Is partisan bickering what's left?

[See It Clearly]

I just spent a little time watching C-Span's coverage of the budget hearings.

A representative form Texas spent several minutes imploring the committee to seriously consider the amount of the budget and the potential damage it will do to our Nation because of the high levels of spending.

This particular representative has a steady record of being against big spending, even from is own party. After he was done talking, and he did not personally attack anybody or any party, the chair of this committee went on his soapbox to berate the "previous administration". He never addressed the man's comments or issues other than to downgrade them because of past policies.

So, is this the best we can expect from any group on the hill, regardless of affiliation, only partisan bickering? Is it ALWAYS going to be,"Hey, you guys had your chance, now it's our turn to screw things up" or "Don't lecture us on how bad things are going to be, look what you did when you had the chance".

It seems to me that one of the great strengths of America is that we pull together when times are tough. We put aside petty differences, religious differences, economic status differences, and will help our "neighbor" in their time of need. Well without getting too sappy here, that is what makes America great, no apologies needed for that, right!

Why can't, or shouldn't we, expect our politicians to do the same thing?

[tobybear]

This is change!

The Libs spent W's last 5 years bitching about the size of W's budget, the debt being passed to our children, the money borrowed from China, etc..

Then in Odumbas first 100 days they ignore all that!

Read my lips, "Change!"

[Jagergeist]

You have a point that there is a high level of bickering, especially on the news shows. I can't stand to watch those panels where people do nothing but argue, snipe and ignore good ideas to stick to their party ideology. On the other hand I don't think the news or chat boards like these are representative of the mood in the country. I would argue that a majority of people have pulled together and work to a common goal. Electronic venues accentuate the nagative, real life the positive.

[animalnut]

Obama complains that the right needs to offer solutions. They have done that, and their ideas have not been considered. He states repeatedly that he doesn't believe in looking back, but in looking forward, yet he releases the interrogation memos, and now wants to release pictures. The pictures were taken for cases against our military, but when they're released, they won't mention that they were investigating these actions. These moves have and will endanger our military, Americans traveling abroad, and further enrage our enemies. Nothing good can come out of these decisions.

They have the power now, and whichever side has basically total power will rub it in the other side's face every chance they get. I don't think politicians evolve as mature adults. They seek power, attention and money. They taunt like children on a playground. They lie like rugs.

I do believe if there was another catastrophe here, you would see the masses come together, although the politicians would still be thinking of their next election. Remember Dashle coming out immediately after 9/11 to attack Bush constantly? They do not know the meaning of bipartisanship.

[Charlie A]

...I don't think the news or chat boards like these are representative of the mood in the country. I would argue that a majority of people have pulled together and work to a common goal. Electronic venues accentuate the nagative, real life the positive.

That's an hypothesis that won't be testable until 2010.

[margaretms]

You have a point that there is a high level of bickering, especially on the news shows. I can't stand to watch those panels where people do nothing but argue, snipe and ignore good ideas to stick to their party ideology. On the other hand I don't think the news or chat boards like these are representative of the mood in the country. I would argue that a majority of people have pulled together and work to a common goal. Electronic venues accentuate the nagative, real life the positive.

I wonder what the net effect of 24-hour cable has had on political discourse. It seems like there's something pettier and more fine-grained about the divisiveness.

[jeepers]

I would argue that a majority of people have pulled together and work to a common goal.

If the common goal is living together in a peaceful fashion IRL, I would agree because that is always the truth, no matter who is in the White House.

... But if you are saying that the majority of people in this country are working together under a common umbrella of political belief towards a singular goal, you would be incredibly wrong, no matter how many 'yes we can' statements are declared on the television.

46 million people voted against the Obama Administration in this past election. Their politics haven't suddenly changed with voting. Matter of fact, for some, the pendulum has swung farther in the direction AWAY from it than it was before.

I look at this as a wasted opportunity. If Obama had come into office swinging his machete at spending, he would have garnered respect from the fiscal conservatives out there. He would have led by example and that is hard to argue with.

Instead he did the opposite which is nothing but polarizing. He's also done it to such a degree that it's literally historic.

Half the people in the country aren't clapping, son.

Unless your argument is only 'if there are 100 people and 51 of them are shouting yes we can! then THAT is a majority'...Which while technically true, doesn't speak to the 49 others...

[Iggy]

The "change" is which side is doing all the bitching about the other side wrecking our country.

[zantax]

I wonder what the net effect of 24-hour cable has had on political discourse. It seems like there's something pettier and more fine-grained about the divisiveness.

Go back and read old newspapers, if anything political discourse is elevated now compared to historically. Andrew Jacksons opponent for example called him a murderer, a cannibal and accused his wife of being a prostitute. Truman called republicans Nazi's.

[LJ14]

This "partisan bickering" was what Obama campaigned to change. He lied. There's no other explanation for his behavior.

He's the guy who's supposed to set the tone. But in his choices, he's been nothing but political. From locking Republicans out of the stimulus bill, to his attack on Rush Limbaugh, to his release of classified information, and at every turn... he has elected to stir the pot.

[Iggy]

Go back and read old newspapers, if anything political discourse is elevated now compared to historically. Andrew Jacksons opponent for example called him a murderer, a cannibal and accused his wife of being a prostitute. Truman called republicans Nazi's.

I remember reading that Thomas Jefferson was once accused of being the Antichrist.

[margaretms]

Go back and read old newspapers, if anything political discourse is elevated now compared to historically. Andrew Jacksons opponent for example called him a murderer, a cannibal and accused his wife of being a prostitute. Truman called republicans Nazi's.

Oh, I agree with that--newspapers began life, in no small part, as partisan rags (and often vicious ones, at that). I am referring to something else--it has more to do with the demands of the television medium for certain kinds of drama, conflict, and emotional responses, which may have nothing to do with substantive discussions of real problems: this gets amplified and the grain gets finer when you have pundits and political officials playing their little theatrical roles and chewing over stories and non-stories 24-hours a day on multiple tv channels. (and this doesn't even take into account radio and the Internet)

[zantax]

Oh, I agree with that--newspapers began life, in no small part, as partisan rags (and often vicious ones, at that). I am referring to something else--it has more to do with the demands of the television medium for certain kinds of drama, conflict, and emotional responses, which may have nothing to do with substantive discussions of real problems: this gets amplified and the grain gets finer when you have pundits and political officials playing their little theatrical roles and chewing over stories and non-stories 24-hours a day on multiple tv channels.


I'd say it's nothing more then a mirror held up to what's always been present in our society. Politics is ultimately about power and money, no surprise that people will fight about it, always have, always will. The old network news was artificial and created a false impression of civility that didn't exist anywhere but among the elite journalists.

[margaretms]

I'd say it's nothing more then a mirror held up to what's always been present in our society. Politics is ultimately about power and money, no surprise that people will fight about it, always have, always will. The old network news was artificial and created a false impression of civility that didn't exist anywhere but among the elite journalists.

I disagree. I don't think it's just a one-way mirror, simply reflecting what "is"; that seems incredibly naive to me. In fact, I think it's also true that cable news (particularly the ideologically-driven shows) does just as much to promote and encourage (because of the need for drama, conflict, emotional responses) an incivility that doesn't actually exist among working politicians in D.C. (although it's gotten worse). Ted Kennedy in a black hat, drunk, a murderer, a socialist, etc. makes a much better character on television than the Ted Kennedy who's a dear friend of Orrin Hatch's and respected by his Senate colleagues on a day-to-day, working level. I am not saying that all these people are pals; I am saying that civility and nuance and complexity makes for relatively bad television.

[zantax]

I disagree. I don't think it's just a one-way mirror, simply reflecting what "is"; that seems incredibly naive to me. In fact, I think it's also true that cable news (particularly the ideologically-driven shows) does just as much to promote and encourage (because of the need for drama, conflict, emotional responses) an incivility that doesn't actually exist among working politicians in D.C. (although it's gotten worse). Ted Kennedy in a black hat, drunk, a murderer, a socialist, etc. makes a much better character on television than the Ted Kennedy who's a dear friend of Orrin Hatch's and respected by his Senate colleagues on a day-to-day, working level. I am not saying that all these people are pals; I am saying that civility and nuance and complexity makes for relatively bad television.

And my contention is that while Hatch and Kennedy may get along that doesn't change the fact that Kennedy would be demonized and caricatured by some of his political opponents, television or no television. It happened in print before television ever came onto the scene and no doubt it happened by word of mouth prior to moveable type.

[timjy]

Could not sleep last night.Got up and turned on H.B.O just happened to be Bill Maher on. Now that is a sad and confused little man. He is not helping bypartisanship in the country at all.All he could talk about was Sarah Palin, her kids and Obamas race.He is a hateful man.He is a good reason why television should go off the air after midnight.Iwould rather watch the off air sign than that idiot.