L.A. Times: Obama Still Futilely Pursuing Compromises with Republicans
And Obama’s personal march of folly continues.
Liberals want Obama to confront Republicans more directly. Moderates, remembering how Bill Clinton altered course after losing control of Congress in 1994 and won reelection in 1996, want the president to work more cooperatively with Republicans in hopes of avoiding gridlock. […]
For now, Obama seems to be coming down on the side of those who want conciliation. He is scrambling to round up enough Republican votes in the Senate for an arms treaty with Russia that until recently had seemed like a sure thing. And he has suggested he would consider a temporary extension of tax cuts for people earning more than $250,000 annually — a concession he had once vigorously opposed.
Yeah, great idea! Though it’s lucky for Obama he didn’t try this earlier, because otherwise the stimulus would’ve been loaded up with too many tax cuts to attract Republican votes. Boy, that would’ve been a big mistake! And that health insurance bill — fortunately it wasn’t modeled after Republican plans to attract Republican votes.
Because if the stimulus was too small and the health insurance bill did nothing to break up the monopoly of the insurance companies, the Democrats would really be in trouble right now, right?
“You can’t build bipartisanship on preemptive concessions,” Edley said in an interview. “These are bullies who can’t be appeased.”
Edley, who also served on Obama’s transition team advisory board, added: “Too much time was squandered pursuing bipartisanship — far beyond the point of a good-faith effort. Repeating the same hopeful approach would be tragic. They need to be open to bipartisanship, but there needs to be a demonstrated interest from the other side.”
The other side has made their intent clear. To everyone, apparently, but Obama.