The media pundit's pundit. Written by NYC insider Jeff Jarvis, BuzzMachine covers news, media, journalism, and politics.
Across the divide
: Peter Berkowitz, conservative, has four suggestions for how the Bush administration should reach out to Democrats:
: Appoint a Democrat or two to the federal bench.
: Appoint a liberal hawk to a foreign-policy position.
: Bring a Democrat in to work on improving education.
: Set up regular meetings with Democrats on Capitol Hill.
And as for bridging the divide off Capitol Hill and among the masses, I suggest keg parties.
Why is it the President’s responsibility to “reach out” to the Democrats? If anyone is being divisive it is them.
No action taken by the President will make the current Democrat party happy, why even try? It’s like trying to teach a pig to sing, you just wind up wasting your time and annoying the pig.
The Democrat party seems content to sulk like a pouty teenager…let them.
Jeff,
Bush did reach out and worked with Ted Kennedy – even publicly called him a “fabulous senator.” Ted Kennedy never responded favorably in kind to the president.
Show me once where the Democrats treated the president well (outside of immediately after 9/11). If the Democrats want to be included, then they need to be inclusive.
None of those things are going to happen Jeff, because the Republicans hate Democrats as much as most Americans hate Al Qaeda. Sad, but true.
By the way, was that the same Ted Kennedy who Bush spit on repeatedly during his campaign? The same, I believe.
Brett, how about Max Cleland? Pretty moderate fella, voted for Bush’s 2001 tax cuts, Patriot Act, the war, yadda yadda. As memory serves, he didn’t get treated too kindly for going the bipartisan route there…
Why is it the President’s responsibility to “reach out” to the Democrats? If anyone is being divisive it is them.
The thing about bridging the divide is that you have to get past the previous transgressions, rejected olive branches, etc.
Part of being a leader is breaking the status quo instead of settling for it, or casting blame.
Bush is our elected leader. He should make a move. If it’s reciprocated, it’s good news for all of us. If it isn’t, Bush makes the Dems look like assholes and the Republicans come out winners.
Personally, I think Bush should french kiss Lieberman in public. Or at least get him more involved in Iraq planning.
Oh please, Oliver…save it for the paying customers.
When you “reach out” to a senator, and all you get for your trouble is a knife in the back it makes you less likely to try for an encore. Are you really that shocked that Bush was less than thrilled with the outcome?
Ah, but I forgot, when a Democrat does the stabbing it’s called statesmanship, and when a Republican dares to say “ouch” he’s being Devisive.
“None of those things are going to happen Jeff, because the Republicans hate Democrats as much as most Americans hate Al Qaeda.”
The amount of hypocrisy and utter lack of self-regard in such a statement simply boggles the mind, and can only be measured in units previously reserved for determining the size of large astronomical bodies.
Projection: “The attribution of one’s own attitudes, feelings, or desires to someone or something as a naive or unconscious defense against anxiety or guilt.”
Hate to say this Jeff, but you’re way off base on this.
Bush tried this before in the beginning of 2001, and it was smacked back in his face harshly by these same Democrats. There is an analogy to working with people from a position of strength that is often said about the war on terror. The Dems are sure they can bring us to the negotiation table to appease them. Appeasement never works. If they want to be a part of the future legislation, they need to sit down and work with us knowing the Republicans have a position of strength. If they think they can obstruct legislation for another two years, they will get soundly defeated once again and will work from an even smaller base.
Bottom line, Bush learned his lesson in 2001. There will be no appeasement here, the Dems better learn how to work together quickly or they are going to be left behind in history.
Peter Berkowitz has it backwards.
The Democrats need to “reach out” to Bush.
How about allowing a few district judges to be confirmed, and avoiding a months-long soap opera about confirmation of the attorney general and commerce secretary.
It is the Democrats that need to demonstrate goodwill, not Bush. After all, Bush won. And when he tried to demonstrate goodwill after he was elected, the Dems told him to stuff it.
Soros is apparently still paying Oliver to be an idiot. He’s getting his money’s worth.
Allowing Arlan Specter the chairmanship would be an amazingly mature move that ease the Democrats and the Republicans into common ground.
Oliver is “like Kryptonite to stupid…” on Bizzaro World.
I’m with Dexter on this one. Every time the Dems lose an election, and they’re getting good at it, it’s all about Reps ‘must now show bipartisanship.
Meaning: Hey, we can’t win but these really, really, really great ideas! You just have to use them! The people will love you!
Bush should extend a hand to Democrats, so they can bite him again. Whem Kerry became a nominee, W called him to congratulate and got AWOL charges as a repayment of his gesture.
I wish for more of co-operation between both camps, but still relish an idea of having Reps stomp Dems like a roadside weed. Seems to be the only course of action the latter understand well.
: Appoint a Democrat or two to the federal bench.
President Bush appointed several of President Clinton’s judges that weren’t approved in time. For this, his judges were kept off the bench.
: Appoint a liberal hawk to a foreign-policy position.
Colin Powell isn’t exactly the king of conservatives.
: Bring a Democrat in to work on improving education.
After he was burned by Ted Kennedy – this isn’t happening.
: Set up regular meetings with Democrats on Capitol Hill.
Doesn’t he meet with the leaders for breakfast every week? With people like Nancy Pelosi (the minority leader) calling him all sorts of names, why bother making any new friends? Guys like Zell Miller will find their way to the President’s side, as well folks like Ben Nelson (Democratic Senator from a very Republican state).
: And as for bridging the divide off Capitol Hill and among the masses, I suggest keg parties.
That is something everyone can stand behind.
I want to see the government work but if I hear one more Democrat explain how the president has to work with them – well, there are a whole lot less of them this time out. Maybe they can figure out a way to start working with him.
amazing: before an election, there’s a lot of talk about one party or another not governing for or representing the whole country. In these comments, folks think it’s fine for the Pres. just to govern based on the interests of his constituency, or at least in disregard of the views and talents of the other candiadtes’.
No wonder folks become so bitterly partisan: vocal commentators think it’s fine to snub noses at the candidates and constiuencies that lose the Pres. election.
Have we forgotten that the Dems and independents that hold federal office were *also* elected by their constitutents? The country is not an absolute monarchy. It’s a federal Republic: and that’s strict constructionism.
I’ve been reading this blog for only a short while, but it seems to me that while Jeff seems to lean to the “left”, the majority of people who reply seem to come from the “right” (not left) side. Am I the only one who sees this? Just checking. I mean, there are a few Dems who consistently reply, but for the most part, they seem outnumbered in this part of cyber space. As I don’t have nearly the time it would take to check into it myself, do you other blog-readers notice the same out on other blog sites? Do the majority of replys come from one side or the other?
Ethan: Shhhh! We’re all members of a secret society formed for the exclusive purpose of slowly converting Jeff Jarvis into a rightwing neocon.
Don’t worry carsonfire, I won’t let on. If you need any hot fire irons, or other means of persuasion, let me know. I’ll see what I have in the basement.
But seriously, I’m curious if one side uses this medium more than the other. What do you see out there?
The dems need Bush more than he needs them. Bush got slapped around pretty well after reaching across the isle to aquaman and his education raid on the treasury.
Time for the dems to reach out, or sit and seethe.
derek et all…
seriously, do you all have any idea how things work on the hill now? bush has had more judges confirmed than any modern pres, and a higher percentage of his nominees than any modern pres. the dems killed a few high profile ones via filibuster, which is only unprecedented b/c the republicans have changed the rules so that the ways they used to block clinton’s judges are no longer valid. not to mention that some of those judges were incredibly unqualified. what exactly wualified kavanaugh for a lifetime appointment again?
and more important is the sham that the conference committee process has become. the dems may be the minority, but they still constitute 45% of Congress. but a conference cmt now consists of repub leadership and industry lobbyists. i’m really surprised more conservatives aren’t pissed about this, b/c its not only a terrible way to make law, its wreaking havok on the budget.
or maybe you all are right. bush is a uniter, not a divider, and those mean nasty petty america haters in the democrat (sic) party won’t play by the rules.
matty has it right about how things are working nowadays.
As far as meeting with the leaders every week, I could be wrong but I think that’s history, Bush only meets with Republican leadership.
Kennedy only “burned” Bush on education after the Republicans refused to fully fund the NCLB according to the estimates that were come up with on what it would take for it to not be an unfunded mandate (Remember when Republicans hated those?). He viewed THAT as being stabbed in the back. Have you really paid attention to how many school districts and states are thinking of refusing federal money because it’s CHEAPER to refuse the funds because they don’t cover the expenses of what it takes to meet the requirements?
The last thing we need is a Democrat running the dept of education.
I do wonder where some of the Republicans posting here get their facts. It’s been noted in many places that in spite of partisan screaming on the issue that the overwhelming majority of Bush’s judicial appointments have been confirmed. The Democrats have treated him much better on this issue than the Republicans treated Clinton. Yet here they are, blathering on about how the evil Democrats haven’t approved his appointments, strongly implying that very few or none of them have gone on to the bench. Don’t worry, folks. The Republicans won’t be doing any of that nasty reaching out stuff that you so heartily disapprove of. Of course neither will the Democrats when they come back into power 40 or 50 years from now. But don’t forget that Tom DeLay is basically running the House now and here is some comfort for your worries about the possibility of any cooperation:
Tom DeLay on trying to force Republicans-only practices on lobbying firms in Washington:
“We’re just following the old adage of punish your enemies and reward your friends. We don’t like to deal with people who are trying to kill the revolution. We know who they are. The word is out.”
Tom DeLay on shutting down the federal government during the 1995 budget conflict:
“Screw the Senate. It’s time for all-out war.”
Tom DeLay on the GOP’s subsequent loss of its House majority:
“Our biggest mistake was backing off from the government shutdown. We should have stuck it out.”
Be comforted. His power is unquestioned.