February 17, 2009

2/17: Back In The Saddle

Conservative bloggers are giddy about the fact that not a single House GOPer voted for the economic stimulus bill. Righty bloggers are heaping praise on House Min. Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and Min. Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) for keeping the GOP caucus unified; some are promoting a celebatory video from Cantor's office entitled, "The House GOP Is Back". While a few conservative bloggers are expressing qualms about the GOP's approach to the stimulus negotiations, they are clearly outnumbered. The majority of righty bloggers view the GOP's near-unanimous opposition to the stimulus bill as an important first step toward reclaiming the mantle of fiscal conservatism -- which (in their view) bodes well for the party's prospects in the 2010 midterms.

What else is happening in the blogosphere?

• Liberal bloggers (Moulitsas, Hamsher, Marshall) cite recent polling as evidence that the GOP's approach to the stimulus negotiations did nothing to improve their reputation.
• Liberal bloggers (digby, Moulitsas, Bowers) hope that the stimulus saga has convinced Pres. Obama to finally abandon his "obession with bipartisanship."
• Liberal bloggers (Llorens, Benen, Gardner) are criticizing IL Sen. Roland Burris after he acknowledged that the brother of ex-IL Gov. Rod Blagojevich asked him for fundraising help in the weeks before his Senate appointment -- an admission that contradicted Burris's earlier statements. Conservative bloggers (Yousefzadeh, Morrissey) are calling for Burris's expulsion from the Senate.

STIMULUS: The GOP Is Back, B*tches!

Conservative bloggers are praising the House GOP leadership after every single GOPer voted against the stimulus bill:

• RedState's Neil Stevens: "Represenative Eric Cantor therefore deserves our praise and congratulations on the results of the Porkulus bill in the House. Not once, but twice, did he as Whip help ensure that the bill passed the House without a single Republican vote. That's unity, and that kind of unity doesn't happen without at least some effort. Eric Cantor had to step up. Congratulations on that effort. Of course, the whip can only do so much without the Leader there with him, so congratulations to John Boehner for drawing the line on the Porkulus. This is the kind of effective party we need to be if we want to win in 2010."
• Townhall's Amanda Carpenter: "Republican House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (Va.) has helped keep the GOP in line on TWO votes on the stimulus package. Am I the only one who thinks some props are in order for Mr. Cantor?"
• RedState's Jeff Emanuel: "Kudos once again to the House GOP, which held the line in unanimity not once, but twice, against the Democrats' Porkulus charge."
• NRO's Kathryn Jean Lopez: "[T]he likes of Eric Cantor and [WI Rep.] Paul Ryan have long struck me as men who know what they believe and why (and can even explain it). This is the first time they've really had a wheel -- albeit a minority wheel in a town where they are outnumbered. I'm in the mood to encourage them."

Several conservative bloggers are already licking their chops in anticipation of the 2010 midterm elections:

• Townhall's John Hawkins: "[I]t has already become very apparent that if the GOP can hold the line on spending, it will not only fire up our base and be good for the country, it will give us an enormous stick with which to savagely beat the Democrats in the 2010 elections."
• The Next Right's Conn Carroll: "I still think 2010 is too early for the GOP to capitalize on the imminent failure of the Bush/Obama bailout parade, but if the GOP marks a clear break with [George W.] Bush's profligate spending, and the Democrats continue to demonstrate that their economic plan is just Bushonomics on steroids, then we have a real shot of making Obama a one-term president."
• Power Line's John Hinderaker: "...Obama has tied himself irreversibly to the deeply unpopular Congress and will have to live with the consequences of the Reid-Pelosi porkfest, as well as TARP I, TARP II, and whatever additional follies the Democrats may come up with in the months to come. Nothing that reporters and editors can do will protect Obama from the effects of his policies: inflation, unprecedented debt, economic waste and stagnation."

STIMULUS II: ...But Was This The Right Approach?

A few conservative bloggers are criticizing the GOP's approach to the stimulus negotiations:

• NRO's Bruce Bartlett: "[C]ongressional Republicans were never really willing to concede the principle that stimulus was needed. Their tax plan was just a rehash of old hash that was never plausibly linked to the particular economic problems we have today. I disagree about the payroll tax for various reasons, but at least it would have been focused on the reality of the situation, rather than just being a pointless political exercise. [...] An even better approach, in my opinion, would have been to focus on the details of the stimulus plan and argue that its provisions were not very stimulative -- even under Keynesian assumptions. [...] But for Republicans to make that argument they would have had to concede that the basic principle of fiscal stimulus was sound. In the end, Republicans preferred to reject the principle of stimulus, thus taking themselves out of the game. I think that was a mistake, both politically and substantively."
• The New Majority's David Frum: "We in fact have a constructive solution to offer, one that would deliver more jobs faster: the payroll tax holiday, an idea endorsed by almost every reputable right-of-center economist. But that's not the solution being offered by Republicans in Congress. They are offering a clapped-out package of 1980s-vintage solutions, including capital gains tax cuts. Capital gains! Who has any capital gains to be taxed in the first place? [...] If we're to make progress in 2010, we have to look serious. This week we looked not only irrelevant, but clueless and silly."

Most righty bloggers, however, are defending the House GOP's conduct. AmSpec Blog's W. James Antle, III writes: "I can't fault the Republicans' approach to the stimulus too much. [...] A coherent Republican plan for governing isn't going to flow out of the anti-stimulus campaign anymore than the Contract with America was the direct product of the Republicans' unanimous opposition to the [Bill] Clinton tax increase in 1993. But it's a step in a better direction than the party has traveled in recent years."

Meanwhile, NRO's Jonah Goldberg takes the middle ground: "All in all, I think the Congressional GOP did the right thing in voting against the stimulus. Indeed, it was very nice to see them man-up [...]. Nor do I think the GOP should have followed the [Arlen] Specter-route -- a view I made somewhat forcefully here. But Obama's framing of the Republicans as 'do nothing' has teeth, whether it's true or not. If this stimulus proves to be a turkey, it would be useful for the GOP to remind voters 'here's what we wanted to do.' And, if things turn out better than we expect, it would help if the GOP could say 'our plan would have gotten us here cheaper and better.' No one will remember the pork."

STIMULUS III: Look At The Polls Before You Pat Yourselves On The Back, GOPers

Liberal bloggers are buzzing about a new Daily Kos/Research 2000 poll indicating that the net favorability ratings of cong. GOPers have dropped over the past few weeks while the net favorability ratings of cong. Dems have risen. Lefty bloggers see this poll as evidence that the GOP's tactics may have impressed the party's base, but not the country as a whole. Daily Kos' Markos Moulitsas writes:

"The dinosaurs in the GOP may be patting themselves in the back from another round of well-executed obstructionism, but their already-unpopular numbers in Congress are plummeting to newfound lows while they continue to lose ground against the Democrats not just nationally, but even in their last redoubt in the South. So yeah, obstructionism may feel good, but if America wants something else, it does them little long-term good."

Liberal bloggers are also pointing to this poll as evidence that D.C. journalists are disconnected from public opinion:

• TPM's Josh Marshall: "In Washington, it was a battle royale between the new president and an emboldened Republican minority. At times they seemed to have him on the ropes. And yet in the country at large, Obama remains super popular. And the GOP is wildly unpopular."
• The Reality-Based Community's Mark Kleiman: "The stimulus bill and Obama are both quite popular, and the Republicans just the opposite. The public doesn't seem to have had nearly as much trouble as, for example, the editorial page of the Washington Post in figuring out which side is extending the hand of friendship and which side is biting it."
• Firedoglake's Jane Hamsher: "[C]ontrary to beltway opinion, the Republicans are getting hammered. While the Republican Party has only had a net change of -2, those directly involved in the stimulus battle are taking huge hits: [Senate Min. Leader Mitch] McConnell and Boehner at -11, and the Congressional Republicans who are getting such applause from the beltway denizens score a -10. [...] The American public looked at DC, they saw the Democrats trying to do something, and they liked what they saw. People who are deeply worried about staying employed and taking care of their families do not seem to have the universal high regard for House Republicans who stood together to oppose helping them out that the DC establishment do."
• Atrios: "I really do wonder what it would take for the Villagers to realize people don't like Republicans and their stupid shit anymore."

OBAMA: Goodbye Bipartisanship (And Good Riddance!)

Throughout the stimulus negotiations, the netroots frequently complained that Obama was emphasizing bipartisanship at the expense of crafting good policy. Liberal bloggers felt that by making so many public declarations about the importance of winning GOP votes, Obama was giving congressional GOPers too much control over his agenda. It's no surprise, then, that lefty bloggers were pleased to read this weekend's Politico article indicating that Obama "plans to travel more and campaign more in an effort to pressure lawmakers with public support, rather than worrying about whether he can win over Republican votes in Congress":

• digby: "If this article in Politico is correct, it sounds like the White House now recognizes that their fetishizing of bipartisanship actually handed the Republicans a big fat club. All they had to do was say no and Obama had 'failed.'"
• Open Left's Chris Bowers: "Awesome. I am excited about this shift in focus, and eager to engage in the legislative battles that will take place over the coming months. What we need now is a populist, progressive President who offers a clear choice to Americans, and allows his activist supporters to place pressure on fence-sitters. President Obama seems prepared to move in that direction."
• Moulitsas: "Yeah, I know there were those who thought that Obama's obsession with 'bipartisanship' was some sort of clever master plan to outflank Republicans or something, but in reality, the obsession with getting Republican votes ended up detracting from the selling of the stimulus itself to the American people. That apparently won't happen anymore. [...] Obama was elected to find solutions to our nation's pressing problems. Obama and the majority Democrats need to implement the best possible solutions to those problems. If Republicans have genuinely good ideas (i.e., not their tired 'tax cuts!' crap, especially now that Democrats have passed the largest tax cut in American history with zero Republican support), then fantastic. They can bring them to the table for due consideration. Otherwise, they shouldn't get a second thought from the adults actually trying to clean up George W. Bush's messes."
• The Nation's Ari Melber: "Less than a month into his presidency, Barack Obama has found that no one is really buying bipartisanship. His base hates it, as the blogs will tell you. His allies in Congress resent it, as Sen. [Chuck] Schumer signaled on Sunday morning. And while media outlets still prioritize a bipartisan process over actual policy substance, like this weird Washington Post editorial, even centrist pundits are souring on Obama's bipartisan bouquets. Time's Joe Klein, a fan of bipartisanship, has concluded that bipartisanship is currently impossible because there are no good faith partners in Washington. [...] Team Obama is already recalibrating, naturally. [WH CoS] Rahm Emanuel recently noted that an 'insatiable appetite' for bipartisanship made Obama's team 'get ahead' of itself. The President, for his part, clarified that bipartisan outreach does not make him a 'sap.' And throughout his career, Obama has pivoted deftly from the soft touch to knockout blows. [...] It's about time, obviously."

Daily Kos' mcjoan: "[A] healthy economy under a Democratic president is the last thing the retrenched Republicans need going into the next election cycle, and they're going to continue to do everything in their power to sabotage Obama, even if it means fiddling while the country burns. It's good that this was the first lesson Obama got out of the gate. He's a smart man, and unlikely to make the mistake of thinking Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats negotiate with good faith again. That realization is going to be just as important to the impending debates over health care and, inevitably, entitlement reform."

BURRIS: Will Someone Please Primary This Guy?

Liberal bloggers are criticizing Burris after he acknowledged that Blagojevich's brother asked him for fundraising help in the weeks before his Senate appointment -- a revelation that contradicted "Burris's earlier descriptions, including one under oath, of his conversations with those closest to the former governor":

• TalkLeft's Big Tent Democrat: "The Burris appointment always stunk to high heaven. This revelation makes it stink on the other side of the universe."
• Daily Kos' SusanG: "So the newly minted Senator from Illinois lied to an impeachment panel about being shaken down, yes. But he also suddenly remembered that he had, in fact, expressed interest in the seat to a couple of other people he previously forgot to mention, including a guy who was arrested."
• The Washington Monthly's Steve Benen: "What's odd is that Burris probably had no reason to lie about this. By all appearances, the governor's brother sought fundraising help, Burris declined to play along, and Burris got the appointment anyway. There may be details we don't yet know, but so far, it seems Burris didn't have an incentive to hide his three conversations with Robert Blagojevich, but he did anyway."

FiveThirtyEight's Nate Silver: "The fiction that Burris' appointment was a one-off event that could somehow be compartmentalized from Blago's attempts at bribery may have been critical to the Democrats' ability to do the politically expedient thing and allow Burris to take his seat. With this revelation, it's no longer possible for the Democrats to suspend their disbelief."

BURRIS II: Smells Like Perjury

Conservative bloggers are also buzzing about the latest Burris revelation:

• RedState's Moe Lane: "Harry Reid? Yeah, this is why people do that entire 'stick to your guns' thing. Because right now the only thing you've done by seating this guy is do our 2010 campaign ads for us. Whether or not Burris lasts that long. Much obliged!"
• Hot Air's Ed Morrissey: "Burris has arguably committed perjury and failed to report corruption. Will [Dems] wait until he gets charged in the case, or act to remove him and allow new Governor Pat Quinn to appoint someone much less problematic to replace him? If Reid does nothing and allows Burris to occupy the seat, Republicans will have a brand-new case to add to the Democratic 'culture of corruption' that now includes [ex-LA Rep.] William Jefferson, [CT Sen.] Chris Dodd, and [NY Rep.] Charlie Rangel for the midterm elections."
• RedState's Pejman Yousefzadeh: "It is utterly inexcusable that Roland Burris did not reveal earlier that Rod Blagojevich and his minions tried a pay-for-play scheme on the Senator before Burris was named to fill the vacancy left by the President. It is time to consult the wording of Art. I, Sec. 5 of the United States Constitution, and all precedents that attach thereto. By all rights, Roland Burris's tenure in the United States Senate should not last for long. And please, spare me the argument that Governor Pat Quinn is honest and ethical enough to avoid the legal quicksand Burris and Blagojevich have fallen into. [...] The Burris-Blagojevich Shenanigans Project has done enough to damage the cause of good government. It should not be continued by Pat Quinn and it should come to an end with Roland Burris's expulsion and with an election to choose his successor."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: IR Theory For Lovers

Alas, Valentine's Day has come and gone, but in case you're still in a romantic mood, here's an international relations perspective on relationships, courtesy of Harvard prof. Steven Walt (h/t Yglesias):

"To begin with, any romantic partnership is essentially an alliance, and alliances are a core concept on international relations. Alliances bring many benefits to the members (or else why would we form them?) but as we also know, they sometimes reflect irrational passions and inevitably limit each member's autonomy. Many IR theorists believe that institutionalizing an alliance makes it more effective and enduring, but that's also why making a relationship more formal is a significant step that needs to be carefully considered.

Of course, IR theorists have also warned that allies face the twin dangers of abandonment and entrapment: the more we fear that our partners might leave us in the lurch (abandonment), the more likely we are to let them drag us into obligations that we didn't originally foresee (entrapment). When you find yourself gamely attending your partner's high school reunion or traveling to your in-laws for Thanksgiving dinner every single year, you'll know what I mean."

LEST WE FORGET: Obama Debuts Annoying Catchphrase

From The Onion:

"WASHINGTON -- In an unexpected turn of events that even his most ardent supporters are calling extremely ill-advised, President Obama, known for his simple yet stirring slogan 'Yes we can,' debuted a new, extremely annoying catchphrase Monday during an address on proposed economic policy reform, saying, 'It is time for America to move forward, not backward -- and in conclusion, hot diggity ding dang!' The new catchphrase, White House officials announced, will replace the former slogan as the focal point of the president's public image effective immediately, and will be implemented in all appearances, official correspondence, and executive paperwork from now until at least mid-2012. Publicity materials featuring the wince-inducing phrase -- and picturing Obama smiling wildly and giving a double thumbs-up to the camera -- were distributed this week to thousands of media outlets. 'We have no idea why he's chosen to do this,' said former Obama supporter Kyle Hammersley. 'It's unbelievably irritating.' 'Hot diggitty ding dang' was reportedly selected by Obama and his advisers from a final list of potential taglines that also included 'Hanker down -- soup's on!' 'That's what the doctor told me!' and 'Mama mia, where's-a mah pizza?!'"

Posted by Ian Faerstein at February 17, 2009 01:24 PM