GOP rejected Pelosi partisanship, not Obama outreach
posted at 5:32 pm on January 31, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Ever since the House Republicans refused to cast a single vote for the stimulus bill, liberal pundits and bloggers have pouted about the futility of outreach to the GOP. Obama met with them three times, the complaint goes, and got nothing for it. Denise Williams gives the typical analysis at Political Machine while discussing Rush Limbaugh, who helped rally conservative opposition to the bill:
My opinion remains mostly unchanged due to one main reason learned long and hard in the Clinton administration. No matter what you offer, no matter how many concessions you make, you’ll never get Republican Congresscritters on your side. Keep offering face-to-face meetings in the Oval, cocktail parties and Super Bowl get togethers, but you’ll change nary a vote. Anything else is naivete.
I don’t mean to pick on Denise, because she’s hardly the only one saying this, but it ignores some convenient realities. And the two biggest realities are that this is incredibly irresponsible legislation and that Nancy Pelosi insisted on the fully partisan attack approach from the beginning of the session.
Bipartisanship means working with the party in power to help craft the bill. While Obama did meet with Republicans to try to get their votes, Nancy Pelosi refused to do the same — and refused to negotiate any elements of the bill with House Republicans. Why should Republicans support a bill on which they’ve been locked out?
Bipartisanship doesn’t require Republicans to vote for terrible legislation. This so-called stimulus package is perhaps the most irresponsible economic legislation ever presented for a floor vote in Congress. And if you don’t believe that, try asking some of the Senate Democrats who have all but declared this dead on arrival in the upper chamber, at least in its present form.
Here’s a news flash for Democrats: If you want Republican votes on legislation in this session, buying Representatives a few drinks and inviting them to watch the Super Bowl won’t be enough. If Pelosi and Harry Reid insist on locking out the Republicans and blocking any amendment capability on bills, then the partisanship problem isn’t with the GOP. Rush Limbaugh is just a convenient excuse for the deliberately high-handed, arrogant approach by Democratic leadership — and the Republicans were right to reject it, especially on this porkfest of a bill.
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air


Bobby Jindal: Paternalistic, big-government liberalism is the biggest loser here

Super Nannies: EU bans olive oils, Germany ponders Autobahn speed limit






Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
As I just posted HotairLib has their whole head up their six o clock.
hamradio on May 24, 2013 at 2:43 PM
Who wrote the speech? Or are you just praising the messenger?
mixplix on May 24, 2013 at 2:57 PM
Connect the dots: journolist meeting by invitation only at the White House on, what Tuesday?, “big”speech by Obama on Thursday, lame stream media fawning over speech on Friday. Who would have seen that coming, huh?
parke on May 24, 2013 at 2:58 PM
They need the “war on terror” in order to further erode our Constitutional freedoms and to deflect criticism from the administration’s and Federal government’s ongoing corruption.
They are just trying to massage it so that they don’t offend the Muslims, international Libtards and their own sensibilities anymore than necessary.
A few Muslim terrorists here and there are quite expendable to this Administration despite their sympathies for them. These drone attacks also do much deflect any potential criticism that the Administration is weak in dealing with such matters.
Dr. ZhivBlago on May 24, 2013 at 2:59 PM
MSNBC is nothing but a left wing propaganda machine serving their master, Obama.
rplat on May 24, 2013 at 3:07 PM
I believe that he was officially nominated 10 days after he was sworn in. Wow! The WON really worked long hours that week and a half to earn that POS medal. During those ten days he ordered NO DRONE STRIKES to keep his peaceful record clean.
fred5678 on May 24, 2013 at 3:22 PM
Obama: Don’t worry about that Ben Ghazi guy. I killed Bin Laden, and Bush didn’t!
And Obummer still wants to close Gitmo? Good luck with that–not even Upchuck Schumer was willing to hold trials in New York!
Steve Z on May 24, 2013 at 3:24 PM
They just changed the definition of terrorist. They used to be jihadis from the Middle East–now they’re Minutemen in Arizona and Tea Partiers in Ohio.
Steve Z on May 24, 2013 at 3:29 PM
Erika, sometimes your writing shows signs of rivaling even the Master of Snark himself, Allahpundit. Good work!
KS Rex on May 24, 2013 at 3:45 PM
I love how crazy Al invoked the Nobel Peace Prize in praise of a speech that spoke about dropping bombs on people’s head. Maybe it was the “fewer” bombs than before that raised this to historic levels.
Do they even know or care that they are morons.
marnes on May 24, 2013 at 3:46 PM
His speech made less sense than Bluto’s Animal House Speech and was far less entertaining. Nothing less than base rallying time. Never thought I would say this, but Code Pink was the best part.
DDay on May 24, 2013 at 4:01 PM
Sperling posted this at the Examiner on May 23 about this “historic speech of Obysmal’s:
You see, we are just not working hard enough to “work with the Muslim American community” who are a “fundamental part of the American family.” Watch out, too, because Obysmal is again trying to limit the impact of the Internet.
onlineanalyst on May 24, 2013 at 4:22 PM
That Chris Hayes is a bit of a twink, isn’t he?
onlineanalyst on May 24, 2013 at 4:25 PM
Obama apparently gave two speeches yesterday and I watched the other one.
myiq2xu on May 24, 2013 at 5:03 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2