1/29: A House Divided

So the House approved Barack Obama's economic stimulus bill in the way that bloggers desired, with Dems almost unanimously voting in favor of the bill and GOPers unanimously voting against it. Conservative bloggers are heaping praise on their GOP representatives for standing up for "smaller government and fiscal responsibility." Michelle Malkin proudly described yesterday as "a good day for conservatism," while Ed Morrissey hopefully wondered, "Have the Republicans turned a corner?" Meanwhile, righty bloggers have already begun urging Senate Min. Leader Mitch McConnell and the rest of the Senate GOPers to join their House counterparts in opposing the bill. Erick Erickson is asking his readers to "send Mitch some balls" (literally) in order to encourage him to "oppose the stimulus bill."

Meanwhile, liberal bloggers aren't surprised that House GOPers unanimously voted against the stimulus bill, as they think it was politically smart of them to do so. However, they're annoyed that Dems made several compromises (such as removing a provision expanding family planning services for low-income Americans) when not a single GOPer ended up voting for the bill anyway. "Pre-compromising to attract non-existent Republican support was, in a word, insane," one blogger complained. Lefty bloggers hope that Obama learned a lesson from this experience -- namely, that compromising legislation in order to seek GOP support is a futile pursuit (and an unnecessary one, in their view, since Dems have such large congressional majorities).

STIMULUS: Thanks For Holding The Line, House GOPers

Conservative bloggers are praising House GOPers for unanimously voting against the stimulus bill:

• Right Wing News' John Hawkins: "Rarely do I say this, but I am proud of the Republican Party today."
• Power Line's John Hinderaker: "Congratulations to the House Republicans: all 177 voted against the Democrats' pork-fest bill. [...] For the Republicans, this vote is an important first step toward reclaiming the mantle of small(er) government and fiscal responsibility."
• RedState's Erickson: "The House GOP held the line. They voted unanimously to oppose the Obama Stimulus Plan. The Democrats will now own this failure. [...] I'm giving a $22.00 donation to the National Republican Congressional Committee, the group that elects House Republicans. We may not agree with them every time. But it is quite important that we say thanks to them when they hold the line on the advance of socialism."
• Townhall's Matt Lewis: "Kudos to House Republicans for sticking together and standing firm against the 'stimulus'. Is it just me, or does it seem like -- for the first time in a long time -- Republicans are starting to get their mojo back???"
• Malkin: "Today was a good day for conservatism. [...The GOP] may have lost the vote, but they sent a lasting message. They took a stand for principle and posterity. They took a stand against generational theft. They reclaimed their brand as the party of small government, low taxes, and fiscal responsibility. They restored their damaged credibility."
• RedState's Jeff Emanuel: "The Democrats passed the bill, but couldn't keep their caucus together -- and the GOP managed to keep every single member in line. Well done, Reps. [John] Boehner, [Eric] Cantor, and the rest of the House Republican caucus."
• Hot Air's Morrissey: "Politically as well as economically, Republicans made the right choice in refusing to sign onto this stimulus package. In the first place, only 12% of this bill has any actual stimulus value, and it comes too slowly to help. The rest, filled mostly with historical Democratic spending priorities for government like family planning, education spending, and poverty programs, should have been handled through normal appropriations and not emergency economic stimulus spending, which it clearly is not. If this package passes Congress and it works, the Democrats will get all the credit, as [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi especially ensured that Republicans couldn't offer any of their ideas for improvements. If it fails (and it surely will), the blame falls squarely on Obama, Pelosi, and [Senate Maj. Leader] Harry Reid, which is exactly what Obama hoped to avoid -- and why the vote was actually more of a defeat than a victory."

AmSpec Blog's Philip Klein isn't quite ready to congratulate House GOPers: "I find myself of two minds in the wake of the House vote on the stimulus package. On the one hand, I'm thrilled that Republicans voted against this monstrosity. On the other hand, it's frustrating to consider what it took for them to actually stand in unified opposition to crappy legislation. For years, they voted for every pork-laden bill that the [George W.] Bush White House sent down the pike. Now they finally make a strong statement for fiscal restraint, but only after two straight election pummelings that handed Democrats the White House, both chambers of Congress, and a near filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Things might have been a lot different had Republicans stood up to the Bush administration like they stood up to President Obama today."

STIMULUS II: Follow The House's Lead, Senate!

Conservative bloggers are urging Senate GOPers to oppose the stimulus bill as vigorously as House GOPers did:

• Hawkins: "Unfortunately, I have been hearing behind-the-scenes for the last few days that although the GOP leadership and most of the rank-and-file in the Senate oppose the stimulus bill, they are unlikely to filibuster it. Perhaps seeing the House Republicans stand tall will stiffen their spines a bit, however, and we may see the Senate GOP go to the mat to stop this incredible disaster for the American people."
• Malkin: "Senate Republicans, take note. Don't squander this opportunity for redemption. Make no apologies for principled obstructionism. Counter the inevitable liberal overreaching with plain facts and free-market alternatives."
• Morrissey: "The way to build credibility on principle is to start acting on it. Let's hope Senate Republicans figure that out when the bill hits the upper chamber."

Meanwhile, Erickson is urging his readers to "send Mitch some balls": "I've said [McConnell] lost his testicles and is now spreading a cancer of capitulation throughout the Senate Republican Conference. We need to send Mitch some balls. Seriously. We're teaming up with the Don't Go Movement to do just that. Go here and send Mitch some balls. The House GOP can hold the line. Mitch and the Senate GOP should do the same and oppose the stimulus bill."

The Heritage Foundation's Conn Carroll hopes that Obama "changes course": "[S]lapping together all of the far left's spending priorities into one massive deficit skyrocketing bill and then calling it 'economic stimulus' does not make it economic stimulus. [...] For the sake of the economy, we sincerely hope [Obama] changes course."

STIMULUS III: Enough With The "Bipartisan" Charade

Most liberal bloggers don't care that zero GOPers voted for the economic stimulus bill. They believe that Dems should stop making compromises in the name of bipartisanship and instead rely on their sizeable congressional majorities in order to pass the most progressive legislation possible:

• Open Left's Chris Bowers: "While we will need two Republican votes to pass the stimulus through the Senate, I'm glad no Republicans supported it in the House. Not only does it offer a clear contrast between the parties, not only does it give good reason to re-write the legislation without any concessions to Republicans when the bill is reworked in conference, but it puts a quick end to the 'bi-partisan' charade of the last few days. As demonstrated on so many occasions, most recently by the 95% drop in Republican support for TARP, almost all Republicans in Congress are bad faith actors. You can't compromise or appeal to people whose motives are simply to oppose you. [...] Let's drop futile attempts to appease those who caused our problems in the first place, and stay focused on cleaning up the mess they left."
• AMERICAblog's Joe Sudbay: "The traditional media and pundits need to remember that the primary goal here is saving the economy, not bipartisanship. It shouldn't surprise anyone that the same Republicans who played politics with the Iraq war are willing to play the same games with our teetering economy. That's what they do. Hopefully, the Obama team has learned something, too. If the other side isn't really negotiating in good faith, you're just negotiating with yourselves. [...] The goal, once again, shouldn't be getting GOP votes. The goal is putting together a package that will save the economy, which was destroyed by GOP policies."
• Atrios: "If I were advising the Republicans I would've told them to vote against the stimulus package. I would tell them to make the point clearly that if they were in charge, the bill would be a different bill. They're a competing political party and they need to, you know, highlight the fact that their vision for America is actually different. I appreciate that members of both parties don't always toe the line completely, but on a bill as big as this it makes perfect sense for it to play out as it did. Of course the flip side is that Dems should've pushed the best plan that could pass the Senate instead of pushing some pointless fantasy about bipartisanship."
• Think Progress' Matthew Yglesias: "I would imagine the [GOP's] crude calculus is something like this. In 1993-94 the GOP minority relentlessly sought to obstruct a new president's legislative agenda and were rewarded with a big electoral win in 1994. In 2001-2002 the Democratic minority relentlessly sought to compromise with a new president's legislative agenda and were rewarded with a big electoral defeat in 2002. Simplistic lesson is that there's no upside to cooperation. The lesson I would hope the administration learns here is this: He needs to spend less time seeking political cover to mitigate the downside to possible policy failure, and more time trying to implement the best policies he can."
• MyDD's Todd Beeton: "You see, this is what you get when you fetichize bipartisanship. Can we just agree that it's overrated and that we'd be a lot better off if Democrats just passed everything on a party line vote and move on?"

STIMULUS IV: You Made All Those Compromises For Nothing, Obama!

Several liberal bloggers are bemoaning the compromises Obama made when not a single GOPer ended up voting for the bill anyway:

• The New York Times' Paul Krugman: "The House has passed the stimulus bill with not a single Republican vote. Aren't you glad that Obama watered it down and added ineffective tax cuts, so as to win bipartisan support?"
• Firedoglake's Ian Welsh: "After taking out family planning money and ditching bankruptcy reform, plus including significant tax cuts, not a single Republican voted for it. It's like Democrats are negotiating with themselves. They give things up and get no votes in exchange."
• dday: "[P]re-compromising to attract non-existent Republican support was, in a word, insane. Now Obama had better hope those Republican ideas (which aren't overwhelming, but they're still there) baked into the package work. I'm not holding my breath. And let's hope that, in the future, the only people who sill listen to the ideas of Republicans are cable news talent bookers."

Several liberal bloggers are urging Dems to undo these compromises before the Senate votes on the bill:

• Bowers: "[Now there is] good reason to re-write the legislation without any concessions to Republicans when the bill is reworked in conference."
• The Reality-Based Community's Mark Kleiman: "When the House and Senate bills go to conference, some of the concessions made in the name of bipartisanship -- in particular some of the inequitable and uneconomic tax cuts -- should be taken out, and replaced by, e.g., a payroll-tax holiday for employees. And we should be sure to put the birth control funds back into the bill; Republican politicians, their corporate paymasters, and their fundamentalist voters need to be taught the lesson that obstructionism has a price. McConnell has already announced that he won't filibuster the stimulus package. So we don't need any Republican votes in the Senate, either. Having tried it the bipartisan way, let's make this a Democratic bill and pass it with Democratic votes."
• Balloon Juice's Tim F: "If Republicans plan to deliver exactly zero votes for Obama's stimulus bill, then why does the bill still have compromises in it? Screw them. Put the family planning stuff back in, take the tax cuts out. If we know for sure that passing a crappy bill won't win any more votes then just pass a better bill. They won't scream any louder. The political cost won't be any greater. Also, and pay attention because this is the important part, a better bill is more likely to succeed."

STIMULUS V: Obstructionists!

While many liberal bloggers don't seem to mind that House GOPers unanimously voted against the economic stimulus bill, others are portraying House GOPers as obstructionists:

• Mother Jones' Kevin Drum: "In case there were still any doubters, I think it's now safe to say that the GOP caucus has decided to pick up where it left off last year, in full-on obstruction mode."
• The Washington Monthly's Steve Benen: "If the House Republican caucus, en masse, isn't willing to support a stimulus package in the midst of a global economic crisis, it's hard to imagine when, exactly, GOP lawmakers are going to work with the majority party in a constructive way."
• Kleiman: "Democrats should never let the voters forget this. Republicans chose the opportunity to give an overwhelmingly popular new President the finger over the opportunity to work together to drag the economy out of the hole their policies left it in. In particular, those running in 2010 against the remaining Republicans from Blue districts should wrap this vote around the incumbents' [necks]; when push came to shove, they put party first, country last."
• Obsidian Wings' publius: "Here we are facing the most desperate economic crisis since the Depression -- with mass layoffs stories filling the newswires each week. And the Republicans are attempting -- in an extremely partisan fashion -- to block efforts to stimulate the economy (after monetary policy has completely run out of bullets). I mean, a Democratic Karl Rove would have a field day with this stuff."
• Daily Kos' Jed L: "Nobody expected overwhelming GOP support. But for every single Republican member to oppose a new economic recovery plan? After the 2008 election, that's just stunning. [...] This type of partisan obstruction by Republicans is just another example of why Americans overwhelmingly favor the Democratic Party on issues like the economy."
• dday: "I don't know how you can come away from this sideshow thinking anything but that Republicans are determined to have their Great Depression and that they openly wish failure upon the United States, or at least no economic recovery for anyone who needs it. Americans seem to have gotten that message too; it's why Democrats have a 24-point generic ballot lead at this point for the next election."

The Atlantic's Andrew Sullivan: "The GOP sure rewarded the president for coming to the Hill and talking it through with them for hours, didn't they?"

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: A Strange Time To Take A Stand

The American Conservative's Daniel Larison thinks the House GOP made a mistake by unanimously voting against Obama's stimulus bill:

"It continues to mystify me how John Boehner remains the leader of the House Republicans. The Republican stimulus vote was remarkable in how politically tone-deaf it was. The bill as presented to the House shouldn't have passed, but it is striking how unwilling the Republican leadership was to back a popular piece of legislation. When confronted with a similar situation in September over the bill authorizing the TARP -- the Democrats had a majority but wanted, indeed needed, Republican votes for provide bipartisan cover -- the Republican leadership caved and backed a bill their constituents hated and endorsed a measure of dubious merit. Of course, that was four months ago when it might have done them some good electorally. Having blown the obvious opportunity to tap into populist outrage over the bailout, which was supported by perhaps a third of the electorate at most, the leadership now decides to make their stand opposing a bill that commands support from a broad majority of the country, and they do so at a time when their stand, such as it is, will be forgotten by the time the midterms come around. Indeed, the sudden unanimous opposition of House Republicans to this bill mainly accomplishes one thing, which is to remind everyone of how gutlessly the Republican leadership acquiesced to whatever the Bush administration wanted and how they only managed to discover some interest in resisting massive expenditures when someone from the other party is in the White House."

LEST WE FORGET: Starbucks Eliminates Coffee, Cups, Stir-thingies

The Huffington Post's Andy Borowitz:

"In its latest cost-cutting moves designed to improve its bottom line, Starbucks announced today that it would no longer offer coffee, cups, or stir-thingies beginning February 1.

In an official statement, company spokesman Carol Foyler said that Starbucks 'wrestled long and hard' with the decision to eliminate the three items, 'especially coffee.'.

'We are aware that many of our customers have come to Starbucks in the past looking for a cup of coffee,' Ms. Foyler said. 'We hope, however, that they will continue to come even though we no longer offer coffee or cups, for that matter.' [...]

When asked what Starbucks hoped would attract customers to their stores in the future, Ms. Foyler said, 'We hope customers will see our stores as a place for the unemployed and/or homeless to come out of the cold and warm themselves over a scalding hot cup of water, as long as they bring the cup.'"