Legal Commentary

Will Republicans Accept The Obama Agenda?

By Big Tent Democrat

TChris pointed to the fact that John Boehner wants no part of the Post-Partisan Unity Schtick. In some ways, I sympathize with Boehner - he does not agree with the Obama Agenda. Should he go along just for the sake of it even though his constituency voted for his vision of America? There is something nefarious and anti-democratic about the insistence of the High Broderists for bipartisan compromise. In essence, they are demanding that politicians abandon their beliefs and the beliefs they presented to the electorate. But if we are going to do that, it seems to me that the lecturing and hectoring should be directed at the Republicans. After all, they are the party whose ideas have been rejected by the American People. The High Priest of the Beltway and the founder of the Church of High Broderism, the Dean hisself seems incapable of hectoring the Republicans:

[John Kerry] said that the difficulty of the challenges facing Washington is such that the aim should not be to pound out narrow partisan victories but to negotiate for "85-vote majorities," endorsed by all but the most extreme liberal or conservative senators. . . . But it will be up to Obama to signal that this will be his way of doing business, as well.

(Emphasis supplied.) First of all, the partisan victories will not exactly be narrow. Party line votes in the House and Senate would reflect nearly 60% of each body. Add a few Republicans and you can get over 60% almost every time. Beyond that, the merits of a particular piece of legislation cannot be determined on whether it is bipartisan or not - look at the Iraq Debacle. The merits of legislation will be based on its a -- merits. Does it work. I would much rather have a narrow partisan victory for a good bill (see Clinton's tax package in 1993) than bipartisan consensus for a bad bill (the Iraq War Resolution.) But in the upside down world that is Broderville, the actual merits of legislation matter not at all. The only thing that matters is whether it is "bipartisan." That is wrong for the country. If Obama follows that path, he will be a one term President. And rightly so.

By Big Tent Democrat,speaking for me only

Full post as published by TalkLeft on November 06, 2008 (boomark / email).