Obama has adult conversation with GOP

[Lurker]

This was amazing to watch

[Embar Angylwrath]

I was impressed with the exchange, at times frank and pointed, but mostly civil. Personally, I don't think the Republicans expected Obama to accept their invitation, and when he did, and brought a camera crew with him, what could they do? Master stroke by Obama. However...

Once you get past the words, the calls for bipartisanship, while noble, will require adjustments on both sides. Pelosi has to stop presenting Dem caucus agreements to the full house under a closed rule, which practically eliminates any amendments of significance, thus effectively locking out the Republicans from the process. Its a great way to ram through legislative agenda on the fast track, but you dramatically reduce bipartisan involvement by doing so. Its a bit disingenious of Pelosi to paint the Republicans as the party of "no", when she sets it up so that they have no real input in the process.

As to the Republicans, they now have a chance to stand up and be counted. If Obama is sincere about wanting to work in a bipartisan manner (and I beleive he is sincere about that), he will put his shoulder to the rock and help move legislation through the House and Senate that does enjoy bipartisan support. If he starts there, he may change the current dynamic of politics in Washington. If he isn't afraid of his own party, and is willing to buck up against the liberal fringe within the Dem party to get bipartisan support, he may be as successful as Clinton. More so if he doesn't fuck an intern.

[Lurker]

So all the Republicans have to do towards bipartisanship is "stand up and be counted"? Interesting. How very one sided.

What I gathered from the discussion is that it would be more helpful if both sides stopped lying about the plans and actions of the other side and stopped presenting their own plans in such a dishonest way. The last question of the evening was a perfect example of why calls for bipartisanship are likely doomed to failure, and not due to any fault of Obama's or the Democrats. After all that discussion a Republican actually stands up to pose an attack question premised on a complete lie, coincidentally the very same deficit lie you leveled a couple weeks ago. It was pathetic.

Anyways, I thought the exchanges were remarkable. Obama has obviously spent considerable time looking at all sides of these issues, he's read the Republican proposals, and he seems open to ideas as long as they aren't just political bullshit and can credibly work.

[Ddrak]

This is what Obama needs to do more of. His strength is his oration and ability to present a thoughtful and intelligent image. If you want to stop an attack, let them address you face to face with a camera rolling and show that you have cohesive responses to the questions presented.

Dd

[Embar Angylwrath]

Agreed Dd.

As to Lurker... why didn't you substantially address Pelosi?

[Lurker]

Because you already covered it. Why didn't you address the Republicans at all?

I don't want this thread to turn into a back and forth attack. My only point was that we need to look at the root cause of the problems on both sides. A little honesty on each side and less hyperbole would go a long way. I'm not sure we saw that in some of the dishonest framing of questions.

[Kulaf]

Basically what you need in both houses is fresh blood leading both parties. Unfortunatly the only people who get to be Speaker and Majority/Minority leader are the most instransigent of partizans. And this is on both sides of the aisle. They put on public happy faces but in the back rooms they are just business as usual.

[Lurker]

I haven't seen many "public happy faces". I have seen a lot of dishonesty and hyperbole.

[Embar Angylwrath]

Pelosi needs to be sidelined before there can be any real involvement by the Republicans. Presenting legislation on the floor that they can't even submit amendments to, and then crying foul when they don't vote for it, is dishonest. That's entirely in Pelosi's hands. If she wants them engaged in the process, she has to open it up to them. Until she does that, she's hamstringing Obama's wish for bipartisanship.

[Lurker]

You said that already.

Is it possible that Pelosi would open up to the Republicans if they were more honest in their criticism and put forward more sensible policy proposals? Making demonstrably absurd claims like "Our stimulus proposals cost half as much and produce twice as many jobs!", or "Obama quadrupled the deficit in 3 weeks!", or "Our health reform plan lowers premiums, covers everyone and doesn't cost a dime!" isn't a very good starting point for bipartisanship.

Edit: And in the Senate, you have Republicans demonizing ideas that they themselves proposed or supported, like paygo, deficit commissions, end of life counselling, reduction of waste in medicare, etc. That's not the Democrats fault.

[Embar Angylwrath]

You said that already.

Is it possible that Pelosi would open up to the Republicans if they were more honest in their criticism and put forward more sensible policy proposals? Making demonstrably absurd claims like "Our stimulus proposals cost half as much and produce twice as many jobs!", or "Obama quadrupled the deficit in 3 weeks!", or "Our health reform plan lowers premiums, covers everyone and doesn't cost a dime!" isn't a very good starting point for bipartisanship.

As some Reps pointed out and as Obama agreed in the video you posted, whenever the Reps do try to get involved, Pelosi locks them out. Doesn't leave them much to work with, does it, other than to resort to bareknuckle politics.

She has to the first to change, since its absolutely a requirement. She does that, and the Reps don't change, then your criticism will stand. But until the Reps are offered a legitimate avenue to be part of the process, you can't condemn them for not being a part of the process.

[Lurker]

I agree with you on the House. Pelosi needs to try harder to include the Republicans if they are proposing good ideas.

That doesn't explain the Republicans in the Senate or the larger issue of outright lying to the public.

[Embar Angylwrath]

I agree with you on the House. Pelosi needs to try harder to include the Republicans if they are proposing good ideas.

That doesn't explain the Republicans in the Senate or the larger issue of outright lying to the public.

I think most of that was driven by 2 things... 1) Reps being marginalized and knowing they couldn't really be involved in any significant way when it came to shaping legislation (their only real tool was a filibuster, although thats changed now), and 2) knowing they were marginalized, and not able to be involved in any substantive way, they set on a path of obstructionism so as to better position themselves in the upcoming elections. It doesn't excuse the behavior, but I think thats the reason behind it.

[Partha]

These are many of the same Republicans who came in in the '94 elections, who decided when it was time to make legislation, to physically lock Democrats out of the meetings, add provisions after committee meetings, holding votes open for incredibly long periods for extra arm-twisting, etc. etc. ad nauseum ad sputum. To find them now complaining about Democrats being mean to them is incredibly hypocritical.