So, here we are, two and a half weeks into Barack Obama's first term as President and already it's a post-post-partisan world.
Kumbaya sounded good. Really. How could you not like the idea of it? Especially after eight years of the unitary executive in which the Republicans frequently ignored Democrats, much less consulted with them about legislation or other matters. That ain't the way to behave.
Unless, of course, you're modern Republicans. Theirs is the Genghis Khan view of bipartisanship: We tell you what to do and you do it. Surrender or get trampled. The idea that the Gee Oh Pee was going to switch its stance just because Barack Obama won a mandate and the House and Senate swelled with newly elected Democrats was a pipe dream. From the point of view of Republicans, real bipartisanship is just another word for nothing left to lose. A last resort when nothing else works.
Some left-progressives have been suspicious of the bipartisan, post-partisan theme all along. We didn't buy it. But it wasn't our call. Now, it is to be hoped, more folks see it for the fantasy it is. Not that cooperation, which is what bipartisanship is supposed to be about, should never again be tried. Of course, it should. But next time it is, we shouldn't start out with a "pre-compromised" proposal like the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act - the stimulus bill, the jobs bill. Good bargainers know that if you want to sell a rug for $100, you don't start out asking for $105, you ask for $200 and hint that you might be flexible. I'm not referring to dollar amounts here, but rather negotiating principles.
So what did we get from the sincere bipartisanship of President Obama? Well, we don't know yet for certain because we don't have a Senate vote on the stimulus package. But we do know that what started out "pre-compromised" has now been weakened even more by Republicans and some conservative Democrats who saw vulnerability and pounced on it. Jon Perr, (who posts here at Daily Kos as Avenging Angel) pointed this out at his blog Perrspectives Friday:
While many of my liberal allies disagree with my assessment that President Obama got rolled by bringing a knife to a gun fight with Congressional Republicans, it's hard to disagree with New York Times columnist Paul Krugman's January 5th prediction of what would come to pass. Call it Krugman's Law:
"Look, Republicans are not going to come on board. Make 40% of the package tax cuts, they'll demand 100%. Then they'll start the thing about how you can't cut taxes on people who don't pay taxes (with only income taxes counting, of course) and demand that the plan focus on the affluent. Then they'll demand cuts in corporate taxes. And Mitch McConnell is already saying that state and local governments should get loans, not aid - which would undermine that part of the plan, too."
And as I've previously suggested, there is also Krugman's Corollary. Fearful of a Democratic majority for years to come, Republicans are afraid not that Barack Obama's economic recovery package will fail, but that it might succeed. Or as Krugman himself put it on January 26th:
"Conservatives really, really don't want to see a second New Deal, and they certainly don't want to see government activism vindicated. So they are reaching for any stick they can find with which to beat proposals for increased government spending."
In short, as if we needed more reminding, they don't believe in a post-partisan world. They won't participate in real bipartisanship. But they will exploit somebody else's willingness to do so.
It's good to see Obama displaying some of the old campaign fire over how Republicans and renegade Democrats have behaved on the jobs bill the past few weeks. Too bad it didn't happen sooner. But better late than never.
+ + +
The Overnight News Digest is posted.