Share

GOP Schools Obama on Partisanship

by: Robert Parry  |  Consortium News

photo
A group of Republican House members look on as House Minority Leader John Boehner speaks about the economic stimulus package on Wednesday. (Photo: Getty Images)

    On Wednesday, when the House voted on the $819 billion stimulus bill, which many economists say is vital for the United States to avoid a possible depression, not a single Republican supported the legislation.

    The Democrats had to provide all the 244 votes that sent the package over to the Senate, where leading Republicans, including Sen. John McCain of Arizona, have already announced their determination to fight the bill.

    Sure there are weaknesses in the House version - in part because Obama had Democrats shelve some direct spending on the nation's creaky infrastructure in favor of putting in $275 billion in tax cuts designed to win over some Republican votes.

    Still, the bill was picked at by House Republicans who complained about some features, like repairs to the National Mall and family-planning money. So Obama pressured Democrats to remove those criticized items. Still the Republican caucus voted unanimously against the bill.

    This solid phalanx of GOP opposition is now the latest -- and clearest -- evidence that the national Republicans have settled on a strategy similar to the one the party followed after Bill Clinton took office in 1993, when the Democrats also held majorities in the House and Senate. The Republicans sought to strangle the young Democratic administration in the cradle.

    Clinton, too, made gestures of bipartisanship. He helped sweep several Reagan-Bush scandals under the rug just like Obama has been signaling that he will look forward, not backwards, about George W. Bush's abuses. But the Republicans and their right-wing media allies responded with an all-out war on Clinton and his mildly reformist agenda. [For details, see Robert Parry's Secrecy & Privilege.]

    Targeting Clinton

    Much like Wednesday's unanimous GOP vote against Obama's stimulus package, the Republicans in 1993 denied Clinton even one vote for his first budget because it contained some tax increases (which later were credited with bringing the U.S. budget nearly into balance and helping set the stage for a broad economic expansion).

    Like today, radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh took the lead in rallying Republicans into unrelenting opposition to the Democratic administration. Day in and day out, Limbaugh regaled his huge audience with three hours of mocking attacks on Bill and Hillary Clinton, just like today when he has announced his desire for Obama to fail.

    Regarding Clinton, the Republicans stirred up harshly partisan investigations. In early 1994, the Republicans succeeded in getting a GOP special prosecutor, Kenneth Starr, appointed to investigate Clinton's past financial dealings. Other investigations, also under the control of right-wing prosecutors, took aim at key members of Clinton's staff.

    In February 1994, when I covered the annual Conservative Political Action Conference - a kind of trade show for the Right - I was stunned by the volume of hate-Clinton paraphernalia. Never had I seen anything like this well-organized, well-funded determination to destroy a political figure.

    As 1994 wore on, the Republicans harassed, undermined and ultimately killed Hillary Clinton's plan for universal health care.

    By November 1994, a resurgent Republican Party - energized by its hatred of the Clintons - wrested control of Congress from the Democrats. Limbaugh's role was viewed as so important that he was made an honorary member of the new House Republican majority.

    After those congressional victories, Republicans intensified their assaults on Clinton. Starr expanded his investigation into Clinton's clumsy efforts to cover up an extramarital affair with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky. In late 1998, the Republican-controlled House impeached Clinton, though the President mustered enough Democratic votes to survive a trial in the Senate.

    Though the Republicans failed to drive Clinton from the White House, the impeachment battle set the stage for George W. Bush's run for President behind the promise that he would restore "honor and dignity" to the White House.

    During Campaign 2000, Clinton's Vice President Al Gore became a kind of whipping boy for Clinton's enemies both in the political world and in the press. Gore still clawed his way to a narrow popular-vote victory in November 2000, but the race was close enough for five Republican partisans on the U.S. Supreme Court to deliver the White House to Bush.

    Partisan Divide

    Then, despite Bush's promises to be "a uniter, not a divider," he interpreted his tainted victory as a mandate to push through a right-wing agenda that included steep tax cuts weighted in favor of the wealthiest Americans, widening the deficit that had been virtually eliminated under Clinton.

    Dov. S. Zakheim, a foreign policy adviser to Bush's 2000 campaign and a Pentagon official during his first term, later admitted in a Washington Post opinion article that Bush dropped his "compassionate conservative" mask soon after taking office.

    "We came to a bitterly divided Washington and poured salt on partisan wounds, culminating in an ugly divide-and-rule style of politics," Zakheim acknowledged.

    After the 9/11 attacks, when Democrats and many other Americans swore off partisanship in the cause of national unity, Bush seized the moment to arrogate unprecedented powers to himself. Then, in fall 2002, he exploited America's fear and anger to push through a pre-election Iraq War authorization and still branded the Democrats as soft on terror.

    Sen. Max Cleland of Georgia, who had lost three limbs in the Vietnam War, was defeated after being almost equated with terrorist Osama bin Laden.

    By 2004, Bush and his political guru Karl Rove had set their sights on a "permanent Republican majority" that would relegate the Democrats to a cosmetic appendage to the GOP's one-party state. Republicans would control all levers of government power, including federal prosecutors and the federal courts, and would be backed by an intimidating right-wing news media.

    Under Bush, the only freedom that seemed left to many Americans was the freedom to follow him. If you didn't, you'd be labeled unpatriotic or un-American. You might even face career punishment and physical threats, like those meted out to the Dixie Chicks for daring to criticize Bush at a pre-Iraq-invasion concert.

    Similarly, anyone who threatened Republican electoral dominance got a steady dose of smears, like the Swift Boat attacks on Sen. John Kerry's Vietnam War heroism. At Bush's 2004 convention, some GOP delegates wore Purple Heart Band-Aids to mock the severity of Kerry's war wounds.

    After Election 2004, with Bush gaining a second term and the Republicans again owning both houses of Congress, Rove ally Grover Norquist mused that Democrats should learn to get along in Washington by becoming like castrated pets to their Republican masters.

    Talking the Talk

    Sometimes when Republicans faced reversals, as they did in Election 2006, they revived some talk of bipartisanship because the American people had grown tired of the political bickering.

    Yet, even if some Republicans genuinely wanted a more bipartisan approach, such a change seemed impossible - after decades of exploiting "wedge" tactics and relying on a right-wing media built to destroy opponents.

    In recent years, when Republicans talked about repudiating "partisan rancor" - like John McCain did at the 2008 Republican National Convention - the rhetoric was usually followed by another binge of partisan rancor, like Sarah Palin's attacks on Obama for "palling around with terrorists" or McCain's own smearing of Obama as a "socialist."

    As I have written before, the idea of transforming modern Republicanism into some less partisan form may be like trying to train a boa constrictor which fork to use at the dinner table.

    Beyond the fact that today's Republican congressional caucus has fewer moderates than ever before, there's also the influence of the powerful right-wing media that runs on the high-octane fuel of anti-liberal hate. This machinery now faces a business imperative to find attack lines that can be used to tear down Obama and build up audience share.

    For instance, on Jan. 16, four days before Obama's Inauguration, Limbaugh was publicly rooting for Obama to fall on his face. "I hope he fails," Limbaugh bluntly declared.

    A day after the Inauguration, Limbaugh expanded on his anti-Obama views.

    "You know racism in this country is the exclusive problems of the Left," Limbaugh said. "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."

    In other words, Limbaugh is appealing to his largely white, male audience to see itself as the victim of some "reverse racism," with the graphic image of white men bent over being subjected to sexual humiliation - and presumably anal rape - by a black man.

    Despite these growing signs of Republican obstructionism and sabotage, Obama continued to pursue his goal of a post-partisan Washington. His first post-Inaugural trip to Capitol Hill on Jan. 27 involved meetings with House and Senate Republicans, not Democrats.

    Already, Obama had devoted about one-third of the stimulus package to tax cuts aimed at winning over some Republican votes. He weathered Democratic complaints that the tax cuts prevented additional spending on the nation's infrastructure, a strategy that many economists say would generate more jobs and provide longer-term value to the nation.

    Despite his concessions, Obama ended up getting whip-sawed by Republicans who complained that the tax cuts weren't big enough and, ironically, some joined in castigating him for shorting the infrastructure spending. In the end, his personal appeals and his deletions of some items opposed by Republicans still failed to secure a single Republican vote for the House bill.

    So, in a replay of 1993, the Republicans made clear with their unanimous vote against the stimulus bill that they - like Rush Limbaugh - are determined to see the new President fail.

    Now, the question is whether Obama will give up his quixotic bid to woo Republicans - and instead support a stimulus package that will do the most to help the country - or whether he will continue making more concessions to the Republicans in hopes that they will undergo a sudden transformation.

    -------

    Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Neck Deep: The Disastrous Presidency of George W. Bush, was written with two of his sons, Sam and Nat, and can be ordered at neckdeepbook.com. His two previous books, Secrecy & Privilege: The Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq and Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth' are also available there. Or go to Amazon.com.

  

»


Comments

This is a moderated forum. Β It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

The Republic ants are

The Republic ants are reflecting the "new tone" that Bush brought to Washington 8 years ago.

Obama needs to learn one

Obama needs to learn one important lesson from the Clinton administration: never, ever trust the Repugnantcans! It is obvious that it is a political party so right wing, so devoid of any moral leadership, and only concerned about power and getting money into the hands of the richest at the expense of the working classes. Take heed Mr. Obama. Tell the Repugnantcans in fron of all the American people that there's been enough compromise, and that if they want to vote no, they can do so and will be made famous for obstructing economic justice for most Americans!

I plead with Obama to take

I plead with Obama to take off his gloves. No more Mr. Nice Guy with the Republicans. They do not have the best interests of this country in mind. They are not patriots; they are out to rule and to line their own pockets as we have seen for the last 8 years. Their "useful idiots" are Conservative Christians and white, male Neo Nazis. The Trojan Horse of the inaccurately named "Liberal Media" is their mouthpiece. Their tools are lies and dissension. Crush that viper before it breeds and bring in a new second party...it's time for progressive thinking and an expanded world view. The Green Party is my choice to replace the Republicans.

Blame Obama!.......... The

Blame Obama!.......... The Republicans will try their best to blame Obama for the coming financial meltdown, whose corrupt, black roots grew entirely on their watch. They would not mind seeing the entire country sink into a financial black hole if they thought that it would gain them some political benefit in the future. They know that the Rush-drones are too stupid to see the truth and are so inculcated in the new racism - hating liberals, that it won't even occur to them that Republican machinations are to blame. In the meantime, the Republicans will nip at the heels of the Obama administration with their own investigations, lawsuits and scandal mongering. It's already started with the lawsuit against Clinton's job as Sec. of State. Look for much more of this in the future. It served them well against Clinton.

Yes, but who won the

Yes, but who won the vote? If that's the way it's got to be that, that's the way it's got to be. Since most of the Repugs who are left must be from red strongholds, they better hope that their constituents continue to enjoy their bloc party.. The 'publicans are good at sticking together, but any of them that just snuck in on a tight race won't be able to play this game all the way down the line. ...and if they must, let the Senate GOP filifester!

Republicans are the party of

Republicans are the party of obstructionists. They haven't learned anything from the past 8 years. They mindlessly repeat the same old mantras that don't work. They don't want to govern, or pass any needed legislation, all they want to do is make the Democrats look bad in hopes of regaining power. They have become irrelavant in 2009 and need to either redefine themselves or just disappear, for they are doomed.

I read Truthout regularly,

I read Truthout regularly, and am always interested in the comments that follow. What saddens me is to see some of the divisive and extremely disrespectful language used when mentioning those who disagree with "our" position. How does this help? How does fueling the fire of divisiveness help create a system in which we all work toward consensus? I am actually quite pleased that Pres. Obama made the compromises that he did, and it doesn't surprise me that the Republicans still refused to vote for it. It is now on record for all to see what they are doing. And I don't think America as a whole is going to respond to their efforts. I believe that, in the long run, their tactics will do all that's needed to weaken the party. However, when we act like a "pack of screaming dogs" with the excuse that "they do it too" or "they started it", all we do is give moderate conservatives a reason to distrust and dislike us. I ask again, how does that help? ~~ Rev. Lane Baldwin, lifewithspirit.org

Prez O seems like a

Prez O seems like a reasonably smart fellow; he must realize that the media is dominated by the far right and that the gop is not interested in improving the country if it means making a dem look good. Therefore he will have to admit that working together is a fantasy, that the gop is in the minority and irrelevant after the depredations of the last thirty years, and do what he needs to do to get the country back on track. Good bloody luck.

Rev. Baldwin. As well you

Rev. Baldwin. As well you should know. The teacher came to bring division, not togetherness. Evil is real and it looms large in the fattened bull of Washington. You claim spirit, so fight on!

Like it or not... it is in

Like it or not... it is in All our best interest to have this administration succeed in getting us out of this mess. Seems to me the Republicans have just finished with having it their way for the past eight years. What has happened to their saying yes to the huge spending that went on during their watch?

All the talk about economic

All the talk about economic philosophies by the various politicians of either party is amusing in that they somehow always consider spending on something that doesn`t help them or someone they know as 'wasteful'. I`ve read way too much commentary aready. The question is not 'socialism' (as defined by MSM) vs. 'free market Freidmanism' vs. 'social democracy'. It`s much simpler - Do we invest in WAR or PEACE."The creator has a master plan, peace and happiness for every man" Leon Thomas sings on the Pharoah Sanders CD 'Karma'.What is their real plan.It`s the political system that determines the quality of life.It is ultimately the INTENT of the participants.Dictatorship can work with a King Solomon and democracy can fail with the caliber of politicians we are used to electing.Perhaps if they were voted on weekly, likethey do on American Idol(tecnologically possible), the politicians would be more interested in what people thought instead of just mouthing platitudes every two years during elections. War or Peace? That is the question.What`s your answer?

Huge spending may not repair

Huge spending may not repair anything. Bringing troops home and ending empire would begin repair. I am sad that Obama seems to have little inclination to do this. The Republicans are irrelevant because only one of them spoke of ending empire, and he was marginalized by the party. Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul know how to practice bi-partisanship. It is unfortunate the rest of both their parties do not. The gap between crying in the wilderness and being heard by sufficient other voices is hampered by the deep corruption of D.C. Many, many Republicans voted for Obama with the hope he would roll back the loss of human rights and enhance the dignity of the individual in this country. By turning agriculture over to a person with ties to harmful ways of monoculture farming, both parties may become irrelevant. To me, aside from empire-maintenance, agriculture is one of the most serious political issues at present. Micro-grid energy production is also important, but I don't see evidence of its being attended to. Putting down Republicans may be fun, but it distracts from the influences that invested a great deal of money in Obama's candidacy and who intend to consolidate power in ways that undermine the bottom-up rhetoric that Obama used to convince some people to vote for him. Both parties make promises they don't know how to or don't intend to deliver. Obama has the opportunity to showcase tremendous farm practices, such as that of the Amish. He could support and publicize cross-cultural permaculture ventures already happening in the Middle East. If Obama asks the Israeli military to build and plant rather than to use phosphorus weapons on a beseiged population, then we will have change. Until then, it looks like the same-old to me.

What I get out of the

What I get out of the Republicans is that they have absolutely no faith in their "beliefs" (which are malleable to them, they believe in power, the rest is window dressing) If they did they wouldn't have to "root" for failure of Obama, theyw ould just expect it. But hoping for failure means they really have no true economic philosophies, all they care about is control. If they had faiths in any values they wouldn't need to work for failure, cheer for failure, etc.. But they really don't believe in their policies (they really have none as can be seen in the lack of any in the House Republican's "plan" which is just 2000 plan, they would propose tax cuts even if there were no taxes, they have no other ideas. They have no ideas but to obstruct, they seem devoid of thinking facilities, only possessing primitive areas of their brains having to do with being combative, and lying to survive

I said the other day if Jr

I said the other day if Jr Bohner and a handful of spoiled children cause this monumental effort in a positive direction to stall, it`s just as Powell told Bush you break it you bought it...Well merchants and consumers alike send all your unpaid balances to the Republican Congress and Blue Dog Democrats assigning them personally these debts and you watch how damn fast they get the job done when their wallets are on the frigging line!

It seems the Republicans are

It seems the Republicans are all for bipartisanship only as long as theirs is the party in power.

I have two words for those

I have two words for those Republicon proponents of "stay the course & more tax cuts" when that ship of state goes down: YOU FIRST!

I am so sick of weak

I am so sick of weak democrats they need to be tough and stick to their guns and stop all this appeasing to republicans , we have 30 years of policies in favor of business and wealthy families to even the playing field a little bit again and rebuild our consumer economy, if they want us to spend they have to make sure we have disposible income., its as easy as 4th grade math

I have two words for those

I have two words for those Republicon proponents of "stay the course & more tax cuts" when that ship of state goes down: YOU FIRST!

Jerry, I'm a spiritual

Jerry, I'm a spiritual minister, not tied to any specific religion. Further, I am not advocating standing by... I'm advocating learning to have public discourse in a manner that shows respect for all sides. I'm advocating learning to express our position without falling into the trap of acting like a bunch a nasty grades chool children. We don't need to use silly names. We don't need to cast insults and invective. To do so only gives center/conservatives a reason to tune out the message. I believe that more people would support the programs, and just as important, would stop listening so much to the conservative fringe, if we were to approach our dialog in a more respectful manner. ~~ Rev. Lane Baldwin - lifewithspirit.org