the country’s problems. It’s not going to happen — not as long as one of America’s two great parties believes that when it comes to politics, stupidity is the best policy."

CANT WE ALL JUST GET ALONG!!!!!

I think that one of the fruits of this charade is that the reps are looking worse and worse to a lot of voters.

But if the SP goes in the tank, it will hurt the Dems.

Maybe the plan all along was to feign some sort of bipartisanship and then uncover the real republican agenda.

he would give Obama the advice he needs to be successful

Are you serious? You think of Truman as successful in doing what he wanted to do?!

Truman went from 87% approval rating in June 1945 when his administration was fresh to 22% approval rating in February 1952.

Some examples of "success" from wikipedia

The disorderly reconversion of the economy of the United States was marked by severe shortages, numerous strikes, and the passage of the Taft-Hartley Act over his veto.

In the spring of 1946, a national railway strike, unprecedented in the nation's history, brought virtually all passenger and freight lines to a standstill for over a month. When the railway workers turned down a proposed settlement, Truman seized control of the railways and threatened to draft striking workers into the armed forces.[69] While delivering a speech before Congress requesting authority for this plan, Truman received word that the strike had been settled on his terms.[69] He announced this development to Congress on the spot and received a tumultuous ovation that was replayed for weeks on newsreels. Although the resolution of the crippling railway strike made for stirring political theater, it actually cost Truman politically: his proposed solution was seen by many as high-handed; and labor voters, already wary of Truman's handling of workers' issues, were deeply alienated.

He won re-election by the skin of his teeth, and

After his re-election he was able to pass only one of the proposals in his Fair Deal program.

You should remember there was bipartisanship in the house vote on the porkulus spending bill. The bipartisanship was AGAINST Odumba's bill.

Republicans are not 'undercutting' 'docile' democrats. Those democrats know they will be up for re-election in about 21 months. They realize how the voters in their districts look at this attempt at a Marxist coupe.

If Harry Truman were alive today he'd look at Odumba with disgust. I doubt Truman would lower himself to even speak to the SOB.

Harry had some good quotes but he was faced with the same Republican obstructionism (led by presidential hopeful Senator Taft). His national healthcare didn't get off the ground, and he had to wait until LBJ passed Medicare/Medicaid to see something like it. God knows we all would have benefited from such a program, physically, spiritually, and economically. Harry also had the poor judgment to bog us down in Korea, which was a big part of his unpopularity (it didn't help that he relieved the enormously popular MacArthur, who wanted to drop nuclear bombs on the Chinese.)

Perhaps obstructionism disguised as bipartisanship is just the nature of our system, and we are even now slowly stumbling towards a more socially ideal state and nation.

I think it is politically necessary for the administration to reach out to America's internal enemies during the first 100 days. I don't for one second believe Obama will not have obatined all the capital necessary to put his enemies squarely on the defensive when he closes the door.

Obama will "Slam the Door Softly".

ps - "a Marxist coupe" - ain't that what Joe Stalin used to tool around in?

Keep slingin' it, ReNeigh - you're gettin' me hot again : : :

Toad,

Bipartisanship is bipartisanship. Odumba, or at least his handlers, know this. The house vote score was the bellwether they recognized as the unraveling of the porkulus deficit spending bill.

The dems are running scared on this thing now. Just get off that chotie you're puffin long enough to watch it bog down in the senate.

I think you may be right, and I hope you are.

If you measure success by popularity alone then you have a point.

I'd say Truman was a very successful President indeed and many of the things that made him unpopular at the time turned out to be the very things that have elevated him to being one of the most popular of modern Presidents. Truman was faced with a coalition of Republicans and segregationist southern Democrats like Strom Thurmond on a host of domestic issues and won most of his battles with them.

As for "barely" winning in 1948 I'd say your discounting of his victory is pretty amazing given that no one believed he would win at all. Nobody gave him even a chance of winning. Every newspaper was against him. The war was over and his party had been in power for 16 years running. His opponent was popular and well known. Truman's victory was an extraordinary affirmation by the American people in him, not a slight victory that should be looked at askance. His victory over Dewey was an extraordinary triumph.

But more than anything else, he had the Republicans' number and he still does which is the point of the post.

I agree, it amazes me so many do not want success, as if not realizing anything else means we ALL go down the tubes, If ever there was a time to ask, What were they thinking?, isn't it now?

I can't help myself, dd. SP is already in the tank!
(for the repubs that is)

Taft was president decades before Truman, otherwise, I agree with your assessment. Truman was far from the democrats most shining star. I would say Ike was as good a democrat as Truman was if that is the measuring stick.

Well said. Perception is reality.

I am smarting from the realization that the progressive left is also contributing to the stimulus gridlock thorugh agenda and ideology... but are unwilling to admit it.

The degree of holier-than-thouism that permeates a lot of this dialogue is a hindrance to pragmatism and compromise. And using Truman as an example just irks me.

And the biggest difference in renaye and a steaming pile of excrement is ... oh, never mind; they both stink to high heaven!

Beautiful post. Absolutely on point politically and also a wonderful history lesson. It also reminds me of something I think FDR once said of the wealthy elite, "They hate me and I welcome their hatred." It's hard still to imagine a contemporary politician talking like FDR or HST, but the times they are a-changing.

Yeah, Renaye

Truman certainly wasn't any Marxist.

They won't have to reach very far. The cabinet is fuller of America's enemies than Obama's church!!

Obama preemptively compromised. He must have learned that from the prememptive surrender monkeys in the coward caucus. And why blame us powerless progressives? It's the same Blue Dogs like Harrold Ford making Republican talking points as usual.

Truer words have never been spoken. It's amazing, actually astonishing how relevant Truman's quotes are today.

Both parties have members in congress that are serious impediments to honest political discussion.

We need a progressive governing majority. What constitutes progressive? Progress, not regress. It's that simple. We're so far behind in advancing essential social issues such as education, health care and clean energy alternatives (Heck, science was put on hold in 2000), that if you're not a progressive, you're so 20th century.

You miss the point entirely.

By the way, how on earth would you know if taking the fight to them doesn't work? It hasn't been tried by Democrats since the mid-60's. It is about winning and getting things done and this namby pamby approach to kissing the asses of the Republicans has been tried and proven not to work for decades now. That is the policy and approach of Tom Foley, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the rest of the weakling Congressional Democrats.

Accomodating a bunch of assholes who hate you and are doing everything to screw you is just downright naive and stupid. Obama is paying an extraordinarily high price to peel off a couple of moderate votes that he's going to get anyway. His approah is handing all the power we worked so hard to give to Obama right back to the dumbshits who fucked up the government and the economy to begin with. Look at what glee the Republicans are taking in all this. They know they are in charge and Obama has been dancing to their tune, not ours or his. What more proof do you need that this is the wrong road to go down huh? Another 20 years of defeat and capitulation to these outragously incompetent, lying, corrupt, crooks?

Take a look at what Josh posted earlier on the front page of TPM from Theda Skocpol:

"In response to what you are saying: Obama is, sadly, much to blame for giving the Republicans so much leverage. He defined the challenge as biparitsanship not saving the U.S. economy. Right now, he has only one chance to re-set this deteriorating debate: He needs to give a major speech on the economy, explain to Americans what is happening and what must be done. People will, as of now, still listen to him -- and what else is his political capital for?

Speaking as a strong Obama supporter who put my energies and money into it, I am now very disillusioned with him. He spent the last two weeks empowering Republicans -- including negotiating with them to get more into Senate and his administration and giving them virtual veto-power over his agenda -- and also spending time on his personal cool-guy image (as in interview before the Super Bowl). The country is in danger and he ran for president to solve this crisis in a socially inclusionary way. He should be fighting on that front all the time with all his energies -- and he certainly should give a major speech to help educate the public and shape the agenda. That is the least he can and should do. Only that will bypass the media-conserative dynamic that is now in charge."

Oh look! The pric has returned.

Truman had gotten the USA into the Korean War where our troops were fighting the Chinese; the ultra-right Republicans like Joe McCarthy were dominating the press with accusations that the Democrats were the party of "20 years of treason," and by the end of his term, Truman's popularity was pretty low. But that doesn't invalidate the message of his words, and the example he set in the 1948 campaign! President Obama is fumbling and stumbling because his focus is on appeasing the crypto-fascists instead of doing what he was elected to do. And he's even backing down on his stand against torture!

He should try channeling FDR instead of Lincoln. But he's still doing Lincoln . . . who didn't think the southern traitors really were serious about secession. The first part of Lincoln's term was a series of political and military missteps.

But even Lincoln filled his Cabinet with RIVALS not ENEMIES! Why put Gregg in the Cabinet? Why not Norm Coleman---then Franken at least could get to the Senate.

Now is the NOT the time to sit silently and HOPE that President Obama has some deep plan to outmaneuver the Republicans. The President needs to hear loud and clear from the people---many of whom weren't so much voting for him as AGAINST the Republican perjurers, thieves, and war criminals.

The campaign is over. There's no need to keep capitulating to the SOB's who got us into this mess.

Take it easy oleed. - Back away from the cliff. Much of what you are seeing is a predictable distraction. I still think Republicans are gorging on dangling, fish-hooked, bait.

I predict at 100 days or so, the Republican enemies of the United States, and their supportes (Mr. renaye) will be exposed for what they are and entirely marginalized and humiliated. Give the process a chance to work.

I find the quotes to be incredibly accurate and refreshing. Over the past 20 or so years, the US public has been sold a bill of goods. Reagan's "revolution" was really a public relations program to obscure the fact that Republicans are always Republicans. There's no new brand. Government was always the problem, unless they could rob its Treasury. Grover Norquist is nothing but Reagan's dark side.

We've been lied to so much, we've been marketed 24/7 for the past 29 years on the myth that Republicans will build a smarter, richer America. But through the decades their BEHAVIOR has always been the same. The past eight years represented "Republicanism Unchained." They ran amuk. I hope all of those Reagan Republicans who will be lining up outside the unemployment office remember who brought them this mess. The line is only just beginning to form. The Republicans who are hastening the lengthening of the lines are committing political suicide.

There's more to Obama's push for bipartisan consensus than naive political idealism.

To interpret his victory as a broad mandate for liberal policies is a mistake. He had two powerful winds at his back: disgust at the moral vacuity and incompetence of the sitting administration and a tanking economy.

For Obama to get any kind of momentum behind health care reform, energy and the environment, two things need to happen. He needs to get at least some Republicans behind the recovery and reinvestment plan, and it has to work. If things begin to turn around and he can recognize Republicans for their role in its success, he's got a shot at achieving the kind of mandate he needs to implement the rest of his agenda and make it stick.

Otherwise, all bets are off.

I am buying your argument here Eyeball. It is a good one and I always thought this was a chess game.
If it is indeed that, I shall have great fun watching it play out.

It's called ceding to the wishes of representatives for 45% of the country, plus whatever percentage of moderate democrats who don't think this spending actually accomplishes what it sets out to do.

I know three moderate democratic friends who have varying degree of heatburn with the bill as it exists. They are also suspicious of thing that big that they rush through the process. So am I. These guys can't get things right that they debate for months, so how is a couple weeks enough time to get it right?

Would another month or two be so bad? I think not. Look at TARP to see how well Congress performas under pressure.

I think Congressional democrats totally spoiled Obama's play, unless these "pork" programs were sacrificial pigs to be removed in the interst of "giving" republicans tax cuts they always planned on adding.

To Zipper's point, he was talking of the progressive (liberal) left who use "fighting words" vice intelligent thought. There are many pragmatic progressives that you continue to paint as "surrender monkeys" or whatever, rather than forcing them to be more progressive. Just because Harold Ford et. al. acted one way in the past, doesn't mean they will act the same way in the future.

Taking out a bunch of special interest pet projects, no matter how needed, is not the same thing as using republican ralking points. Compromising on language, but attaining your progressive goals just the same, is not the same thing as the Clinton "Third Way" that was really a third rail.

Times have changed and the democrats will have to deliver progressive change, notwithstanding the strange DC dance they must do for cameras, or they will lose big in the 2010 primaries. Just like Congressional republicans will if they continue to offer sound bites instead of solutions.

Right on!

"Obama is acting like he is more concerned about appeasing the losers and assuring them that he is not beholden to the people who elected him or ready to govern through assertive leadership"

That's one spin a person could put on it. The curious thing about the truth is that it can easily be spun for better or worse.

I missed a "than" which would make "more" a measurable notion. As it is, it's just vacant fluff.

Obama is acting like the guy who campaigned without resorting to negative ads when he could have, who calls for unity and wants to assure everyone reasonable will have their voices heard. His kind of assertive leadership is just different, and that's part of what got him elected, imo.

A little learning is a dangerous thing, Jason. That's a statement which can be taken in different ways . . . I suggest you have a LOT MORE to learn.

For instance, "coup de grace," (with a circumflex over the a.)

I suggest that opening with ad hominem attacks proves I have less to learn than the critic. If you have something constructive to add to my proposition that doesn't involve a typo, please feel free. Otherwise, go Cheney yourself.