Gibbs probably wouldn't have said that 40 days ago

What would he have said? "Oh, they came up with the idea of taking the $200 million "for condoms" from the stimulus package. And, umm, the ATM fix we do every year. And then, well, uh, you know, sitting boy, girl, boy, girl at a White House luncheon."

. . . the minority party will criticize the proposal with varying degrees of rage.

Not from where I sit. All I'm seeing is one lonesome degree of rage, which I could most accurately describe as "frothing."

Republicans just don't have anything constructive to offer right now.

When have they ever? Republicans don't build, they destroy. Their most recent act of demolition was the economic meltdown.

When House Republicans put out a budget last week

Dickerson's nowhere near as bright as his mother was, but he's not this dumb. This is willful misrepresentation.

If the White House really is done taking Republican outreach seriously, it's about time.

Hear! Haar! About time indeed.

About the only people who regret this development are legacy Villager john Dickerson and his dinner guests. Republicans must be totally marginalized if the country is to survive and prosper.

I note that Dickerson says of Obamam: "He often frames Republicans unfairly or defines them by their most extreme elements." Well, no, actually it's the Republican party that defines itself by it's most extreme elements. At least in the Democratic party, we don't elect the lunatic fringe as our leaders.

And honestly, I don't know anyone who voted for Obama because he would somehow be "bipartisan." We voted for him to oppose the Republican agenda not collude with it.

Does Dickerson think President O is stupid? Why should or would he keep beating his head on the republican wall? I'm sure if the gop were to offer a reasonable suggestion it would be considered, but what is the likelihood of that happening?

I have a question loosely related to this post (apologies if this is considered improper behavior): George W. Bush was "elected" president in 2000 without winning the popular vote and never obtained the sort of majority of voters that Obama can lay claim to. Further, the Legislative branch, while holding Republican majorities, still fell short of the majorities Democrats now enjoy. With this being the case, why were so many of Bush's disastrous policies allowed to pass into law? Why did the Democrats fail to curb the worst of the Rightward excesses? I understand that the reason the Democrats fracture so easily when a Democrat is in the Oval Office is due to their being less given to the authoritarian that so enthralls the right. But presumably Democrats become Democrats for a reason and should be willing, especially in these times, to do what is best for the country, and not merely grandstand in front of a set of mics & congratulate themselves on their own sense of importance.

I was disappointed when Obama watered down his stimulus ideas -- tax cuts stimulate the economy exactly how again?? -- because I felt it was playing politics with something that was deadly serious and in no way a game. He wanted those "80 votes" so he could claim bi-partisanship, right? But is there anything in the behavior of Republicans going back to, say, 1992, onward that would give anyone who is paying attention the least idea that Republicans would actually be willing to go along with anything that was not wholly Republican?

Given the current state of the Republican party (my view is that Eisenhower was the last decent (& true) Republican President), the Democrats (modern-day Dems aren't much to write home about either ...) should be ramming through an agenda designed to HELP THE USA and not worrying about watering things down and playing nice.

What happens when, a year from now, we realize that our country hasn't a hope of any sort of return to the glories of the post WWII years and that the rest of the world is treating us accordingly?

Okay, that's more than one question ...

If the White House really is done taking Republican outreach seriously, it's about time.

I don't think it's clear that they ever did take GOP outreach seriously.

Rather, I think that they can now stop pretending since -- after demonstrating clearly to the public that the GOP had no intention of cooperating -- they've bought themselves some political sympathy from voters.

So, why pretend?

Because Boehner has puppy dog eyes?

Time to give a big FU to the GOP. If they want to filibuster, let them and turn up the heat (while throwing them in the pressure cooker) by making their obstruction the issue for debate.

Unfortunately, Harry and Nancy will never do that.

Rather, I think that they can now stop pretending since -- after demonstrating clearly to the public that the GOP had no intention of cooperating -- they've bought themselves some political sympathy from voters.

Bingo. The best efforts of whiners like Dickerson notwithstanding, the polls unfailingly show that the vast majority of voters clearly gets that it's the GOP that's not operating in good faith here. The Wurlitzer took a hit on this one.

Good, now maybe we can just get on with actual governing and repairing the damage the Republicans left in their wake without this useless kabuki dance trying to get the failed remnants to grow up and stop acting like retarded jellyfish.

"...they've decided they'll pay no political price for acting in a more partisan fashion."
They're not deciding to "act in a more partisan fashion." They're deciding to act in a functional fashion -- i.e., to attempt to govern effectively. The fact that it happens to appear partisan is only because every single republican that's left has decided to behave in such a dysfunctional manner. You can't blame the white house for wanting to actually get some stuff done.
Really, who are the partisans here? The guys trying to pass laws, or the group that's decided unanimously to stand in the corner pouting about how they're not getting what they want.

Spare us all the pleasantries and stick a fork in those fuckers, they're done. I for one have had enough of the GOD party!

It's interesting that our legislature is evolving towards a parlimentary system based on ethnonationalist identification.

With the republicans forming some kind of white, protestant Christian Democratic party and the Democrats forming some kind of Social Democratic party...

I don't believe Obama will stop reaching out to the GOP. But it was a smart ploy to publicly suggest he might. It's a not-so-subtle reminder of the GOP's bad behavior.

Let us not forget that Obama earned the right to be post-post-partisan. By reaching out extensively at the beginning of his administration, meeting with Republican leaders, and even conservative columnists, he earned a reputation as trying to be bi-partisan, trying to incorporate their ideas. He even weakened his initial bargaining position on the stimulus by incorporating tax cut proposals the Republicans would like.

But then they slapped him in the face, and he got no Republican votes in the House, and only 3 in the Senate.

So why they may have "showed Obama" they could stay unified, they got nothing out of it that Obama didn't give them to start with.

Obama now looks like he's taking the high road, and now he can just get done what he wants done.

"Non-partisan," I get. But what the heck is "bi-partisan" supposed to mean anyway? Must one be bi-polar to be bi-partisan? Just sayin...

Spare us all the pleasantries and stick a fork in those fuckers, they're done. I for one have had enough of the GOD party!
Posted by: The Galloping Trollop on March 31, 2009 at 1:31 PM | PERMALINK
*********************************
The GOD party indeed. That would be the party whose 2nd in command shouts "FUCK YOU!!" to Congressmen in the hallowed halls of the Senate, who shots a man in the face and never apologizes, who supports rendition, killing, torture and war. The war profiteer who makes money off the killing, maiming, and shower-frying electrocutions of other human beings. Yes, the GOD party, the moral party, the party of 'family values' strikes again. Flaming hypocrites. Every god-forsaken one of them!

Given their particullarly provocative, nasty, personal rhetoric, I suspect the Republicans have some sort of coup d'etat plan in place. As soon as President Obama starts to force through his agenda and insist on budget reconciliation, or seating Al Franken, or the Nuclear option, Republican will turn up the rhietoric and start encouraging people to revolt and call for impeachment...oh - Nevermind.

Now we have the author of the repeal of Glass-Steagel working in the Treasury Department. Who needs a coup d'etat? "Plus ca change..."

which I could most accurately describe as "frothing." Posted by: C.S. on March 31, 2009

May I have that cappucino bill with a frothing amendment? Ha!

the group that's decided unanimously to stand in the corner pouting about how they're not getting what they want. Posted by: Govt Skeptic on March 31, 2009

In a strange way Repubs ARE getting what they need, if not what they want, by staying quiet and pouting. They need time for the public to forget their complicity with Bushies in getting us into these messes.

Meanwhile, Obama and Congressional Dems should do as much good stuff done as they can. The world needs it.

GOP Bi-partisanship circa 2004:

"Go F*ck yourself." - VP Dick Cheney on Senate floor