Matt Yglesias, Kevin Drum, and Digby (too bad I'm such a luddite I don't even know how to link to the urls of the references cited above) all weigh in on the demise of bipartisanship, but I disagree with them that we must give up on bipartisanship. I think it would be a concession of defeat to conservatives to abandon bipartisanship in favor of bare knuckles, pure power politics espoused by Republicans. In fact, I see in the demise of bipartisanship a disastrous diminishment of our democracy.
The end of bipartisanship has a very clear cause, the wholesale Republican abandonment of the basic tenets of gentlemanly discourse in favor of pure muscle politics. While "gentlemanly discourse" has a distinctly quaint ring to it, it was the basic lubricant of bipartisanship and truly "democratic" governance. The defining characteristic of the gentleman's discourse was a respect for the opposition's views, something the Republicans make a strenuous point of obviating at every opportunity. If bipartisanship were a plank upon which the public interest was precariously balanced, and the plank was held up by Democrats on one end and Republicans on the other, the Republicans have dropped their end of the plank and are now whacking the Dems upside the head while the Dems deliberate over whether to keep holding the plank or drop their end and fight back.
It's a terrible dilemma for Democrats because either way they are pretty well screwed. Muscle politics depends on money and corporate support, which Republicans have the inside track on. Democrats still holding onto the plank waiting for Repubs to pick their end back up look weak, while those who join the fray end up looking a lot like Republicans as they hustle for corporate monies and rely on hot button themes to garner public support. Hillary (and Bill for that matter) is a prime example. Flag burning? You gotta be kidding.
Democracy is not about winning and power-based governance, it is about balancing the vast diversity of public interests, something that occurs through respectful (bipartisan) discourse. Democracy is impossible if the voice of constituencies as voiced by their elected representatives never get to the table.
Worst of all, the end of bipartisanship means the end of reasonable discourse in the administration of government policy. Instead of debate and the exchange of ideas and a path of compromise between different viewpoints, Republicans have quashed all discourse in favor of heavy-handed favoritism designed to bolster their political powers. Could there be anything more disheartening to a small "d" democrat than the spectacle of the latest round of Congressional posturings over issues of such grave import as war, domestic spying and torture, Constitutional law, public health and welfare, economic policy, immigration? Having abandoned bipartisanship, the Republicans have made a joke out of political discourse itself. They got the money, they got the power, they don't need no stinking discourse.
The end of bipartisanship is not merely a new style of political strategy, it is a descent into a less reasonable, less effective in terms of the public interest, and less democratic, form of governance. It represents nothing less than the debasement of the noble ideals of American democracy. I hold all Republicans in utter contempt for their selfish, power-mad grab for political hegemony. Their foolish antics are destroying my country. For this reason alone (and there are plenty more to choose from), Republicans should be purged from our government with all due haste and bipartisan discourse reinstated as a fundamental characteristic of effective governance.
-Ted Bucklin