Archive for compromise? what compromise?

Here’s what GOP extremism looks like… and these are just headlines from the past 24 hours

gop extremists

It’s truly mind-boggling that Republicans can’t get past their own extremism, especially after being trounced in the November elections. But that would be rational, and the GOP simply can’t go there, now can it? Why learn from mistakes when you can continue to make them over and over and over again?

Take a look at the following headlines and tell me how we can see even a glimmer of hope for a Congress (or state legislature) with members like these:

GOP Rep: ‘It’s About Time’ We Had Another Government Shut Down

Tea Party Senator: ‘I Don’t Think What Washington Needs Is More Compromise’

New Republican Senator Says Gun Safety Is ‘Unconstitutional’

Alabama Lawmaker To Introduce Bill Arming Teachers, Despite Opposition From School Officials

Conservatives Open New Congress With Unconstitutional Bill To End Birthright Citizenship

 Happy New Year.

banghead gif

Twenty-four states will be controlled by Republicans in 2013

Via Think Progress

A new election, a new year, a new outlook, right? Yeahnotsomuch. Washington gridlock isn’t going anywhere, and now it appears that compromise could be a lost cause in 2013 for many state governments. One-party rule will see to that. Via the New York Times:

Come January, more than two-thirds of the states will be under single-party control, raising the prospect that bold partisan agendas — on both ends of the political spectrum — will flourish over the next couple of years. [...]

Twenty-four states will be controlled by Republicans, including Alaska and Wisconsin, where the party took the State Senate, and North Carolina, where the governorship changed hands. At least 13 states will be Democratic, including Colorado, Minnesota and Oregon, where control of the legislatures shifted, and California, where the already dominant Democrats gained a supermajority in both chambers. (The situation in New York, where the potential for single-party control by the Democrats rests on the makeup of the Senate, is still uncertain.)

Power will be split in, at most, 12 capitals — the fewest, said Tim Storey of the National Conference of State Legislatures, since 1952…. Over all in this election, Democrats had more victories among the roughly 6,000 state legislative seats that were up for grabs…

Here’s one example of what happens when Republicans run states:

And don’t get me started on Voter I.D. laws. Via ProPublica:

Aside from Rhode Island, all voter ID legislation has been introduced by Republican-majority legislatures.

News21 also has this report on the close affiliation between the bills’ sponsors and the conservative nonprofit group, American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).

Jeb Bush: Just kidding!

Yesterday, in a post about Republicans eating their own (specifically, Grover Norquist getting all worked up over comments by Jeb Bush), I wrote:

Jeb Bush thinks Ronald Reagan (In this video, at about 18:25, he talks taxes) “would have a hard time” finding “common ground” today:

Ronald Reagan would have, based on his record of finding accommodation, finding some degree of common ground, as would my dad — they would have a hard time if you define the Republican Party — and I don’t — as having an orthodoxy that doesn’t allow for disagreement, doesn’t allow for finding some common ground.”

Everyone was buzzing about how reasonable Jebby sounded, and how he’s positioning himself as a more rational Republican as compared to those in his stubborn, intransigent party who have moved to the extreme right.

There he was faulting his fellow Republicans for being disagreeable and unwilling to find “common ground,” and for that he got lots of attention. Grover was sputtering his disapproval (“That’s foolish… It’s stup—it’s bizarre. … There’s a guy who watched his father throw away his presidency…”), Jeb was quoted on all the usual cable shows, what a day it was!

Well guess what?

Kidding!

Via First Read:

In a series of tweets today, Bush said: “The point I was making yesterday is this: The political system today is hyperpartisan. Both sides are at fault.

He added, “My dad & Reagan sacrificed political points for good public policy.”

And he concluded: “Past 4 years, Democrats have held leadership roles w/opportunities to reach across political aisle. For sake of politics, they haven’t.”

Oh, so that’s the point he was making. Silly us for misunderstanding. It’s really the Dems’ fault after all, because Daddy and the Saint were patriotic martyrs, but those lefty extremists, they haven’t compromised one bit.

I guess he’s been under a rock for the past three years.

The preceding flip flop moment was brought to you by Willard Romney.

Republicans Eating Their Own: Grover Norquist vs. Jeb Bush

Jeb Bush thinks Ronald Reagan (In this video, at about 18:25, he talks taxes) “would have a hard time” finding “common ground” today:

Ronald Reagan would have, based on his record of finding accommodation, finding some degree of common ground, as would my dad — they would have a hard time if you define the Republican Party — and I don’t — as having an orthodoxy that doesn’t allow for disagreement, doesn’t allow for finding some common ground.”

Republicans conveniently ignore the fact that Reagan raised taxes many times. As the Whitehouse.gov Reagan president’s page specifically notes:

  • In a June 28, 1985 speech Reagan called for a fairer tax code, one where a multi-millionaire did not have a lower tax rate than his secretary. Today, President Obama is calling for the same with the Buffett Rule.

A picture’s worth…

Via Maddow Blog

 

And of course, there’s that little thing called the horse’s mouth:

Jeb Bush makes a good point. The GOP would label St. Ronnie as a liberal Marxist socialist today. Why, I bet they’d demand to see his birth certificate and accuse him of eating dog meat.

But first things first: Jebby is no moderate, so don’t get lulled into a “He’s no W, he’s not so bad” moment. That said, it is a treat to see Republicans eating their own.

Grover Norquist of “sign my anti-tax pledge or you’re political toast” infamy didn’t like Bush’s remarks one little bit.

TPM is reporting that Grover said things like this about Jebby’s Reagan comments:

That’s foolish… It’s stup—it’s bizarre. … There’s a guy who watched his father throw away his presidency on a 2:1 [ratio of spending cuts to tax increases] promise… And he thinks he’s sophisticated by saying that he’d take a 10:1 promise. He doesn’t understand — he’s just agreed to walk down the same alley his dad did with the same gang. And he thinks he’s smart. You walk down that alley, you don’t come out. You certainly don’t come out with 2:1 or 10:1.”

And then he blamed Reagan’s tax increases on a Democratic-led Congress. Grovie’s such a class act, isn’t he? And by class act, I mean he’s “foolish, stup– bizarre.”

Glub.

Hatred, trolls, and politics

Link

Ever since Wisconsin Still-Gov. Scott Walker managed to survive the recall election last night, from the minute the results were announced, I started getting tweet after tweet by troll after troll spewing (mostly misspelled) nastiness, gloating, and insults.

Sidebar: A brief Twitter lesson on trolling… A “troll” is someone who enters a Twitter stream, usually uninvited, and initiates a conversation in the most inflammatory way possible. Sometimes, but not usually, it starts out more subtly, then quickly escalates into full-on offensive content. The idea is to provoke, bait, disrupt, and eventually get an emotional response. One motivation is to acquire more followers and/or get a posse to pile on. They often appear to be illiterate, bigoted, racist, uninformed, misinformed, and very angry. And yes, that description also fits commenters at this blog, as well as the very definition of Fox News [sic] devotees… and believe it or not, even some fellow Dems.

Just as things were settling down, I was deluged again because Michael Moore retweeted the same tweet of mine that the Maddow Blog posted on their site (scroll), and all the Moore haters swooped in.

These people don’t want to debate for the most part, nor do they care about having a civil discussion. They go directly to rude, hostile blather and harassment, and I go directly to the block option, although I do sometimes succumb to a couple of rounds of Whack a Troll when I’m feeling feisty.

But why is this happening? Why is there so much blatant rancor? The political climate is so heated, so hateful, that, just as Congress is more divided than ever, so are the rest of us.  And because people can hide behind their computers, feel removed, knowing there’s a distance between them and who they choose to attack, even bully, knowing they are likely impossible to track and identify, they take full advantage.

How can our representatives govern properly if one side openly announces that its primary goal is to boot out the president instead of passing laws that will improve life for fellow U.S. citizens? How can those who are governed by clashing Congress members achieve their own peace if tea party enthusiasts, Breitbart followers, right wing extremists, and religious fanatics condemn and assault anyone they see as the enemy?

What’s worse, and ironic, is that those we think are dead wrong about so many things feel the very same way about us. Their concern is that we’ll win elections and power, and we’re worried that they will. Fear can be a powerful motivator.

Disagreements are fine, but bombarding or beating up on political opponents doesn’t resolve disputes or change minds, it solidifies positions, and can even radicalize the other side.  Launching attacks without provocation expressly to evoke a knee-jerk response or to start a fight to get attention is self-serving, destructive and unnecessary.

And it’s no way to improve the nation’s collective state of mind, or for that matter, the state of the union.

“The Republicans are the problem… Compromise has gone out the window.”

Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein have been studying Washington politics and Congress for more than 40 years, and guess what? They’ve never seen it this dysfunctional in all that time, and expand on the point in their WaPo opinion piece.

You’re right, this is not the least bit surprising, but it’s still nice to get some validation from Mann and Ornstein… as if we needed any, right?

As John Dean tweeted, this op-ed is so important given the sources, and it deserves some real attention. Their premise is, of course, that “the problem lies with the Republican Party” and that when one party is so off the charts ideologically, then coming together with the other political party to work through and resolve the nation’s problems is nearly impossible:

The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition. [...]

While the Democrats may have moved from their 40-yard line to their 25, the Republicans have gone from their 40 to somewhere behind their goal post. [...]

Today, thanks to the GOP, compromise has gone out the window in Washington. In the first two years of the Obama administration, nearly every presidential initiative met with vehement, rancorous and unanimous Republican opposition in the House and the Senate, followed by efforts to delegitimize the results and repeal the policies. The filibuster, once relegated to a handful of major national issues in a given Congress, became a routine weapon of obstruction, applied even to widely supported bills or presidential nominations. And Republicans in the Senate have abused the confirmation process to block any and every nominee to posts such as the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, solely to keep laws that were legitimately enacted from being implemented.

As for how Democrats behaved when George W. Bush was in the White House, “the difference is striking.” That’s right, the Dems actually provided crucial votes that got some controversial legislation passed, like tax cuts, No Child Left Behind, and the 2008 financial bailouts. (Not that they should have passed some of those laws…)

That was then.

Their advice to the press:

[S]top lending legitimacy to Senate filibusters by treating a 60-vote hurdle as routine. The framers certainly didn’t intend it to be. Report individual senators’ abusive use of holds and identify every time the minority party uses a filibuster to kill a bill or nomination with majority support.

Their advice to voters: “Punish ideological extremism at the polls.”

My advice to Mann and Ornstein: Shout ”The problem lies with the Republican Party” from the rooftops.

Thomas E. Mann is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, and Norman J. Ornstein is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. This essay is adapted from their book “It’s Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided With the New Politics of Extremism,” which will be available Tuesday.

Note: Edited.

President Obama is still willing to work with Congress in 2012

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Ed Schultz:

“According to The Times, the president will showcase measures he is taking on his own to revive the economy. The Associated Press reports he will unveil at least two or three directives per week.”

The Hill:

The White House on Tuesday downplayed news reports that President Obama will go it alone with Congress this year.

Two senior administration officials said there’s work to be done with Congress — including work on the deficit and full-year extension of the payroll-tax cut — and Obama will look for opportunities to work together with Congress to improve the economy.

The administration officials said Obama will also be pushing lawmakers to pass some parts of his jobs package that did not win approval in 2011. Anything that hasn’t been signed into law, Obama still wants to sign into law, the officials said.

Jay Carney says this isn’t an “either or” situation… and also that President Obama “hopes” Congress will work with him.

You can stop laughing now.

But he also said that if Congress does the one thing it does so well– obstruct– “the president’s not going to just sit here.” That’s more like it.

White House officials believe that some Republicans who are up for reelection will break with their party and do what Eric Cantor refuses to do, compromise. In fact, in his interview on “60 Minutes”, Cantor said he wants to “cooperate,” but the other C word is not an option, because it really means compromising “principles”. That’s funny, I thought it meant meeting someone half-way.

Let’s ask Mr. Webster, before wittle Ewic’s press secretary interrupts to cover Ewic’s wittle hiney again:

Definition of COMPROMISE

1a: settlement of differences by arbitration or by consent reached by mutual concessions

b : something intermediate between or blending qualities of two different things

2: a concession to something derogatory or prejudicial <a compromise of principles

So Eric Cantor and his buddies cherry pick the definition (“derogatory” Eric?) that is the least relevant or applicable in order to avoid giving the president so much as an inch.

And this is who President Obama still feels will meet him half way.