Of all the liberal notions about Barack Obama, perhaps the most specious is that of his bipartisanship. When House Democrats crafted his “stimulus,” they didn’t consult with Republicans. Indeed, when one Republican objected to some of its provisions, he rebuked him by saying simply, “I won.”
Earlier this week, Noam Scheiber articulated the liberal notion in a post at the New Republic’s blog, quoting Mark Schmitt, once of The American Prospect, who put it thusly:
[P]erhaps we are being too literal in believing that “hope” and bipartisanship are things that Obama naively believes are present and possible, when in fact they are a tactic…
One way to deal with that kind of bad-faith [conservative] opposition is to draw the person in, treat them as if they were operating in good faith, and draw them into a conversation about how they actually would solve the problem. If they have nothing, it shows.
Is this guy kidding himself? It’s members of this conservative opposition who are putting forward solutions to our nation’s problem, as per this post today on Hot Air about a proposal to reform Medicare authored by Republicans Sens. Tom Coburn (Okla.) and Richard Burr (N.C.):
Coburn said it best when he explained to The Washington Times why they decided to release the plan in an election year, when it’s unlikely to actually go anywhere: “All of us in Congress are running around fixing everything except our biggest problem. If you don’t start fixing Medicare, you can’t save it.”
If the president were truly interesting in seeking bipartisan solutions, he would call these two men to his office and talk to them about their proposal. He and Coburn became friends while serving together in the Senate. And he would have called Paul Ryan last year when he put forward a plan to reform Medicare as part of a budget proposal to scale back federal spending.
But, as Michael Barone reports, though he wondered if his aides had looked at the proposals, he didn’t make any effort to contact the Republican leader himself:
At one point Lizza does quote Obama writing on a memo, “Have we looked at any of the other GOP recommendations (e.g., Paul Ryan’s) to see if they make any sense?” Another president might have looked at Ryan’s proposals himself, or might even have called him on the phone.
A man interested in bipartisanship would have made the call — and like a Democratic Senator from Oregon worked with the Wisconsin Republican to craft a bipartisan plan.
I’m sure that you also have far left friends on Facebook who think that because Obama didn’t impose single-payer healthcare already he is practically a Republican. You know the type. They regularly vote for the likes of Barney Frank of Chuck Schumer, and they lament how “conservative” Obama has turned out to be. They really believe that Obama is “too bipartisan” and don’t understand the first thing about what actual conservatives and Republicans believe because they get all their information from the NYT and MSNBC.
Indeed, Kurt, indeed. 🙂
Hold on, I’m trying to imagine what you’d have called Tom Coburn if him and Obama had become friends… I can’t imagine any of them would be kind.
Also, why didn’t he go for single-payer healthcare then? Because he’s too progressive? Too socialist? Because socialists hate single-payer healthcare and would prefer a private mandate system? I’m seriously having trouble wrapping my head around this one.
Finally, the Burr-Coburn Medicare reform plan as referred to by Daniel. I have an opinion on it, but I’d like to keep that to myself right now. Instead I’d like to hear a few opinions here. Love it? Like it? Hate it? Too much? Too little? I’d like to hear the opinions here so I can gauge what sort of ‘compromise’ it is on the scale of American politics before I say what I think of it.
Wow, I think Kurt just summed up Serenity to a T.
Of course, we already know what Dan calls people who associate with the Obamas…
Family.
Obama, Democcrats, and the media all have one common definition of “bipartisanship,” Republicans shut up and do what Democrats want to do.
Show me one editiorial, one news article, one plea from a left-leaning pundit for Democrats to back down from their ideology in order to compromise with Republicans. Such a call is rarer than the unicorns whose magic farts Obama’s energy policy is based on.
Seems to work this way too. Also, why would left-leaning people be urging Democrats to back down in order to compromise? The fact that they don’t is what makes them left-leaning, they’d be centrist otherwise.
But the MFM do claim to be centrists, Insipidity. Yet their calls for “compromise” are only directed at one party.
This is clearly moving towards a time-consuming game of “he said, she said” linkfest, and nuts to that. Keep your belief in the liberal media, I’m not going to bother challenging it today.
Wise decision, vapidity. There’s really no debate anymore about the bias of the agenda-driven media. That ship, as they say, has sailed.
Forbes has a pretty fair analysis of the Coburn-Burr proposal. It sounds promising:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2012/02/16/burr-coburn-the-best-medicare-reform-proposal-yet/
It’s no where near the ideal solution of getting Government out of health care entirely, but it seems like a much better system than what is in place now.
In other news, my assertions that the sun rises in the East and water is wet will also go unchallenged.