Reid: The jobs report would’ve been better if not for — what else? — Republican obstruction!
posted at 2:41 pm on November 2, 2012 by Erika Johnsen
In response the Friday’s final pre-election jobs report, Senate Majority Leader from Nevada Harry Reid issued a statement in which — surprise — he was up to all of the same tricks. Does anybody else find it incredible that they’re still able to beat this “obstructionist,” “extremist” drum with a straight face? Via The Hill:
“We have a great deal more to do and too many Nevadans are still out of work,” Reid said in a statement Friday. “But this recovery would be even stronger if Republicans had decided to work with Democrats, instead of obstructing at every turn. As we look to the challenges facing us in the coming months, I hope that my Republican colleagues will reevaluate their strategy, stop trying to appease the Tea Party and instead choose to help all Americans by reaching across the aisle to get things done.” …
“Today’s job numbers make one thing clear: President Obama’s policies are moving our economy forward, creating more jobs than expected in October and more than 5 million over the past 32 months,” Reid said.
Well, I’m not sure how the GOP selecting a Republican governor from Massachusetts to lead the party exactly reeks of “radical conservatism” (which is Democrat-speak for people who want to pay fewer taxes, smaller government, and actually balance the budget, quelle horreur), but hey, thank you, Sen. Reid, for drawing attention to this excellent point: President Obama has completely failed to reach across the aisle, demonstrate any semblance of leadership, or take Republican input into account, somehow managing to transform the meaning of “Republican obstructionism” into “Republicans refuse to grant my every unadulterated wish.” Instead of maybe doing something about all the gridlock, all he’s done is laying blame and twiddling his thumbs, and it sounds increasingly feeble.
As for those dastardly, unpatriotic Republicans purposefully holding things up out of mere spite? This is what Sen. Reid is promising in the event of a Romney win, from the same statement:
“Mitt Romney’s fantasy that Senate Democrats will work with him to pass his ‘severely conservative’ agenda is laughable,” Mr. Reid said in a statement on Friday…
“Mitt Romney has demonstrated that he lacks the courage to stand up to the tea party, kowtowing to their demands time and again. There is nothing in Mitt Romney’s record to suggest he would act any differently as president,” Mr. Reid said.
So he’s preemptively ruling out Democrats working with a Romney administration, whilst actually trying to convince us that there is no record of moderation or bipartisanship in Mitt Romney’s past…? I am nonplussed. You can’t make this stuff up.
This is also a grand ol’ opportunity to once again point out that, during the first half of his presidency, President Obama was not obstructed by Congress. Although he ‘regrets‘ not having done more for immigration reform, he sure as heck managed to push through ObamaCare, Dodd-Frank, and his stimulus package, which he specifically promised would bring us to a national unemployment rate in the 5-percent range by 2012. Maybe if he had considered some bipartisan measures, he really could’ve followed in Bill Clinton’s footsteps and he wouldn’t be in this pickle right now. As Fred Barnes reminds us in the WSJ:
From the day he took office in January 2009, Mr. Obama hasn’t lacked for opportunities. His first initiative was an economic stimulus package. After he told Republicans that he wanted their input, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor personally handed him a one-page list of pro-growth proposals, including a 20% tax cut on small business income and a reduction in the two lowest income-tax rates. “Eric, there’s nothing too crazy in here,” Mr. Obama said after looking over the list.
But when the administration’s $831 billion stimulus bill was introduced three days later, it contained none of the Republican ideas. Would the pro-growth tax cuts have made the bill more stimulative? Yes. Would the economic recovery have been stronger? Most likely, but how much stronger is unknowable.
A compromise backed by congressional Republicans would have been a political windfall for the president. Instead, he made matters worse by accusing Republicans of spurning his offer of a bipartisan stimulus. In truth, he made the offer while addressing the House Republican Conference the day after Democrats had finalized the stimulus bill—without consulting Republicans.