Victor Davis Hanson offers some advice to the president:
Calling for bipartisanship seems contradicted when you then allege that those who disagree are being “partisan”, and you preface almost every major issue with a blanket invective against the past eight years, even when you seem to adopt many of the past policies, from rendition to FISA. Perhaps try to raise the debate from one of your opponents seeking cheap advantage to one of innate philosophical differences, and then try to cease the campaign mode. The election is over. Bush is gone. Like it or not, the executive responsibility of the U.S. is now yours alone.
Leaders of Obama’s party in Congress don’t seem interested in bipartisanship either given how they froze Republicans out of the House-Senate conference committee meeting to reconcile their two different versions of the “stimulus.”
If he were really interested in a new kind of post-partisan politics, the president would publicly take Democratic congressional leaders to task for their partisan shenanigans. And if he were truly interested in transparency, he could call for “televising the stimulus bill conference committee meetings.”
I’m surprised it taking this long for hanson to get it… the folks at American Spectator had “it” before the Office of President Elect announced the World Class Transition Team of New America.
The “it” is the willing use of any buzzword by Obama in order to sound like constructive, keenly focused analysis and actions are at hand.
Sort of like using “change” when you really mean “politics as usual” if we look at the Democrat 2009 Spending bill.
Sort of like using “hope” when you really mean “empowering Democrats and our allies” with political might so that all the old issues that conservative coondog Clinton didn’t even try to get done in the 90s can now be done by REAL Democrats.
Sort of like using “bipartisan” when you really mean “I’ll make the gesture, but don’t ask me to compromise. We won, afterall, and we have the mandate from the People”.
At least Hanson is getting “it”, finally. It’s about time.
Just imagine how bad Obambi will be by summer if things continue on this trend. Which they will. He’s going to make Carter look like a decent president by comparison.
How can you pretend like Barack Obama has been nothing but infinitely gracious to the Republican Party since he took office? He’s appointing Republicans to all kinds of posts, he lets Lieberman keep his chairmanship, he lets Rick Warren, say the little prayer, he’s holding meetings with conservative media figures and inviting Republicans over to talk about the economy, what more would you have him do? He’s only been calling GOPers partisan since they didn’t show up to vote for his bill even after he made concessions.
What ridiculous standard of ‘bipartisanship’ are you holding Obama to? Could anyone seriously argue that George Bush made half of the amount of bipartisan gestures in his entire 8 years that Obama’s made in a few weeks?
The “transparency” here is the president himself. Look past his filmy image and you see the same old Democrats with the same old ideas hiding behind the screen. Unfortunately I fear that Republicans will do as they’ve been doing for a while now; whine a little bit and then agree that spending lots of money will fix any problem.
But only when the government spends that money.
If I were a Republican congressman or senator, I wouldn’t want my fingerprints anywhere near the “stimulus” train wreck.
When a Democrat calls for bipartisanship, it means go along with what they want.
What should we expect from someone (Obama) who when cornered/rattled can only come up with “We won” (so there!)
He is ghetto
Levi, what specific concessions did Obama make to the GOP on the stimulus? Nearly all of the amendments offered by Republicans in the Senate were voted down completely by party line. How is omitting all of the GOP ideas being bipartisan? How is keeping them out of the final resolution being bipartisan?
Bush had Democrats in his cabinet as well. NCLB was sponsored by Ted Kennedy who was next to Bush when he signed it. Bush rarely vetoed legislation even that sponsored by the Democrats, something many conservatives lamented. That is much more bipartisan than what is being done today.
Um, Levi, where do I say that the president hasn’t been gracious to Republicans?
I don’t.
So, you’re telling me that just because he’s been gracious to Republicans, they should support his policies?
But, is it gracious to fault them for supporting policies he tags as “failed”?
And if you’ve bothered to read this blog, you’d know that I’ve praised him for meeting with conservative media figures.
Concessions? Concessions? What concessions? Did he drop the excess spending which Republicans find objectionable? What more would I have him do? I’d have him respect Republicans’ philosophical differences, understanding that many oppose the plan because they don’t believe government spending will stimulate the economy.
And why do you need bring up Bush? If I were you, I’d go back and check Bush’s record in his first few months in office to see the number of bipartisan gestures he’s made, including dropping school vouchers from his education legislation.
So, please, Levi, read my stuff before you criticize me. Check the record before you criticize W. And identify the specific concessions Obama made to Republicans. And while you’re at it, acknowledge the praise I offered the president. And please read my posts before you comment.
Dan,
Levi’s mind is made up. Why would he want to be confused with facts?
You also forgot his re-nominating some Clinton judicial nominees, FWIW 😉
I love the fact that Levi’s proof of Obama being “infinitely gracious” to Republicans is that Lieberman gets to keep his committee chairmanship. Classic. Well, based on that logic, the Republicans are infinitely MORE gracious because we let McCain be our nominee for President of the United States. Tell me Levi, what’s more bipartisan than us choosing a Democrat as our candidate?
Considering the deficit hole Obama is digging, it’s better off for the Republicans not to have any part of it. Let the Democrats own their failure.
#10: Right on, V the K. Ann Coulter was saying the other night on TV–because they are in the minority, Republicans can’t make much of a difference anyway, so now is the time for PRINCIPLES. They should be fighting tooth-and-nail for the American people because they have nothing to lose. That’s why Specter, Snow and Collins are so vile. Still hoping Steele will tell all three of them to hit the road (or at least that there is SOME consequence for their abandonment of the most fundamental of conservative principles).
This is one of those MM comments where I wonder what alternate universe he must live in. Victor Davis Hanson has long been one of the people who gets it best.
And, P.S., Hanson should be particularly commended for being a Democrat who is willing to “get it”. There are some of us 🙂 (Though I’m far enough removed now that I do call myself an ex-Democrat.)
But here goes – I’ll say it. Obama has suggested on several occasions that it’s patriotic to agree with him and by implication, unpatriotic not to. First, contrast that to Bush, who was always careful to say things like “I don’t question my opponent’s patriotism; only his judgment.” Obama’s way is less gracious. Second, it brings us full circle to fine theme of this blog: Questioning Obama is, in fact, the highest form of patriotism. Heh.