Washington's New Old Partisanship
There’s much to be gleaned about what’s changed and what hasn’t changed in Washington after not a single Republican house member voted in favor of President Obama’s economic stimulus package tonight. On the surface, of course, it means a certain kind of partisanship—a good kind, in my view—is alive and well.
While much was made of Obama’s so-called charm offensive to win GOP support for the enormous stimulus bill, I doubt that he really thought he would change any republican minds. It was a gesture in keeping with his promise to reach across the aisle when he makes policy. He reached, the loyal opposition disagreed, the vote was taken and the majority party won. That’s the way the system works. Good for the winning majority, and good for the Republicans who unanimously stood behind clearly-stated reasons they didn’t like the bill.
But a much more toxic kind of partisanship -- played out in the media -- accompanied this week’s economic debate. And it has involved missteps from people on both sides, including the President.
At the middle of it all has been Rush Limbaugh. The conservative radio host recently said, quoting here, “I hope he (Obama) fails.” That gave everybody the vapors, but I don’t know why they’re surprised. It may well be Limbaugh’s actual viewpoint, but it’s also his job. His (enormous) audience turns to him precisely to hear opinions like that. And Keith Olbermann’s audience on the left does the same to hear HIS thoughts. They are, to put it in political terms, playing to their base. It’s what earns them their (enormous) paychecks. (One GOP lawmaker nicely makes the distinction here between the guys venting and the guys voting.)
But then, pushing his stimulus bill, Obama told Republicans, “you can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done.” I think that was a mistake on the President’s part, even if he just said it in passing. It threw in the element of media grandstanding when he should have been appealing to Republicans strictly on what he felt are the merits of the legislation.
And from there, it’s gotten very silly. Limbaugh now says Obama wants HIM to fail. Then a liberal columnist wrote that Limbaugh is just pouting because the President didn’t invite him to his confab with other noted conservatives last week.
Here’s what I’m hoping: for President Obama to have a thick enough skin that he doesn’t rise to take the bait of pundits and radio hosts of any political stripe; for Congress to stay focused not on partisan gamesmanship, but on real solutions to this thing, solutions based on whatever they sincerely believe is the best economic policy; and for an end to this economic crisis that is so deeply hurting so many people. Please, Washington, keep your eye on the ball.
| Search Blog
|
Comments: 6
Certainly the republicans stand against the bill is a calculated gamble that the stimulus won't work and in 2010 they will get congress back.
Maybe. But in a time when the economy continues to circle the drain..job lines at unemployment are longer than an American Idol audition..it would have been nice if these bozos could have just sat down and worked something out.
The messiah will just have to figure out a way around this. If he does it will be the political equivalent of walking on water.
First off, capital R = the party, lower case r = the principle. In other words, call them Republicans when you're talking about the party's actions and call them republicans when you're referring to the principle (free elections, constitutionalism, etc...). Understand?
On another note, Jim (I like you, really), why do you make fun of "news" segments that you know aren't news (the Godiva piece last night) but show them anyway? If you know they're not "news" then take a stand in the newsroom, enlist Mr. G and so forth and tell your bosses not to run BS ads w/no newsworthyness (is that a word)? What do you think Jim?
You bring up two excellent points, jimmy.. first, I'm sorry to hear I got the capitalization wrong on political parties.. I actually went to google to find a guide, and thought i got it right. I think I did, with one exception, which I just flat out missed.. I'm working overall to get things like that and punctuation correct.. when one writes in the breezy tone of a blog, it's easy to start making one's own rules.
on your second point: I do NOT have veto power over newscast content. coverage decisions are usually made early in the day before I get in, and editors and producers often have their minds made up to put these items in the newscast.. I don't mind so much, because it actually gives me and Kaity a chance to have some fun with these fluffy, utterly inconsequential stories.. on THAT, I have total freedom to mock! It's a good tradeoff.. but usually on stories like the godiva piece, my perspective is, why don't they buy commercial time like everybody else??!!
Thanks for the follow up comments, Jim. I am certainly glad you have freedom to mock, as that is a key part of the appeal of the News at 10. Just make sure you don't cross the line and get yourself in trouble!
Keep up the good work - I like the extra insights from your blog.
Jim, Hope you took the R issue in stRide. Truth is, I'm a teacher so I deal with things like that all the time. Back to the issue of "fluff"...don't you still think it's unwise for the News to make time for unnewsworthy issues? I mean, you're a newscaster right? And the show I tune into is the 10 O'Clock News, right? While I understand you're not the guy who makes the decision on what's going to be on TV (and I suppose it's better than nothing if you point out the silliness of the segment) but, in the words of Tom Joad in Grapes of Wrath, "who do we shoot first"? (Metaphorically...). If I'm told to do something in my classroom that I think isn't educational I won't do it. So,how can we see the news get cleaned up? More news-y? You devote so little time to world news (any?) and so forth. If nobody speaks against this trend there someday won't be any news at all, and then where will you (and I) be? So how about it Jim, if you're not going to put your foot down then who should?
The gauntlet has now been thrown down, Jim. Now this is getting interesting!
Laurie from Jersey