Rahmbo Pledges Bipartisan Approach

[The Paperboy]

"President Obama is very clear, as you look at his career, both in the state senate, U.S. Senate, and the campaign, that we have to govern in a bipartisan fashion," Emanuel said.

Now maybe Obama will govern in a bipartisan fashion but I wouldn't look at his career in the state senate or US Senate for affirmation of that.

At least Obama chose a Chief of Staff with a sense of f***ing humor!

Link here

 

[Annie]

Now maybe Obama will govern in a bipartisan fashion but I wouldn't look at his career in the state senate or US Senate for affirmation of that.

At least Obama chose a Chief of Staff with a sense of f***ing humor!

Link here

I'm not sure, Emanuel and bi-partisan certainly would be an oxymoron, however I don't think he's there for the severely curtailed opposition party, rather the leadership of a very unpopular Congress:

Rahm Emanuel: 'Do What You Got Elected to Do' - WSJ.com

'Do What You Got Elected to Do'
The incoming chief of staff says expect a pragmatic White House.

By JASON L. RILEY
Detroit

In Rahm Emanuel's telling, the Democratic victories on Tuesday were a continuum of what began in the 2006 midterm elections, when his party won majorities in the House and the Senate for the first time in 12 years. "After 2006, I said it was George Bush and the desire for change," the congressman from Chicago's North Side tells me. "And the same cocktail contributed to this turnout. You had Barack Obama's message of change and Bush and the Republicans' record of incompetence."

Mr. Emanuel would know. As chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, he helped engineer that GOP thumpin' two years ago. And as Mr. Obama's incoming White House chief of staff -- a position he accepted on Thursday -- he's certain to have an outsized say in how the Dems use their political monopoly come January....

An Obama administration could very well be planning to govern from the center. But there's still the reality of the Democratic congressional leadership, which is brimming with left-wing barons who have their own agenda.

Barney Frank wants to slash Defense spending by 25%. Charles Rangel wants to bring back the draft. John Conyers, who has called for slavery reparations, is also sympathetic to Europeans who want to indict Bush administration officials for war crimes. And Henry Waxman is angling for steep energy taxes to combat global warming.

The question is whether these veteran lawmakers will simply steam roll the new White House occupant, the way previous liberal majorities in Congress had their way with Presidents Carter and Clinton.

"Barack Obama can stand up to them," countered Mr. Emanuel. He started to defend a couple of his colleagues -- "Charlie Rangel also supports reducing the corporate tax rate, and go ask corporate America how pragmatic Barney Frank has been during the financial crisis" -- but then he paused. At first, I thought it was because Mr. Emanuel had run out of examples, but it turned out that he wanted to make a larger point.

"Let me say this as to my colleagues," he began. "Although committed to their philosophy, they are incredibly pragmatic. They have lived through an experience in the minority. And they know how they got to be in the minority. And they know one very important political principle. They know that if President-elect Obama succeeds, all of us succeed. And if he doesn't succeed, his failures won't be limited to him."...

 

[DavidS]

Now maybe Obama will govern in a bipartisan fashion but I wouldn't look at his career in the state senate or US Senate for affirmation of that.

At least Obama chose a Chief of Staff with a sense of f***ing humor!

Link here

Really? Obama's been in the Senate since 2005, and he's voted on over 200 bills. Which bills do you feel that he's voted on since his career in the US Senate started that make him to be non-bipartisan?

Please don't provide for me what some "independent study group" has said. I can find independent study groups that tell me the sky is green if I wanted to. I want to know what bills you, Paperboy, feel that Obama has voted on that makes him to be very bipartisan.

 

[WillowTree]

didn't that scrawny Pelosi woman promise the same thing? How did that work out doyathink?

 

[The Paperboy]

Really? Obama's been in the Senate since 2005, and he's voted on over 200 bills. Which bills do you feel that he's voted on since his career in the US Senate started that make him to be non-bipartisan

Obama voted with his party 98% of the time as did Rahmbo. Enough said.

Obama Speak: Bi-Partisanship means Republicans vote for Democratic bills.

 

[Isolde]

Snicker, who are they trying to fool? Oh, that's right, their über-intelligent base who graciously consumes their bullshit without question.

If bi-partisanship was their thing then why the need for a fillibuster-proof majority? They don't know the meaning of the word compromise.

 

[Ravi]

Obama voted with his party 98% of the time as did Rahmbo. Enough said.

Obama Speak: Bi-Partisanship means Republicans vote for Democratic bills.

Maybe this is too nuanced for you to grasp, and perhaps I'm not explaining it correctly...but most of Bush's positions were not bi-partisan, so voting against them doesn't automatically make someone partisan. It's more likely that voting against them made someone CORRECT...which could be considered moderate, rational, liberal, or even conservative.

 

[Ravi]

Snicker, who are they trying to fool? Oh, that's right, their über-intelligent base who graciously consumes their bullshit without question.

If bi-partisanship was their thing then why the need for a fillibuster-proof majority? They don't know the meaning of the word compromise.

I don't think need has anything to do with, it seems to be what the electorate wants.

 

[Isolde]

I don't think need has anything to do with, it seems to be what the electorate wants.

Oh really? I am fortunate enough to be from Minnesota which is about to be the next election spectacle.

I received several mailings in which Obama begged me to vote for Franken. Here is a direct quote from one such mailing: "But 60 democratic senators can end a filibuster. That's why every Democcrat is needed - and that's just another good reason why Barack Obama needs Al Franken to join Amy Klobuchar in the US Senate."

Sounds like he needs Democrats to me. Is it because he is unwilling or unable to reach a consensus with the other side? Either way, it should reflect on his ability or inability as a leader.

Personally, to borrow a catchphrase, I embrace diversity and I think our government runs better when there is a balance. Even when one has to suffer through all the liberal whining that inevitably occurs, I do think the end negotiated bill is better.

 

[Ravi]

I googled your email and couldn't find anything on it so I'm not sure if you are telling the truth or not.

Regardless, I also agree balance is good. But your comment about liberal whining makes you a partisan hack...

You seem to belie the saying with age comes wisdom.

 

[WillowTree]

Oh really? I am fortunate enough to be from Minnesota which is about to be the next election spectacle.

I received several mailings in which Obama begged me to vote for Franken. Here is a direct quote from one such mailing: "But 60 democratic senators can end a filibuster. That's why every Democcrat is needed - and that's just another good reason why Barack Obama needs Al Franken to join Amy Klobuchar in the US Senate."

Sounds like he needs Democrats to me. Is it because he is unwilling or unable to reach a consensus with the other side? Either way, it should reflect on his ability or inability as a leader.

Personally, to borrow a catchphrase, I embrace diversity and I think our government runs better when there is a balance. Even when one has to suffer through all the liberal whining that inevitably occurs, I do think the end negotiated bill is better.

obamalama begged you to vote for franken? omg!

 

[Red Dawn]

Oh really? I am fortunate enough to be from Minnesota which is about to be the next election spectacle.

I received several mailings in which Obama begged me to vote for Franken. Here is a direct quote from one such mailing: "But 60 democratic senators can end a filibuster. That's why every Democcrat is needed - and that's just another good reason why Barack Obama needs Al Franken to join Amy Klobuchar in the US Senate."

Sounds like he needs Democrats to me. Is it because he is unwilling or unable to reach a consensus with the other side? Either way, it should reflect on his ability or inability as a leader.

Personally, to borrow a catchphrase, I embrace diversity and I think our government runs better when there is a balance. Even when one has to suffer through all the liberal whining that inevitably occurs, I do think the end negotiated bill is better.

What an outrage!

Oh, the humanity....who ever heard of a President asking for a filibuster proof majority in the Senate to enact their agenda! Has any outrage like this ever happened in the history of the republic!??

What a God damned Marxist. You think he'd have the decency to campaign on a platform, asking voters to give the Republican Party at least 48 seats.

 

[Modbert]

Oh really? I am fortunate enough to be from Minnesota which is about to be the next election spectacle.

I received several mailings in which Obama begged me to vote for Franken. Here is a direct quote from one such mailing: "But 60 democratic senators can end a filibuster. That's why every Democcrat is needed - and that's just another good reason why Barack Obama needs Al Franken to join Amy Klobuchar in the US Senate."

Sounds like he needs Democrats to me. Is it because he is unwilling or unable to reach a consensus with the other side? Either way, it should reflect on his ability or inability as a leader.

Personally, to borrow a catchphrase, I embrace diversity and I think our government runs better when there is a balance. Even when one has to suffer through all the liberal whining that inevitably occurs, I do think the end negotiated bill is better.

Sounds like he wants his fellow democrats to win. Since you know, the whole point of two parties in an election is one party wins and one loses. Do you suggest he supports the Republican candidate?

Besides, Al Franken would make a better senator then Norm who originally said we must now count every vote but has now epic failed at trying to stop a recount. No 2000 Redux here.

I also hope you don't support that scumbag coward Saxby Chambliss.

 

[Modbert]

What an outrage!

Oh, the humanity....who ever heard of a President asking for a filibuster proof majority in the Senate to enact their agenda! Has any outrage like this ever happened in the history of the republic!??

What a God damned Marxist. You think he'd have the decency to campaign on a platform, asking voters to give the Republican Party at least 48 seats.

She wants to spread the "wealth" around to the Republicans running for senate seats.

Damn Marxists! *Shakes fist*

 

[Isolde]

I googled your email and couldn't find anything on it so I'm not sure if you are telling the truth or not.

Regardless, I also agree balance is good. But your comment about liberal whining makes you a partisan hack...

You seem to belie the saying with age comes wisdom.

Make that a whining stalker.

On edit: The comment 'liberal whining' does not make me partisan, it makes me an idealogue. I am not the Democrat calling for other Democrats to be elected. You needn't google, I am an independent from the glorious socialist counties of MN. We have brought winners such as Mondale!, Wellstone!, Jesse the Bod! and now Al Frankenstein! for your political amusement.

 

[dilloduck]

I googled your email and couldn't find anything on it so I'm not sure if you are telling the truth or not.

Regardless, I also agree balance is good. But your comment about liberal whining makes you a partisan hack...

You seem to belie the saying with age comes wisdom.

googled her e-mail---damn Ravi
Why don't you just claim to read minds ?

 

[Ravi]

googled her e-mail---damn Ravi
Why don't you just claim to read minds ?

heh...have you ever gone three minutes without being an asshole? Anywhoo, I'm done with Isolde...IT apparently is a troll.

 

[dilloduck]

heh...have you ever gone three minutes without being an asshole? Anywhoo, I'm done with Isolde...IT apparently is a troll.

I was a dick for over 3 hours once. 3 minute asshole--PFFFFFFFFFtttt

 

[WillowTree]

heh...have you ever gone three minutes without being an asshole? Anywhoo, I'm done with Isolde...IT apparently is a troll.

oh well then, that's all we absolutely need to know innit??? I think I'll make Isolde the number two best whiner on USMB in yer honor Ravi..

 

[Isolde]

heh...have you ever gone three minutes without being an asshole? Anywhoo, I'm done with Isolde...IT apparently is a troll.

You needn't be so petulant just because I called bullshit on the bipartisanship meme and then backed it up. Sorry to assault your sensibilities.