An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

The Demonization Of Obama Escalates While GOP Congressional Leaders Drag Their Heels

And so the demonization escalates as you can see here.

Note to Republicans who choose to go this route. There are a lot of independent voters who are truly tired of this kind of rhetoric and will not cast their vote for a party that indulges in it or encourages it. The fact is: Barack Obama has not even been in office a week yet. Give it a rest. There will be plenty of time to go after Obama on the inevitable toe-stubs and wrong decisions that any President makes later. Right now you’re decimating your own credibility because it’s clear you won’t even give the guy A SINGLE WEEK. And, as Republicans pundits loudly — and pointedly — noted in 2000 and 2004: elections do rightfully “have consequences” when one side wins.

Obama said as much in a Congressional meeting today when The Politico reports he told Republicans at one point: “I won.”

Meanwhile, here’s another part of The Politico report worth quoting:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the bill was on track for passage by February 16, while Republicans continued to voice their opposition.

“We expressed our concerns about some of the spending that’s being proposed in the House bill,” House Minority Leader John Boehner said after meeting with Obama.

“How can you spend hundreds of millions of dollars on contraceptives?” Boehner asked. “How does that stimulate the economy?”

Well, it may not involve stimulation of the economy, but…

What’s going on here? According to David Weigel, writing in The Washington Independent, Republicans have come up with a two-pronged strategy to deal with the poll-popular Obama which is essentially triangulation: try to appear to be working with the Obama administration, but work to oppose it in Congress:

In response, Republicans are attempting to link themselves to the popular Obama administration while criticizing the work of the Democratic Congress. The goal is to oppose Democratic policy without being seen as opposing or obstructing the president, a posture that, they hope, will put them in better position to win back voters if the Democrats’ popularity falters.

“What Rep. Boehner and [Minority Whip] Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) are doing is absolutely essential,” said Alex Brill, an economic research fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, who worked for the House Ways and Means Committee before the Democratic takeover in 2007. “They’re bringing to light the true effects of the Democrats’ proposals. They’re creating a dialogue. It’s the best that we can hope for right now.”

The strategy is only a little bit older than the Obama presidency. On Nov. 5, the then-president-elect met with House Republicans. In a comment that leaked out of the closed-door meeting, Obama told Republicans that “the monopoly on good ideas does not belong to a single party.” Immediately, Republican leaders started putting together a Working Group on Economic Solutions that would be, in Cantor’s words, “razor focused on job protection, preservation, and creation.”

Republican sources did not label the strategy “triangulation,” as a report in Roll Call did yesterday. But they did not deny that the portrayal of Obama as a working partner and the congressional Democrats as obstinate partisans was a reflection of the popularity of the two branches. The new president boasts approval ratings north of 70 percent; the Congress is mired in the 30s. “His message is bipartisanship,” said one Republican, referring to the president. “Their message is ‘trust us to spend your money.’”

The Politico report indicates Obama may not go along with this strategy. If he said “I won” he’s stating that working with him means more than just perfunctory smiles and handshakes: it will mean substantive cooperation. So if Obama’s popularity remains high (a big “given” due to the problems he has to tackle) the GOPers who are in the news for trying to delay action on policies he says are vital ASAP will be seen as obstructionists…and likely suffer the consequences at the ballot box.

(See the beginning of this post about independent voters — who had a little bit of a say in the outcome of the 2008 elections.)

UPDATE: The Wall Street Journal’s Washington Wire has more details on Obama’s blunt statement:

With those two words — “I won” — the Democratic president let the Republicans know that debate has been put to rest Nov. 4 .

Democratic and Republican aides confirmed the exchange. A White House spokesman said he wasn’t immediately aware of the exchange. The aides who heard the remarks stressed that it wasn’t as boldly partisan as it might sound.

Still, other Democrats echoed the sentiment. As he left the White House, House Majority Whip James Clyburn of South Carolina was asked about Republican complaints that Democrats aren’t listening to what their GOP colleagues have to say. “We’re responding to the American people,” he said. “The American people didn’t listen to them too well during the election.”

  • AustinRoth
    Yes, they should follow the example of civility and respect towards the President and Presidency that marked Democratic comments and criticisms of Bush and his administration.
  • I figured this would happen after Republicans and Conservatives endured 8 years of hyper toxic language from the Left concerning former President Bush. Even if President Obama succeeds with a more bi-partisan way of governing, that doesn't mean THE PUBLIC will. An eye for an eye indeed....
  • Silhouette
    "Obama is already “the most dangerous” President ever"
    ******

    lol...yeah..to the GOP Obama really IS "dangerous". Kinda like how bank-robbers would consider an alarm system "dangerous"..

    lol,,,,those Grifting Oil Pirates are squirming like greased eels on a hot skillet. It' almost like watching the circus. What wild distractions will they come up with next to keep us from closing Gitmo, prosecuting their culpable members and returning the power of governance to the people, instead of the boys' club of Texas/Arab Emirates?
  • Uncular1
    Yes yes the horrible Dems the last 8 years. Thank goodness the Repubs were soooooooo gracious to Clinton during his time in the White House. Thank goodness there are no 'hyper toxic' voices on conservative talk radio. Thank goodness conservatives have no use for Ann Coulter anymore.

    Honestly if I hear one more Repub complain about partisan attacks on one of the least popular presidents of all time I might throw up a little. The right wing noise machine (and rampant incivility towards the office of the president) really arose when Clinton was elected in 92. Even partisan attacks on Reagan and Bush (I) were never directed in a way that implied they were evil. That started with Clinton (actually continues to this day about the Clintons) and carried on throughout the Bush administration with conservative talk radio and pundits continuing their name calling even today. I know reading a lot of comments from the right that you all seem to have little or no memory of things you may or may not have done. Do you remember bumper stickers that read 'Don't blame me I voted for Bush' or 'Charlton Heston is my President'. Now ask yourself if you ever saw a 'Don't blame me the majority of America voted for Gore' or 'The head of the ACLU is my president'? Well, have you?

    Perhaps, and I know this is a stretch, you could say: "they should follow the example of civility and respect towards the President and Presidency that marked" the last sixteen years if you want to be snarky. But, no, that would be too non-partisan wouldn't it.

    Oh, and T, the two eyes have been taken out so are the Repubs going for the third? Is that what you're saying?
  • casualobserver
    Wars are a blazing, economies are a crashing and polar ice caps are a melting..........and this 2008 weblog award finalist is all a titter about some name calling???

    If your man produces results, words don't/won't matter a snit. Does anyone still alive believe the last election turned on words?? As I recall McCain and Palin had a seven point lead before the market crashed.

    Let's make a resolution to actually get poignant in 2009.
  • Jim_Satterfield
    T-Steel,

    That has to count as the worst post I've ever read of yours. Uncular1 points out one reason. But actual honesty would also call for it to be pointed out what the Republican opinion machine has been like for Bush's Presidency as well. Does anyone really need to be reminded of the bile continuously spewed by Rush, Hannity, Coulter, Malkin and the conservative blogs? Yep, some on the other side were as bad. But they were far outnumbered by the likes of PowerLine, Hot Air, NRO and Red State.
  • AustinRoth
    Reagan was not portrayed as evil? What rock were you hiding under during his administration? The Left always cries 'it all started when the meany-weany Repugs were nasty-wasty to Clinton'. Bullshit.

    Both sides are bitterly partisan, and have been for decades, but you would never guess that from the comments at this 'Moderate' site. Any attempt to point out incivility by the Left is drowned out by, well, incivility. Incivility by the Right is taken as a given, of course.

    What amuses me is how when a Democrat gets elected President, then all of a sudden we are supposed to 'respect the office'. But when a Republican is in office, then 'dissent is the highest form of Patriotism'. Oh yeah, and "all Republicans are evil."
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    "If your man produces results..."

    "your man" happens to be OUR President. Didn't some Republicans criticize some Democrats exactly for calling Bush "your president"?,

    Sorry guys and gals, there are way too many IF's in our discourse ("If your man produces results," "Even if President Obama succeeds..."), shouldn't we all be a little more positive; we are all in the same boat called "USS America," you know, and she is taking water.
  • CStanley
    As far as I'm concerned, no one gets to have it both ways. I prefer civilized discourse that points out disagreements in policy rather than impugning the motives or character of the political opposition. But at least if people do that, they ought to be consistent. If you were part of the crowd who regularly demonized the Bush administration and attributed malice when ineptness was more accurate, then you don't get to call fouls when the other side now does the same to Obama. If you endorsed the name calling of Bush (including, in my view, publishing a blog which invited some bloggers who did so regularly) then you aren't actually opposed to name calling and demonization, you're just opposed to it when it's directed at the current administration.

    Some who were past offenders are now offering to change (this means you, D.E.), which frankly seems a bit too convenient but at least it's better to say you've had an epiphany and admit you're changing your tone than to pretend that you never condoned that tone before last Tuesday.
  • CStanley
  • MuleFace
    Well, it would seem "post-partisanship" has a ways to go. Reap what you sow and all that......but this Republican is still hoping Obama can make some headway.
  • Jim_Satterfield
    Yes, the raging bigotry and hatred in the comments section of Hot Air certainly is informative of the core beliefs of the modern Republican.
  • CStanley
    Ah, Jim, I imagine you'd be willing to make the same sweeping generalization to any liberal blog then, eh?
  • All of this is completely unremarkable.

    The good news is that the public stopped listening to Republicans. They can be as vile as they want in their own little echo chamber.
  • JSpencer
    It's true, the Bush II era received much criticism, but in retrospect we can see most of it was warranted, afterall there's an 8 year record - a record even his supporters must admit isn't pleasant to look at. In contrast, most of this Obama criticism is based on what? A few days in the White House? C'mon folks, it isn't that hard to understand the difference between deserved criticism and gratuitous criticism. Sure, I sympathize with the frustrated partisans and ideologues, but only to a point. They would be wise to view this as an opportunity for a little self-examination... and not just reactionary kneejerking.
  • Jim_Satterfield
    It's not a sweeping generalization. It came from reading the entire comment thread of the article you linked to, CS. And this isn't the first time I've read something over there, either. And it always reads something like this...

    Shyah. I quit liking your movies a long time ago. D-bag
    --------------------------------
    F**k you, Tom Hanks.

    Being gay in un-American.

    And I don’t apologize for that.
    --------------------------------
    Hey Tom! At least I’m consistent. Same comment I made last week. F**K YOU! (I had to put in the stars on that one.)
    --------------------------------
    Up yours Hanks!
    --------------------------------
    Just as long as we allow the same rights be granted to polygamists, those who practice incest (or liberals as I call them) and anyone who wants to marry a dog, horse, corpse or their living room couch.
    --------------------------------
    The little balls of shit that roll out of your mouth every time you open it is typical of your ilk.

    You’re nothing special….we’ve seen it before and it is simply the same old liberal moonbattiness.
    --------------------------------


    And those were just some of the "highlights". It didn't even include the ones that left off at calling Tom Hanks lesser names because of course they all knew that he didn't mean his apology thanks to their powers of Republican omniscient telepathy. Or at least I assume that's how they knew he was lying and only apologizing for the sake of his career.
  • StockBoySF
    "I won"..... because voters wanted a new leader as President, and not just another Republican.

    "I won"..... because voters wanted a new direction for the country.

    "I won"..... because voters wanted someone more representative of the country.

    "I won".... because voters no longer trust the Republicans who have been dividing the country with their rhetoric and catering to the religious right.

    "I won".... because voters felt that the Democrats could handle the economy and other domestic issues better than the Republicans. The past eight years of Bush policies have gotten us to where we are today.

    "I won".... because I'm not George Bush (or Sarah Palin) and I can actually put two words together coherently, I graduated with honors from Harvard law and I can think critically and objectively. These are all traits voters value in the leader of the free world. Positions will be given to qualified people.

    And lastly....

    "I won".... because voters are tired of the partisan bickering.

    So Republicans, remember I won for those reasons. Stop being obstructionists and let's get to work. I'm willing to listen to you and offer true compromise, but at the end of the day I have final say. You won't get everything you want so stop whining and be adults. The rules have changed and the American people and I want a different tone in DC. There are huge problems that need to be solved and the buck stops with me.
  • CStanley
    Jim, generalization means that you are taking a small subset (HotAir commenters) and assuming their characteristics fit the larger group that they're a part of (conservatives.)
  • Jim_Satterfield
    No, not conservatives. Republicans. The party core. The ones who are still certain that Bush did a fantastic job and it's all the fault of the Democrats whenever anything goes wrong. They are not necessarily the same thing.
  • charliehorse
    This newly released Liberal Arrogance is overwellming. The profound vile hatred of Bush for the last eight years since the last hanging chad in Florida, has not stopped to this day. Democrats tried to steal the 2000 election, and that needed to be solved by the Supreme Court, and they are still bitter. Bush won re-election, so there are plenty of us here watching this new President and the Polosi Gang.

    Liberal arrogance is showing a tendency to attack those who are precieved to be their intellectual and cultural "inferiors". Do not speak to me while waving that "I won" so shut up! Those who employ contempt instead of arguement, who are prone to shout down speakers they do not agree with, who precieve those who contradict them of having a lower IQ, and talk of "reason" while not exibiting any themselves had best beware.
  • CStanley
    Regardless, Jim, the commenters at Hotair are only a small segment of the GOP. I certainly don't claim them as my representatives, and again I'll point out that you'd probably see the obvious fallacy if someone made the same presumption of commenters at certain left leaning blogs representing he voice of the Democratic party.
  • rakehell
    Let them prattle on.

    Their discourse on "the most dangerous man to ever occupy the oval office" only serves to make the Republican party look foolish. President Obama has been in office all of 4 days - and half a day was taken up with a parade and balls. The American people aren't as stupid as Thiessen and others might imagine.

    As I recall Bush had the support of about 99% of the American people after 9/11. He had it when invaded Afghanistan. There were questions about going to war with Iraq, given that Saddam wasn't a credible threat to the U.S. and had no nuclear facilities - the latter having been destroyed by Israel in 1981. Even so, Bush still had the support of probably 80% in his decision to invade Iraq. Most criticism was civil in tone.

    Once it became clear that not only were there no WMDs, as Blix had correctly reported, and further that CIA information supporting the no-WMD scenario had been ignored and hidden, and that the post-war was being very poorly handled did the criticism of administration become louder.

    Katrina was the nail in coffin for many. The vast incompetence of his administration was clearly on display for all to see. The economic collapse was the final proof of the total inability of his administration to address any crisis whatsoever for any remaining doubters.

    Let's allow the Obama administration do the talking with their actions. The new president would seem to be very result oriented. If an idea fails, it will be discarded. If an individual is not up to the job, he/she will be replaced. The Republicans may not approve of the President's solutions, but they will not be able to claim he or his administration is incompetent.

    The dustbin of history awaits all these fools. And they will soon be gone; their moment of sound and fury, signifying nothing, has passed.

    Let them prattle on.
  • MarkInIrvine
    message to AustinRoth: get over it dude ... besides, Bush and his admin richly deserved the criticism.
  • Jim_Satterfield
    CS, if the kinds of attitudes displayed by the Hot Air commenters were so non-representative of the GOP then Ann Coulter wouldn't be a best selling writer. Neither would Malkin, Michael Reagan or Michael Savage.
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    CStanley:

    "Some who were past offenders are now offering to change (this means you, D.E.), which frankly seems a bit too convenient but at least it's better to say you've had an epiphany and admit you're changing your tone than to pretend that you never condoned that tone before last Tuesday."

    Yes, I have been a vocal critic of the total failure that was the Bush administration for at least the past five or six years, and I don't deny it, nor regret it.

    But I do remember giving Bush the benefit and the courtesy of supporting him for at least the few initial months and especially after 9/11.

    We are now in the finacial equivalent of 9/11. I guess it is too much to ask to give this new President a chance during this crsis.

    How long has Obama been our President now? Five, six days? Yes, I guess that is long enough. Let the trashing begin
  • StClair
    Dear Mr. President
    You only won the office of President. Read what the constitution says. You do not make the laws you execute the laws of the land. You are Commander and Chief, keep us safe. Your predecessor did. You can issue executive orders but if I don’t like them I tell you and I will ask my representative to take action for or against it. The legislators write the bills such as the stimulus package approve it full of pork and lose my support. My representative in the House of Representatives gets my vote not yours remember that. You only won the right to be President not write the legislation or dictate it. You have a veto use it or not. Understand? You can try and intimidate my representative but I vote for him not you and I will remind him of that. You have not been honest to date and that had better change. You have not been bipartisan so don’t say you have. You have not been open and transparent so don’t say you have. You may think you are on honeymoon but not with me. I wish you success but I will be holding you responsible starting now.
    Respectfully,
    A voter who will listen to anyone he pleases
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    Wow! I wish this voter had spoken out as forcefully and righteously to the previous president who got us in this mess in the first place.
  • Kateliz
    Sorry all you whining Dems. Think back the last eight years. You set the tone. You called President Bush every disgusting name in the book. You used repugnant images, lies, mis information and more lies, hate, gross "humor". You demonized him and all conservatives. Yoiu hurled insults and revolting accusations at us all. You stupidly and disgustingly insulted us abroad. You made the US look like a bunch of hate mongers...which you are. You called him stupid (even though his iQ is higher than Obama,s yeah...thats right.) You called our troops rapists, killers, and liars. You did everything short of crapping on the office of the President. Oh wait Clinton did that. If you did not do it yourselves, you never once objected either.
    SOOO SORRY Whining Democrats are just going to have to get used to it. Obama is NOT the messiah. He is just a community organizer who is in way over his head. All the "rhetorical flourishes" and low information speeches in the world are not going to do him much good now. Even if "I won" makes him think he really has.
  • Jim_Satterfield
    Sorry, Kateliz, but your entire screed just proves the hatred of the Right, not the Left. Let's see....first you made up a list of supposed actions taken by all Democrats since Bush was president. What lies did Democrats tell about Bush? Back up the claims, please. Then you make a claim about relative IQs of Bush and Obama. The problem with that? No one really knows, assuming that you are referring to results from a standard IQ test. Neither one of them have ever taken one or at least have never made the results from one public. All claims about the IQ of either person are pure guesswork. Intelligence doesn't really mean much, taken on its own. Bush made it through undergraduate studies at Yale and an MBA, though with a completely undistinguished academic record in either case. Obama graduated Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law School. These are the things we know without speculating.

    A very, very small number of our troops have in fact been convicted of killing Iraqi civilians. there has been one incident of these murders being committed to further the rape of a young girl. No one that I know of ever accused "our troops" of being any such monsters but this incident and a few others did take place.
  • StockBoySF
    Kateliz, you've been reading too many misconceived opinions on the net which you mistake for facts.
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC