How much bipartisanship is there going to be in Washington?

Quite a few of the talking heads in the media have been claiming that Obama must be judged to have failed if he cannot get Republicans to support his proposals, even though the voters elected enough Democrats to Congress that legislation can be enacted with no Republican support in the House and only a couple of Republican votes in the Senate. This being the case all Republicans have to do is say 'No' in order to have Obama judged a failure. Of course, if they simply say 'No' to everything they will have sacrificed their chances to accomplish anything positive. Do they care so little about what is good for the country that they would try to scuttle needed legislation just for partisan advantage?

Here is Rush Limbaugh, default head of the Republican Party, on bipartisanship. (From his speech yesterday at the CPAC).

Bipartisanship occurs only after one other result. And that is victory. In other words, let's say as conservatives liberals demand that we be bipartisan with them in congress. What they mean is, we check our principles at the door, let them run the show and then agree with them. That is bipartisanship to them. To us, bipartisanship is them being forced to agree with us after we have politically cleaned their clocks and beaten them.

If the Republicans in Congress continue to follow Limbaugh's lead there is going to be very little bipartisanship in Washington.

Who wants to hang with Rush Limbaugh?

On the American Prospect blog Sarah Posner reports:

In his CPAC speech, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell insisted that conservatives are more "interesting" and "fun" than liberals. Here's his proof: "who wants to hang out with guys like Paul Krugman and Robert Reich when you can be with Rush Limbaugh?"

McConnell's comment causes me to suspect that the chasm between liberals and conservatives in this country is immense and unbridgeable. I find it hard to imagine anyone preferring the company of Rush Limbaugh to either Paul Krugman or Robert Reich.

Why the President will not mention local blog

Local conservative blogger, QCExaminer, pleads with President Obama to "diss" her. I think she is missed something important about why the president advised Congressional Republican "you can't listen to Limbaugh and get things done." It wasn't just because Limbaugh is a conservative. It was because Limbaugh was telling Republicans to oppose Obama, not just when they thought his proposals were wrong and would not work, but all the time, especially on proposals that, if passed, would work. Limbaugh wants Obama to fail, not because his ideas would fail, but out of fear that his proposals would succeed. The success of Obama's policies, in addition to being good for America, would clearly demonstrate to the vast majority of voters that it is in their interests for Democrats to be elected.

That is the reason the President told Republicans in Congress they cannot listen to Limbaugh and "get things done." Is QCExaminer saying anything that the President needs to comment on? Not so much.

Limbaugh's head explodes

To Barack Obama's supporters the actions he has taken in these first few days of his presidency are not particularly surprising. After all, they are reflections of themes he stressed during the campaign. For example, his executive order instructing "federal agencies to handle requests for information from the public and press under the Freedom of Information Act [FOIA] with an eye toward disclosure, not refusal" is just a return to the pre-Bush Administration policies regarding FOIA requests. But what most Americans view as a return to the status quo after 8 years of lawlessness has some Bush supporter's heads exploding. Here is Rush Limbaugh's reaction:

LIMBAUGH: What I’m afraid of is that what Obama did with this executive order is actually make it easier for the media to go get Bush documents. Because you know Pelosi and some of the guys over in congress are talking about war crimes trials and charges and so forth. […]

What I’m afraid of is what Obama’s done here is made the gathering of the information for this kind of stuff– This is not American. This is not America. This is not what America does. We don’t– This is Banana Republic kind of stuff.

The idea that obeying the law and allowing citizens to hold the government accountable for their actions makes us "a banana repubic" is pretty bizarre. Even more bizarre is Rush Limbaugh's view of who has been exhibiting racism lately:

You know, racism in this country is the exclusive problems of the left. We’re witnessing racism all this week that led up to the inauguration. We are being told that we have to hope he succeeds; that we have to bend over, grab the ankles, bend over forward, backward, whichever; because his father was black, because this is the first black president. We’ve got to accept this. The racism that everybody thinks exists on our side of the aisle has been on full display throughout their primary campaign.

It is hard for me to make any sense of this. He says that he and people who think like him are being told they have to "accept this" but it is not clear what "this" is. It surely cannot be that Obama has a black father or that Obama is the first black president. He surely cannot be objecting to being expected to accept those facts. No, it must be that he objects to the assumption that we all agree that it is good that we finally have a black president. Amazingly, he is claiming that it is racist of us to expect him to be glad about that.