Leading Beltway "Bipartisan" BSer Ignatius Gives Up On Post Partisan Unity Schtick

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Economy
Posted on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 08:18:14 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

At least one Beltway "bipartisan" BSer has woken up from the never-neverland where Beltway gasbags reside:

The Marine Corps’ 1st Division has a macho motto: “No Better Friend. No Worse Enemy.” President Barack Obama could use a little of that Clint Eastwood-style bravura now as he bargains with Republicans over the stimulus package and tries to establish momentum and credibility for his new administration.

[MORE . . .]

. . . In Obama’s case, the power is there -- he has big legislative majorities, he won a solid majority in November, and his popularity has grown since then. But he is still learning how to use it. Post-partisan can’t mean wimpy. Aided by his tough-guy Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, Obama needs to find a post-partisan political hammer.

. . . Obama needs to tell GOP leaders what he expects, and make clear the political consequences of obstruction. In that sense, the tone of his Post op-ed . . . was off. The themes were there; what was missing was that Clint Eastwood snarl: Go ahead, Senator. Defy my stimulus program. Make my day!

Even Ignatius is telling Obama to jettison the post partisan unity schtick.

Speaking for me only

< Here's "The Rush," Mika: 600,000 Jobs Lost In January | Friday Morning Open Thread >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Leading Beltway "Bipartisan" BSer Ignatius Gives Up On Post Partisan Unity Schtick | 26 comments (26 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Isn't a Post-Partisan Political Hammer (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by WS on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 08:32:02 AM EST

the same as a regular Partisan Political Hammer?

Either way, time to play hardball with the Republicans.

Obama was good last night (5.00 / 3) (#2)
by ruffian on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 08:50:06 AM EST

Using the same kind of rhetorical style he used on the campaign trail - pointing out what is being said against the plan, and how ridiculous it is. More like that, please.

As further evidence that Obama is on the right track with that, Newt Gingrich was on CSPAN this morning deploring the president taking a partisan stand on his own policies. If that doesn't curdle your cereal milk, nothing will.

More Newt Gingrich please (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 08:54:09 AM EST

And Tom Delay, too. (none / 0) (#4)
by ThatOneVoter on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 08:59:04 AM EST

I've been wondering where Trent Lott (none / 0) (#5)
by ruffian on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 09:08:00 AM EST

has been hiding. Don't we need him to weigh in on this?


How about Frist?? What a great (none / 0) (#6)
by ThatOneVoter on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 09:15:54 AM EST

salesman he is! Obama should pay him to get out there and present the GOP viewpoint.


: Joe the Plumber (5.00 / 1) (#9)
by CST on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 09:53:18 AM EST

:)

Fine words butter no parsnips (5.00 / 3) (#10)
by lambert on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 10:04:58 AM EST

The guy runs for a solid year on bipartisanship, and then says "Never mind"? Hope, but verify.

What I say is "show me the money." Show me, in policy terms, what you're going to do to help me (single payer, HOLC).

Don't write ludicrous Op-Eds in Pravda holding out the glorious promise of computerized medical records in five years time. Jeebus.

Show me the money.


Was it in last night's speech (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by jbindc on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 10:19:52 AM EST

that he actually said "My staff is tired"? Really?

If so, BOO-frickin'-HOO. Please - as apologists around here will tell us - "he's only been at the job for 2 weeks."


But, if Obama's plan is (none / 0) (#7)
by dk on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 09:17:52 AM EST

basically republican lite (i.e. not enough spending on infrastructure, too many tax cuts), what does it matter what kind of rhetoric he uses?


At least he is excoriating (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by ruffian on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 10:55:32 AM EST

'Republican Heavy' for once. It is a step in the right direction.


Why? What substance will (none / 0) (#21)
by dk on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 11:15:54 AM EST

that rhetoric give us, if we end up with the same original Obama proposal, watered down by handshake agreements between Ben Nelson and Susan Collins. How is it a step in the right direction? I honestly don't get it.


Right now (none / 0) (#22)
by CST on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 11:17:31 AM EST

We don't have any watered-down agreement. We've got nothing. Something is better than nothing.


Right, but that's not the point. (none / 0) (#24)
by dk on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 11:20:58 AM EST

The point is that Obama's rhetoric is not matching the watered down bill we are going to get. So I don't see why anyone cares about the rhetoric when we all know that the bill, as Obama structured it, and is being further "enhanced" by the Nelson/Collins group, is watered down.


: Of course the rhetoric is not enough (none / 0) (#26)
by ruffian on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 12:52:49 PM EST

but it is required. Can't do the rest without it, as we have seen in the last two weeks as public support for even his initial weak plan has eroded.

At least it is explaining why the (none / 0) (#25)
by ruffian on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 12:50:23 PM EST

Republican 'all tax cuts' plan is a bad idea. And answers the charges that 'it is not a stimulus plan, it is a spending plan'. Until we publicly call them out on those idiotic ideas there is no chance of getting any substantive improvements in the plan.


I'm not sure he can (5.00 / 2) (#8)
by mmc9431 on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 09:50:18 AM EST

I seriously doubt that Obama will be able to shake his post partisan rhetoric. He's staked his future legacy on being the guy that brought unity to Washington. Until his poll numbers tank and he realizes that unless he plays hardball he won't have a legacy to worry about. By then it may well be too late.

: Not exactly (5.00 / 2) (#18)
by Spamlet on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 11:00:08 AM EST

He's staked his future legacy on being the guy that brought unity to Washington.
That was hot air for the campaign trail. But he's still campaigning, not governing, and all the months of gassy rhetoric left only the vaguest notions of what, if anything, Obama wants his legacy to be.

The motto (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by AlkalineDave on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 10:05:26 AM EST

was crafted by General Mattis, but was applied to the Marine Corps as a whole. I know I'm splitting hairs, but being a Marine, I thought I should set the record straight!

simply put, (5.00 / 2) (#13)
by cpinva on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 10:52:36 AM EST

pres. obama tells the republicans:

"i can get my stimulus package passed with or without your support, it's superfluous. if you support it, your districts might, might, get some bennies, come budget time. if you don't support it, be prepared to go back to your constituents, and explain why -0- federal dollars are coming to a theatre near them."

see how easy that is? one paragraph, email it to every republican in the house and senate, and every republican governor. i guarantee, they will suddenly see the benefits of cooperating with the president and the majorities in both houses. guaranteed.

as lyndon johnson is purported to have said: "once you have their balls, their hearts and minds will follow."

: Too late. Obama is allowing (5.00 / 2) (#14)
by dk on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 10:54:38 AM EST

Ben Nelson and Susan Collins to determine the details of the bill. I guess we'll find out what the Obama/Nelson/Collins bill has in store for us.

And the Blue Dogs (5.00 / 1) (#16)
by Spamlet on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 10:55:43 AM EST

Obama needs to tell GOP leaders what he expects, and make clear the political consequences of obstruction.

He really needs to rub the Blue Dogs' noses in the political consequences of obstruction.

Except that Obama's bill (5.00 / 1) (#17)
by dk on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 10:56:43 AM EST

is essentially what the Blue Dogs wanted.


But they're still fiddling with it (5.00 / 1) (#19)
by Spamlet on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 11:01:06 AM EST

: I personally think (5.00 / 1) (#20)
by sj on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 11:06:33 AM EST

that's because they're flexing their muscles. They expect to be throwing a lot of weight around the next four years and want to be sure their profile is big enough.
It's the pre-game strutting.

Send this to Obama (5.00 / 1) (#23)
by SOS on Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 11:20:16 AM EST

Rule Number One: There are no rules

Rule Number Two: Obey the first rule.

U.S. Special Forces