Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Partisanship is the reason for FOX-News' existence, and the reason for MSNBC's rise; it is the animating purpose behind much of the professional political blogosphere. It is, in short, BIG BIG business. It is also one of the primary reasons the U.S. has been essentially dysfunctional for 40 years. I hope Obama can help change this.
I provided numerous examples in what I just wrote of how flagrantly untrue this claim is. I documented the extreme, virtually complete, agreement among the parties over the last eight years on most of the most consequential matters.
And then you come and spout these empty-headed platitudes about how we need more bipartisanship without addressing any of that evidence and without providing any of your own. Why would you think that would be persuasive?
Mr. Greenwald has given a good voice to something I've been thinking for a while now. People seem to have this conception that there's this list of non-partisan business that's not getting done because congress is bickering over "partisan" issues. I'm imagining them trying to pass a resolution that "puppies are cute", but they can't because dammit, they don't agree on abortion.
The fact is, if you want bipartisanship, you want things to stay exactly where they are. Because for the most part, we all want change, but half of us have a mostly different vision of what that change is. Any change is partisan by nature, and can't really think of anything that's not politicized. So my version of politics is, make up your mind, convince as many people as you can, elect the people that represent you, try to get more elected than the other guys, and then take no prisoners.
The end product has been bi partisanship, as you suggest. But Democrats have been very effective at making themselves SEEM to be in conflict with the Bush administration and congressional Republicans. Its that illusion that is being discussed in the 'partisanship' discussion. I would imagine more people are likely to know about that surface construct, than the actual cooperation that exists beneath it.
That was funny... Bipartisanshit? For some reason the spell checker in Firefox doesn't check the subject lines...
Still, a funny comment on the Bush league bipartisanship that has been a cruel and sadistic joke...
Lieberman will not be punished because the powerful right wing of the Democratic party does not see his views as extreme. His more idiotic pronouncements are merely a caricature of viewpoints held by too many Democratic Congressmen. They get where Lieberman is coming from and don't have a problem with that. Kos always says we need "more and better" Democrats. The focus needs to be on better; forget more. Electing more Democrats who vote as Republicans just serves to demoralize progressives in the party's base.
That Democrats in Congress have no problem dissing the grass roots in the name of "bipartisanship" reflects how basically weak the influence of progressives in the Democratic party still is.
... the same Democrats that were spineless 3 months ago, still are. Who'd have thought? What " bipartisanship" really means is "prepare to get screwed over like never before". You can bet this Congress will not go after the lawless Bush administration, in the name of "bipartisanship". And you can bet that things will pretty much continue on as they are, except you might not have a good job anymore, in the name of "bipartisanship". All that word really means is business as usual. Business as usual that you can believe in. Believe it.
I would imagine more people are likely to know about that surface construct, than the actual cooperation that exists beneath it.
I agree. For any real change to occur, people are going to have to accept that the Dems are doing exactly what they want to do and not being spineless or wimpy.
Acknowledging this is the next step towards meaningful change. We keep voting for Dems (well, I don't) because we "hope" and "have faith" that "this time" something will be different. Maybe they'll finally grow a spine.
Just acknowledge that they HAVE spines! And they are exercising their spines in the ways that benefit them and their corporate constituents.
Go along to get along. Screw the base and the public.
Wow. What a suprise.
Wouldn't "bipartisanship" mean that at least sometimes, the Democrats get what they want and the Republicans help them get it? Can you point me to even a single instance of that actually happening?
Now, the other way around - Democrats selling out their positions and supporters to give the Republicans what they want - happens all the time. But I can't think of a single instance in recent memory where the Republicans returned the favor.
Can you?
Once again, it's in the nature of the beast. One party ( here the GOP ) succeeds by scaring people while the other party survives by enabling its abusive partner. Since 1864, the Republicans have used - and mostly abused - patriotism to attack Democrats. Unfortunately, the Democrats are institutionally incapable of seeing beyond the next election. This means they are unable to see that in a multi-party system the tactic of divide to conquer wouldn't work. In fact, they would dominate in nearly every election.
We do want the Democrats in the White House. We just want to make sure everyone else gets heard too.
A lot of this stems from reading all sorts of claims from Obama supporters over the past few weeks about how right Obama is to oppose any punishment for Lieberman because it's so crucial that we have more bipartisanship -- that this was the "change" he promised.-- GlennGreenwald
Would you please provide a link or three to what claims you have read? I don't doubt that you can and that you're correct, but I haven't seen those claims myself, and I don't think that's because I have been purposely avoiding them. It's just that I've read so many claims to the contrary. Like, get the f' rid of Lieberman. I must be doing my reading in the minority circles.
Cass Sunstein doesn't count, so please don't provide link to anything he has said.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
