As goes California so goes the nation.

California is being bankrupted by a just over 1/3 minority of republican legislators who have a veto over the state budget.

In the same way republican senators have a veto federally despite their minority status.

This is a minor quibble, but for Republicans, 'bipartisan' has always meant doing things their way --- and if the Democrats don't agree, they're violating the spirit of 'bipartisanship'.

That really hasn't changed as Republicans haev slid from a 'permanent' majority to a rump regional party.

There was bipartisanship on display in the House vote. 11 Democrats voted against it. Had 11 Republicans voted for the Obamination, the press would be cooing their approval. LOL

Also, posted the following in an earlier post and believes it needs to seen anew.

From today's Rasmussen Report:

Forty-two percent (42%) of the nation’s likely voters now support the president’s plan, roughly one-third of which is tax cuts with the rest new government spending. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 39% are opposed to it and 19% are undecided. Liberal voters overwhelmingly support the plan while conservatives are strongly opposed.

Last week, support for the President’s plan was at 45% and opposition at 34%."

Excellent, the longer the Obamination stimulus plan is debated, the more the public opposition to it will grow. By the time it gets to the One's desk, if it ever gets there, he may have to pocket veto it. lol

"the GOP apparently "really has decided to blindly stonewall everything Obama wants, no matter what.""

And how long do you think the American electorate will put up with this Repug BS? I give it a month, 2 at the most, that if the Repugs keep voting unanamously against Obama's bills, the public is going to say that enough is enough, and all the Repug spokespersons in the world are not going to be able to quiet the publics dissent to this philosphy, unless we are talking Faux News, in which case it will always be the Dems fault.

Yes, it's very obvious now. The few who are still not embarrassed to be Republican are going to be Obstructionists. The rest should start a new party. Obama has done his part. If they are going to act like spoiled brats he should just say, "if you come up with any good ideas, I'm willing to listen", and then ignore them.

I still don't understand why there has been all this talk of bipartisanship. Anyone with half a brain knows what the Repukes are like. Yet the Dems have already let them make the stimulus bill worse. Will we grow up and govern? I hope so. And I hope it isn't already too late.

I posted this in the open last evening, but the discussion got hijacked by some anti-immigrant zealots. And the only person who commented missed my point entirely. I still think it made some points worth discussing, so I'll try again, where it is specifically relevant.

---

NOTES FOR A SPEECH FROM PRES. OBAMA

I was elected to this office after the beginning of what threatens to be the worst financial threat to our country since 1929. It had grown more ominous by the time I was inaugurated. The government had delivered necessary help to two industries that are vital to the economy. Perhaps, in our necessary haste we failed to include certain safeguards against abuse that, in retrospect, would have been desireable. But we were right to do what we did.

At the same time, as I said in my campaign, it was the American people that most needed help, that most needed the economy to be restarted. I promised to do that. And many of you have said that the fact that you believed me when I said it was an important reason for voting for me.

And many of you have said that the reason I was elected was that you believed my ideas and the ideas of my party were the better ones to battle this crisis -- and I have to agree with you on that.

But one of those ideas was bipartisanship. Now when I used the word, there were a lot of things I didn't mean. I didn't mean a wishy-washy, half-stepping compromise that doesn't offend anyone, but is far too weak to do anything about the problem it supposedly addresses.

I didn't mean a mechanical 'fifty-fifty split the difference' deal, because sometimes the right thing to do, the most effective thing to do is not half way between the two positions, but the division might be 75-25, or 90-10, and finding what's right is our job.

I didn't mean giving up on positions you believe in, but I did mean recognizing that someone who opposes many positions you believe in might find a way to share common ground on the point you were discussing.

And I meant other things. I meant knowing that neither side has all the right ideas. Which means listening to the other side, and listening carefully. It means considering their arguments honestly. Maybe you will still reject them, maybe you will see a few worthwile bits to combine with yours. Maybe even they will convince you you were wrong. You won't know until you listen.

I meant sometimes, in an effort which requires the whole nation's help, like the current crisis, sometimes accepting suggestions from the other side, even if you consider them dubious, not harmful but unlikely to be effective. But you are willing to try them anyway, because you need the other side to feel themselves part of the effort towards the common goal that is the reason for bipartisanship.

And finally bipartisanship means not voting blindly for something you believe is bad for the country, but not rejecting something you know is good for the country, because it would also be good for the other party. It means, in the wonderful phrase of my opponent in the last election, "Country First."

This is the spirit with which i approached the recent stimulus bill. I proposed a bill, and the other party objected to things that they felt were inappropriate in a stimulus bill. I could have argued the poin, in at least one case showed the specific economic effects, but I didn't. Those bills can stand on their own, they didn't need to be included.

And they described their own ideas, those ideas that they have expressed for many years. And I knew them, I'd heard the speeches and proposals all the time I have been in Washington. My advisers told me that they would be among the least efficient ways of helping the economy. And pollsters showed that you agreed that this was not the best way to go. But they would be less effective, not harmful, and I wanted the country to know, on our first major act, that both parties were involved in doing their part in the crisis.

I packed up every idea they had that we could dare take a chance on. I put in the package everything of theirs I could. Then I loaded it on the truck and delivered it to them personally. "Here, here's everything you asked for that I could give you."

But they didn't understand me, or what i did. Because of past incidents, they thought I was merely giving them a concession to get them to the negotiating table, that they could use what I gave them to start bargaining. But I had nothing more I would bargain with, and had given them far more than my advisers and the American people thought wise.

And so they voted, the House voted. And somehow, not one of the Republicans could see there way to voting in favor. Certainly I would not have been surprised if most of them had voted no, but all of them?

Not one could say, well, maybe I don't like all of it, but there's enough good in it, and the country needs something done. I'll vote for it.

Not one could say, the country needs confidence and they seem to like this guy Obama, maybe there are mistakes that will have to be fixed, maybe we'll bring up our ideas elsewhere, but it might be good for the country to see us united behind him. I'll vote for it.

Not one of you even felt, okay, there are problems with the over all direction, but at least it might get my constituents the road they need, the school repairs we need, and also give them the jobs they need. I'll vote for it.

None of you even wondered, since you could count and knew the bill would pass, if maybe your contituents would prefer to see you not engage in a quixotic 'last stand' against ideas many of them like.

Now only you know why you vote the way you did. Maybe your votes 'against' were principled, and not the tawdry old-fashioned politics they appear by their unanimity.

All I ask you, all I ask the country, is if this is not a time to put 'country first?"

--

DUH! That's been their policy for the past 2yrs...obstruct (through the filibuster threat) everything dems advocate...everything...in spite of offering no policies of their own. The election overwhelmingly proves that Americans don't want "bi-partisanship"...they want democratic policies and want republicans to STFU. They wrecked America when given the chance to govern and we want them out. they slapped Obama's outstretched hand away thinking they were being cute. Our mandate is clear...stop listening to republicans...they've been wrong on everything...they may own the MSM but not the people. They need to STFU.

Posted by: Chicounsel on January 29, 2009 at 4:54 PM

With such stupidity on display, it's a wonder chicounsel still has his law license. And he still hasn't answered whether he got his degree from a ten- or a twenty-five-cent gumball machine.

Haha!! "Elections have consequences."

W, we hardly miss ya.

Okay, we don't miss you at all, but would you mind landing and taking off from Washington ONE last time? For the kids, you understand.

From a story posted on Breitbart.com:

"The $800 billion-plus economic stimulus measure making its way through Congress could steer government checks to illegal immigrants, a top Republican congressional official asserted Thursday.

The legislation, which would send tax credits of $500 per worker and $1,000 per couple, expressly disqualifies nonresident aliens, but it would allow people who don't have Social Security numbers to be eligible for the checks.

Undocumented immigrants who are not eligible for a Social Security number can file tax returns with an alternative number. A House-passed version of the economic recovery bill and one making its way through the Senate would allow anyone with such a number, called an individual taxpayer identification number, to qualify for the tax credits."

Yep, this will play real well in Peoria. Because there is nothing that the American people enjoy more than giving their tax dollars to illegal aliens. You guys are making this way too easy. LOL

Forty-two percent (42%) of the nation’s likely voters now support the president’s plan, roughly one-third of which is tax cuts with the rest new government spending. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 39% are opposed to it and 19% are undecided.

Oooh! Sounds scary!

Of course, it depends what one wants to cherrypick:

But the final Gallup poll before yesterday’s House vote put support for President Obama’s plan at 52 percent, with opposition at only 37 percent.

The only real debate about the stimulus is about what should be in it. The GOP, having ceded the floor to pique, isn't part of that conversation anymore, leaving the people who give a shit to argue among themselves.

a top Republican congressional official asserted

And John Wayne Gacy asserted innocence. Didn't make it true. LOL.

"But politics is adversarial...)"

Is that a necessity of politics? I can't really see the logic of the statement. I always thought of true politics as cooperative, with modifications designed to help various factions.

Gingrichianism IS adversarial. But that isn't necessarily "politics", rather it is "obfuscation" for no apparent good purpose.

There is the possibility that Obama may have stepped on Republican toes by outlining the tax cuts at the outset. I can only think that House Republicans would've been much happier to work it out themselves so they could go back to their districts and show what a great victory they'd won as the minority party...

Tragically, that way would also have taken months longer and probably would've skewed the tax cuts to the top 5% (gotta take care of that base!)...

It make me think of an Anti-Trix commercial:
"Silly Republicans... Governing is for grown-ups!"

Undocumented immigrants who are not eligible for a Social Security number can file tax returns with an alternative number. A House-passed version of the economic recovery bill and one making its way through the Senate would allow anyone with such a number, called an individual taxpayer identification number, to qualify for the tax credits."

This sounds really bad too, until you actually read it And even then, it's a lie -- by the way "tax credits" are not the same as "tax rebates", so no one is giving up their tax dollars to begin with -- it also "expressly disqualifies nonresident aliens." Mendacity, son. You are a liar or an idiot, I don't really give a shit.

And, just for fun, how many undocumented workers do you think file taxes? If they do, then they aren't really taking anything from Peorians are they?

Really, just bizarrely stupid.

It wouldn't really matter if the Republicans defined bipartisanship as "Democrats acquiescing to everything we want", except that the MSM -- exhibit A being wankers like Mark Halperin -- generally embrace that definition as well.

Obama is a canny politician. He extended the olive branch of bipartisanship to the Republicans...who then showed their true backward, southern-style colors by voting against the stimulus package in unison. When it comes to falling into traps, Wile E. Coyote has nothing on the GOP.

"[If the Ledbetter and SCHIP bills] are any indication, we'll get votes on amendments, they'll all lose, and the bill will then pass, and we end up with a totally partisan package. I don't think that's what the president had in mind when he talked about putting legislation together in a bipartisan way."

Here's what Obama's answer to Kyl should be when Kyl starts demanding "bipartisan" concessions:

Senator...you can have my answer now if you'd like. My offer is this: Nothing. Not even the thousand dollars for the Gaming Commission, which I'd appreciate if you would put up personally.

Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) offered his understanding of (bipartisanship):

"[If the Ledbetter and SCHIP bills] are any indication, we'll get votes on amendments, they'll all lose, and the bill will then pass, and we end up with a totally partisan package. I don't think that's what the president had in mind when he talked about putting legislation together in a bipartisan way."

Sen. Kyle seems to be demanding quotas. Apparently he believes that the poor, oppressed Republicans are the only minority that deserve quotas.

bipartisanship is about give and take...

You give, I take ;)

Seriously, i never understood the bipartisan logic in the first place. If the original plain fails it fails. What's the point in tacking on idiotic tax cuts just to win 'R' votes and thereby diluting the effectiveness of the stimulus? Not only does this increase the likelihood of failure, it does doing nothing to avoid 'R's from blaming you if it fails anyway.

thoughts, and jokes!, here:

http://mrbloggington.blogspot.com/2009/01/post-post-partisanship.html

republicans think bipartisanship equals capitulation. Compromising means losing. If they're in a heavily-Republican district or state, they may have a point. However, every day that passes, more old people die than young people, and more teenagers reach voting age. And 2008 should've showed the GOP how Obama can get out the vote with young people, how much more politically active this generation of new voters is compared to previous. This means that every day, every red state &/or district gets a tad bluer. Not to mention the "We're voting for the n*****r" wing of the GOP - usually dependable blue-collar Republicans who don't like libs or blacks but can't pay the bills due to Bushonomics. Politics make strange bedfellows and the GOP is looking more and more like a puny li'l circle jerk o' losers making each other feel better by saying each others' penii are way awesome. If that's what they think will woo a new generation of voters & keep the old ones from dieing, let 'em have at it, I say.

I wonder what the demographic is for liberal bloggers. It seems to me they all must of come of age in the last 8 years. And have suddenly noticed for the first time that the republican right wing really is composed of intransigent intractable ideologue dumb bozos. The last election had the effect of pruning any sanity or moderation from republican ranks (remember what a rino is) and all this is left is truly whacko southern, midwest John Birch Society hardcore.

And have suddenly noticed for the first time that the republican right wing really is composed of intransigent intractable ideologue dumb bozos.

Nah. It's just a whole lot easier to point this out online, as opposed to furious letters to the editor.

I mean look at what passes for "thought". The fake lawyer Chicounsel thinks that since

"Undocumented immigrants who are not eligible for a Social Security number can file tax returns with an alternative number. A House-passed version of the economic recovery bill and one making its way through the Senate would allow anyone with such a number, called an individual taxpayer identification number, to qualify for the tax credits."

Then

"Yep, this will play real well in Peoria. Because there is nothing that the American people enjoy more than giving their tax dollars to illegal aliens. You guys are making this way too easy. LOL."

Overlooked or ignored -- If they file and they have a tax number, they are paying taxes. So is it simple stupidity? Lying? The notion that tax identifying numbers have something to do other than "paying taxes"? I'm willing to entertain all three in some capacity. It doesn't matter that the bill says something else, they're convinced of the loophole that will allow tax-paying aliens to enjoy the same tax credits as tax-paying Peorians will outrage taxpayers.

No taxation without representation? What's that?

Mickster wrote: "The last election had the effect of pruning any sanity or moderation from republican ranks."

quite...most of the gop seats that got lost were held by moderates and/or folks who didn't live in the south..... this has, apparently, led what's left of the party in the house to conclude that THOSE guys lost 'cause they weren't conservative ENOUGH...

the crazy thing for me is that this is happening right after we had a discussion of wither the country was still center-right or had it moved center left.... the operative word here is "center," IE : "MODERATE."

what's left of the minority is now way, way, way to the right of the general population...and yet the strategy is to adhere to conservative orthodoxy at all costs....they REALLY don't get it...

How about stopping ALL partisanship, and WORKING FOR THE GOOD OF THE WHOLE COUNTRY, not just the good of the [GOP] party?

Novel idea, I know, rethugs!

"...I never understood the bipartisan logic in the first place...". Todd @ 6:34 PM.
The country is facing what appears to be the greatest economic disaster since the 1930's. One would imagine that during such a crisis, the members of both parties would be supportive of measures that are being taken to prevent the problem from getting worse.
President Obama, apparently acting under the dual misapprehensions that Republicans can, at least on occasion, put their country above their party and also act rationally, seems to have hoped for intelligent and constructive input from them. Fooled him, didn't they?
Then there are things besides the economy; such as the "unitary Presidency", Guantanamo/torture, habeas corpus, NSA wiretapping, the DoJ mess, FEMA, the Interior Dept. scandals, NASA, EPA, and on and on and on. If Republicans refuse to help clear these messes up, then the results WILL be "partisan"; ie, Democratic, in the simplest meaning of the word. And being "partisan" will not only make cleaning up the messes that much harder, it will also open up those results to a "partisan" review when/if a Republican is again elected to the Presidency.
Right now, we have a major political party basically disavowing the Constitution in the name of fear and political expediency. If we cannot get that party to agree on how we are to respond to the first five items in my list, what will happen if they ever gain control of the national government again?
I'm presuming that President Obama is worried about the very same problem and that is why he wants "bi-partisan" solutions to them. And I'm also guessing that he thought the economy would be the easiest one to show "bi-partisanship" on - it's either doing well or it isn't; and if it isn't, we need to fix it. Who could argue with that? Well, now we know.
If the Republicans' response to the present economic debacle is any example of what to expect for the next eight years, we're in for some very interesting times...

Prup, you did send that letter to the White House, didn't you? He ought to use it without changing anything.

The Republicans always have defined "bipartisan" as *both* parties doing things their way. I'd like to see the Dems stop defining it thyat way, too.

Vincent on January 29, 2009 at 6:09 PM wins the thread.

Obama went out of his way to extent a hand to the Republicans but the Republicans spit on both him and the American people. The American people are wide awake and are worried. By taking the obstructionist route the Republicans have walked themselves off a cliff. I hope they enjoy their weekend in West Virginian wilderness. They may never come back.

Pelosi and Reid may be dolts, but Obama is a different animal. He is playing a new game entirely. The Republicans don't even know the rules.

Face it. The only way republicans would have been happy is if the compromise on the stimulus ended up being 100% tax cuts and 0% spending, plus if they got to rub the democrats nose in the mud. Which is to say there is no such thing as bipartisanship or compromise.

I'd like to think there will be political consequences, like even further marginalizing their party, but I doubt it.

God forbid that people in congress work together for the benefit of American citizens. Oh the horror if any stimulus package actually worked. That would ruin all the fine work that Bush and the republican party have wrought over the past eight years to create this virtual utopia we are living in now.

You can put lipstick on a "stimulus," but it's still pork.

Elections have consequences, yes. One outcome of the 2008 election is that Barack Obama won the presidency with a clear majority and is immensely popular. Another is that every member of the House of Representatives, every single one, Democratic or Republican, won the 2008 election in their district. I think the Republicans did not play this well, but if I were a Republican member of the House, who just won re-election, and John McCain had won my district, I'd poop on the President, too. Just pointing out Barack Obama is not the only person who won an election in 2008.

The cheap-labor conservatives just can't stop.

They still cling to their Ruling Class Mentality even though they are a minority.

They are a hairs-breadth away from realizing their decades-old dream of destroying FDR's New Deal programs once and for all, dismantling the middle-class, driving millions into proverty, with cheap-labor conservatives, those I all Predator Republicans, ruling America through the help of their fellow Predator Republican corporate pals, who are also cheap-labor conservatives, turning our nation into a Banana Republic.

And these cheap-labor conservative Predator Republicans have been doing this while at the same time singing hallelujahs to Jesus Christ, who was hardly anti-poor, hardly a predator, hardly conservative.

"It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a cheap-labor Predator Republican conservative to enter the kingdom of heaven."

"What profits a cheap-labor Predator Republican conservative, though they gain the whole world, yet lose their soul?"

Our nation, the United States of America, has never been in graver danger than that which we now face from these cheap-labor Predator Republican conservatives, who seem hell-bent on destroying everything in our liberal democracy that We The People hold sacred and dear.

Let's give the poor, beleagured Republicans the benefit of the doubt. Maybe they're not determined to drive the country into the ditch rather than let someone else's ideas succeed. It's possible they're not hopelessly entangled with traitorous, off-shoring/cheap-labor-loving corporate honchos. Perhaps they're not pouting in a petulant fit of anger against America because they lost.

It could be that they're simply and completely out of new ideas and don't know where to get any.

Be fair, guys.