Monday, January 31, 2011

More of that Obama bipartisanship

Jim Geraghty is fond of pointing out that "all of President Obama's promises come with expiration dates. All of them." So, does everyone remember what President Obama said in his State of the Union address? About not "re-fighting the battles of the last two years" but "fix[iing] what needs fixing and ... mov[ing] forward"?

OK, this is not a promise, exactly, but how does this story fit?
Mr. Obama last year short-circuited messy confirmation battles for Dr. Donald Berwick, head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and Craig Becker, a member of the National Labor Relations Board, by using recess appointments to put the men in place while the Senate was out of town. The appointments expire at the end of this year, and the president late on Wednesday renominated both men for a full term...
...knowing that neither one is confirmable, as each is radically outside of the American political mainstream, and cannot possibly gather enough votes to overcome the inevitable filibuster.

So, despite the fact that he just told us all, less than a week ago, that we shouldn't do it, I guess he's decided that re-fighting some of the battles of the last two years is OK. What this tells us, of course, is that when he says he doesn't want to "re-fight the battles of the last two years" he simply means that he doesn't want to re-fight the battles that he won. Those should be enshrined and untouched for all eternity. The battles that he lost, however - he's OK with re-fighting those suckers for as long as it takes...

This is pretty much the standard liberal and media (I know, redundant) definition of bipartisanship - both parties doing what the liberals want. It's SOP in Washington - "heads, I win, tails, we vote again."

Labels: , , , , ,



Post a Comment


<< Home

Links to this post

Links to this post:

Create a Link