Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

Search




Advanced Search

Alegre's Corner
We're not finished folks - not by a long shot!

Post-Partisanship is for LOSERS (Update)

by: masslib

Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 15:14:06 PM EDT


Politicians of the out Party always hype bi-partisanship, or what Obama dubs "post-partisanship", which makes sense.  If you don't have both the White House or Congress, why on earth would you favor partisan politics?  But when your Party is on the ascention, (or at least the conservative philosophy is on rapid decline), and for those of us in our early 30s this is absolutely the only time in our lives the Democrats have been, you don't call for post-partisanship.  It makes no sense. 

This is the time to be advocating for policies and principles in line with the Democratic Party.   It's the time to say, hey, the Republicans had their chance, and they failed miserably.  Now that doesn't mean you don't advocate any policies with broad consensus.  That would be ludicrous.  But this is no time to advocate a non-partisan agenda, as if there were such a thing.  

Indeed, if your argument is that Republicans are terrible at governing, which it should by all accounts be, why give Republicans an in with this talk of "unity", "post-partisanship", and shying away from the Democratic label?  When you do that it's easy for people to think, ok, then why not McCain?:

I mean, we’re all Americans, Obama’s platform tells me that the American people want to move beyond partisan division, so why not I vote for McCain, you vote for Obama, or — troll prophylactic here — vice versa, and then we all sit down round the big table, Chicago-style, and have a civil discussion after the election?

NOTE Since, under Obama’s formulation of how politics should work going forward, there’s no reason to vote for either candidate based on accidental factors like policy or accountability, the only reason to vote for either candidate would come down to personal characteristics, would it not?

 

And while we are on the subject, if post-partisanship is so great, why is Obama always promoting Tom Coburn, as he did again, last night?  Coburn is a partisan's partisan.  Or, is post-partisanship only for Democrats sucking up to Republicans? 

Anyway, post-partisanship is for losers.

 

Update:  This is not a pro-McCain diary, sweeties.  Just to be clear.  I support None of the Above.  That's my candidate.  This a Why Post-Partisans are Losers diary.  Just to be clear.

masslib :: Post-Partisanship is for LOSERS (Update)
Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Post-Partisanship is for LOSERS (Update) | 21 comments
Easy Answer (0.00 / 0)
Indeed, if your argument is that Republicans are terrible at governing, which it should by all accounts be, why give Republicans an in with this talk of "unity", "post-partisanship", and shying away from the Democratic label?

Because you really don't have any inviolable principles.  Principles take a back seat to pandering, to more of the pretty (empty) words that have taken you this far.

Re:  "Why not McCain?", I've been considering voting for him for months.  That consideration got a little less serious yesterday when he stated that human rights begin at conception.  "None of the above" is looking better every day.

Yeah, this isn't really advocating McCain. I'm firmly (0.00 / 0)
none of the above.  It's more about voters who aren't none of the above.  How does this framing help them decide?

Medicare for All is Civil Rights
[ Parent ]
Well, If You're Talking (0.00 / 0)
about the way Obama is framing it, I think the goal is to get them to buy into the hopey-changey thing.  What's funny is that McCain got there first.  He's running a commercial here in Iowa..."Washington is broken.  John McCain knows it."  

Poor Obama is stuck with his fairly tale.  How I wish we had two more months before the convention.  By then it would be patently obviously to anyone with an ounce of grey matter that Barack Obama is a horrible candidate for President.

[ Parent ]
P. S. (0.00 / 0)
masslib, this is a good post!  Is there some way to put a rec button on it?
I thought the same. (0.00 / 0)
Excellent post, Masslib.  I'd recommend it, if I could.

There's no excuse for this, DNC.  None.
[ Parent ]
I did (0.00 / 0)
;-)

Fighting for women at Partizane
[ Parent ]
Thank You, You Cute, Furry Thing. n/t (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
what does it mean? (0.00 / 0)
I have no idea what Barack means in real terms, I can understand his message to stop demonizing those who disagree with you, but he's hardly the poster-child for refusing to take the low road.  This is his biggest problem, he has a theory of governing that he didn't follow himself.  When he tested it, it didn't work.  

I don't know what he can do now.  His biggest asset is McCain, who's starting to lose his mental capacities and the people could come to fear him more, but how it that a positive, that your opponent has become unthinkable?  

Good post Mass, this is a real issue, can politics be lofty but impractical ideals that lead to fair charges of hypocrisy, or must it be good governing, based on experience of what works and what doesn't, what history can show? I think it must be a message of competence and clarity about what needs to be done and how it can be done.  

Barack has been challenged to state his clear goals and to name those he'll put in his administration to carry out these goals.  But will he, can he?  

Hillary - alternative energy

I don't thinks he's lost any mental capacities, and I abhor (0.00 / 0)
ageism, so I really can't discuss that.

I think Obama doesn't really give a rat's ass about post-partisanship.  I think it's just framing.  My point is it's crappy framing.  

Medicare for All is Civil Rights

[ Parent ]
It's outdated framing. (0.00 / 0)
As your first sentence illustrates. He is ashamed to be a Democrat.
"Democrats have gotten so regulation-happy that we don't think in terms of just efficiency."

Not the right time to say this, Barry. The housing crisis was caused by many factors, one being LACK OF OVERSIGHT.

[ Parent ]
he really has (0.00 / 0)
I'm not being ageist.  I've followed McCain, and I know guys like him too.  He has some very serious weaknesses.  He's not a bad person, and he has some nice qualities, and he's a hero, but he's in chronic pain and he's had health issues and he's now more forgetful than he was in the past.  For McCain a lot will depend on his vice president choice, he'd not just be our oldest president, he'd also be the most likely to not survive his term or stay in good enough health.  That's just true.  Noticing that isn't the same as being ageist.  I wasn't mocking him.

Of course it's framing, but it's not a terrible message, it just isn't the kind of thing that belongs in a serious debate, it means nothing.   And less than nothing given that he didn't 'show' it in the primary, he's open to hypocrisy  on top of it meaning nothing.  As you point out, who isn't for getting along?  

You can only tell what people care about when they're willing to lose something for what matters to them. So far the jury is either out on Barack, or the data suggests otherwise.

When Hillary kept fighting the primary after she'd become a long shot, when she put her own money into the pot, and she even increased the number of her policy statements we then knew for sure that she cares about the job being done properly and not losing the few opportunities we still have, to save the nation and maybe even the world.

We would know Barack has those principles too, if he elected to drop out in favor of the one who can win and govern wisely.

One of my only true complaints about Carter, who was like Barack, in that he was ideals and he was also ineffective and a poor communicator who was rather tone-deaf (remember when he quoted Amy in a debate?) was that he ran for a second term when it was more than clear he couldn't win but not at all clear someone else couldn't. That's why Ted Kennedy stayed in, he know Carter would lose and he did his best to take it from him so we'd at least have a chance at winning.   If Carter had truly cared, he would have dropped out, like Johnson did, when he realized that he wasn't up to the job anymore and that he probably wouldn't win.  Johnson did the stand up thing, just like he did with the domestic agenda and civil rights.  For Johnson it was not about his personal glory, it was about doing his best.  

Hilary also did the stand-up thing when she suspended, she knew the DNC was against her and that Barack was a made man. But she also suspended, she did not concede, she didn't burn her own bridges and she's given the party a chance to think things over again and decide if winning the presidency is what matters to them.  

We have lousy leaders. This ought not to have turned out this way. the whole party ought to have been behind the one most qualified and with the best chance to win and make the changes we all need.  That's the reforms I want, I want our candidates rated, on knowledge, on experience, i want them to have job interviews and i want their job applications and their interviews to be public.  We must stop selecting American Idol candidates, we must start thinking excellence.  

Hillary - alternative energy

[ Parent ]
I love that reform idea. I am completely (0.00 / 0)
disillusioned with how our Party picks leaders.  Now I think back to all those primaries I hadn't paid attention to and wonder what would have been.  Who may have applied for the job with your reforms?  What sort of leadership did we miss out on?

As for McCain's age, I think the fact that he's in for just one term is bad for Obama, because lots of Dem's who can't stand Obama and don't hate McCain, will be like, hey after the last 8 years, I can surely tolerate McCain for four.

Medicare for All is Civil Rights

[ Parent ]
famous last words? (0.00 / 0)
i can see it as a theory, that we'd have four of McCain and then get a great president, maybe, but I'll still vote for Barack if that's the choice, which one hopes it isn't, one does hope that he'll get the big picture and defer to her and to winning, with a practical and necessary platform.  Me won't be enough for him to win, however, but I couldn't live with myself if I abetted another pug administration in these times.   I don't think he'll win. I think he won't be able to debate well enough, and I don't think what he stands for is what we actually need, but I also think that if HIllary is the vice president he can win and her abilities would make his presidency an overall success.  McCain's vice president will get a running start with him, and he'll pick someone young and attractive and possibly clever, if there is anyone like that, and in the meantime our party will look weak and the people will lose heart.  We have too many hacks to rid ourselves from.  

But it is about far more than this election cycle, or about anyone's personal ambitions, or even about whether African Americans get what they want and finally find out that we're all the same, we're all mean to each other and we all only think of our own selves (don't mean each and everyone of course, just it's a national trend). The Chinese can work together, and they're beating us. We'll fracture and defend our individualism and we'll end up worse off for it.  

If he picks Hillary as vice president, I'll work for his win. If he doesn't he'll get my vote and no more.  He won't deserve more, he'll have let us down.  

I'll stick with Hillary.  I think she's our best leader for reform and better leaders.   She will continue doing her best as she does, but I hope that that she and Bill will become leaders for party reform, for excellence, for thinking, for honesty.  I have a lot of faith in HIllary. She's earned it.

The big irony of this cycle is that Hillary is what Barack claimed to be.  And more, she claims very little, but she's about putting the people first.  

I wonder how much time we have left. The economy is set to tank even bigger, we're not the only nation with sad leadership. Force is more and compromise is less.  And force never works.

I tell you Mass, being old is looking better and better.

Hillary - alternative energy

[ Parent ]
This Has Been In the Back Of My Mind (0.00 / 0)
I think the fact that he's in for just one term is bad for Obama

One of the reasons I can even consider voting for McCain is that it's "only" four years.  I figure if we survived eight years of Bush/Cheney we should make it through four of McCain.  Even the Republicans couldn't come up with two "worst presidents ever" in a row.
[ Parent ]
First sentence says it all (0.00 / 0)
this has been bugging me for months.

People say he's running such a smooth campaign that is free of drama. Lack of drama is not a sign of a good campaign! It's a sign that he's surrounded by sycophants!

But to your point: Politicians of the out Party always hype bi-partisanship, or what Obama dubs "post-partisanship", which makes sense. Democrats were more of an out Party in 2004. But now they are the in party. It takes him so long to absorb what is happening around him (Rev. Wright, you mean he'll be a problem for me electorally? Rezko, should I buy a house with him?) I swear he is NOT quick.

post-partisanship = unilateral disarmament. (0.00 / 0)
rookie mistake. it's the strategy of a talker, not a doer.

obama doesn't know much about how politics actually gets done. in the illinois statehouse, his patron did all the work for him, and let obama put his name on the bill. the committee work and the bill mark-up? that's where hillary shines. remember kyl-lieberman? hillary was there, arguing over the language, striking the clauses with all the saber-rattling in them, and she did it so well that poor lieberman had to go to the floor and introduce an amendment striking the bukllshit language.

hillary was there, under the basket, throwing elbows, and getting the job done. obama was off campaigning somewhere. he didn't even vote, much less help with the compromise language.

watch the smart girl, obama. THAT is how you do it. those republicans aren't your friends.

Barack Obama's election proves that any male can grow up to be president, provided he's willing to use misogyny as a campaign strategy.

and here's a woman that (0.00 / 0)
does not give up. After being handed her head on health care did she give up? No. She looked at the other side and went to one of them and continued to try on health care. I'm not certain if she would have brought it up this cycle if Edwards hadn't but I do know that Hillary has never lost sight of the fact our health care system is lacking.
[ Parent ]
striking the militant language. (0.00 / 0)

exactly, Hillary got the militant language out, and was willing to take the hit.  She knew it was more important to get those clauses out of there than play it safe to look good to the wingnuts. Then the wingnuts, instead of applauding her for getting that dangerous language eliminated, trashed her for her vote.  All the while, their guy BHO didn't even vote.


[ Parent ]
Interesting (0.00 / 0)
This is the first time I've seen the term "wingnuts" used to describe Democrats.

Entirely apropos.  These days the OFB are way farther out there than Republicans.  

[ Parent ]
I was referring mostly (0.00 / 0)
 to the knee-jerk "progressive" Dems, but you're right.  Most regular Dems as well distorted the Kyl Liebermann thing to diss Hillary.  Thank the gods, Hill helped get the really dangerous stuff out of that legislation.

[ Parent ]
How can the Dems blow this? (0.00 / 0)

The Dem Party could have (or could have had, at this point) the American public behind them  like never before, especially on the economy and healthcare.  And they're blowing it.  And their Nowhere Man candidate is blowing it.

We finally have a perfectly clear shot at achieving universal health care, and our party is just dribbling around.  Happy to be dribbling with their own American Idol creation, I guess.

Post-Partisanship is for LOSERS (Update) | 21 comments
"Always aim high, work hard, and care deeply about what you believe in. When you stumble, keep faith. When you?re knocked down, get right back up. And NEVER listen to anyone who says you can't or shouldn't go on."
Hillary Clinton - June 7, 2008

Hillary Clinton
- Put stuff here

Blog Roll
- Put stuff here

Powered by: SoapBlox