I wonder how the Wall Street Journal defines the public mood:
John Boehner is no Newt Gingrich, which suits the current public mood. Americans have had their fill of triumphalism and revolution in a House Speaker. But Barack Obama is also no Bill Clinton, a President with a gift for tactical politics and compromise. And therein lies the drama of the next two years as we return to divided government. We’re probably destined more for gridlock than accomplishment, which after the last two years is an accomplishment itself.
I also wonder how you can define ‘gridlock’ as an accomplishment. If you don’t think the government can or should do anything to creat jobs, then gridlock might make sense. Is that really what the public thinks? I know that the Republicans pretend to not believe in climate change, but failing to deal with it could have catastrophic consequences. The president says that we’re losing out on a chance to get into the clean energy market and the Chinese and Europeans are eating our lunch. How does gridlock help us there?
But, wait! Why am I arguing with the Wall Street Journal?
I actually agree that Boehner is no Newt. I think he will genuinely try to produce actual legislation (though he may not be competent enough to control the maniacs within his party).
The rest of the editorial is pure drivel, of course.
I disagree. I don’t think he will offer a budget that has any chance of being passed by the Senate, let alone signed by the president. And he won’t be offering any serious legislation at all. Other than a few things that Congress absolutely has to do, like raising the debt ceiling and naming post offices, I don’t think this Congress will do a damn thing. What they’ll do is pass a bunch of bunk that the Senate will ignore.
I think I’m the only one in the universe who believes that legislation will be passed by this Congress.
Part of my reasoning is a hunch about Boehner. Part of it is my believe that the institutions have a tendency to transform flame-throwers into somewhat more reasonable legislators (particularly when in a position of real authority). But I also believe that the GOP House leadership will recognize that some legislation actually is in their self-interest.
Not sure what you mean when you say Boehner will offer a budget with no chances of being passed. Initially, that may well happen. But a budget will eventually be passed, because otherwise everything shuts down.
I also think that there could be some very long-term deficit reduction agreement (provided that the real pain doesn’t start anytime in the foreseeable future).
I think the House Republican caucus is so radicalized that they are incapable of governing in the same universe as the Democratically-controlled Senate. There is nothing they can agree on. Absolutely no hope of compromise. The government will be shut down in the fall. And it won’t be because the president vetoed the budget but because Congress can’t create one that the House will pass. They won’t pass anything acceptable to the Senate until the government has been shut down for a while.
And you can forget about pretty much anything else, as well. They’ll find a couple of kinks in the health care bill to fix and maybe some earmark reform, but very little will be produced because the House GOP is off its rocker.
Love the WSJ. Clinton was a Republican with a D after his name.
One thing I haven’t heard is Issa yelling about impeaching Obama.
The US is behind on green tech and research.
We are going to be the losers on this.
If there was a Republican Senate I’d say they would try to gut the EPA.
Oil is over $86 a barrel today. This is hurting people, along with the rise in food costs.
If the Republs try to shut down the government, it won’t play like it did before.
It seems that the Republicans have a pattern. They seem to be wanting to do pretty much what they did with Clinton.
The problem is that Obama isn’t Clinton. Obama spoke about specifics on the ACA that can be fixed. Today, the AP headline said that the Republicans have no specifics to deal with healthcare.
This could be intersting.
I do think the Republicans benefited from talk radio, which has a lot of rightie syncicated shows and cable tv with it’s lousy celebrities with their breathy, excited voices.
Technically, James Madison wanted gridlock and a do-nothing government. But we’re not living in 1787…
“But, wait! Why am I arguing with the Wall Street Journal? “
Exactly.
And then there’s the last moments of this Congress. Pelosi commented to Olberman that she knew she had the votes for the Bush tax cuts before the elections but decided to do them when they came back instead. Will the tax cuts for the 2% go out the door? And when the Stimulus winds down, will the Teabaggers find a way to make up that tax break with cuts?
How does gridlock help us there?
It pisses liberals off. This is the purpose of politics. Pissing liberals off, and enriching yourself.
It’s in Aristotle.
The kind of legislation we can now expect from the House was discussed on NPR yesterday by Dick Armey — within 3 weeks, a House vote repealing ‘Obamacare’. “There’ll be at least 20 Dems who will vote for repeal. Who cares if it doesn’t pass the Senate? It will show the American people who’s side we are on.”
That’s the kind of crud we are going to be dealing with from here on out.
Are there 20 Democrats left who voted against the Health Care bill last time? How many of the losers in the House are even going to show up for the lame duck term? Most will probably show up to clear out offices and leave.
Check it out. Dday makes the argument I made a while back. This is why I like him:
http://news.firedoglake.com/2010/11/04/harry-reid-out-obamas-obama-with-working-class-coalition/
The ground work was remarkable because it was not dependent on orders from Tim Kaine.
Define the enemy and blame others, what a concept. Did the Administration ever educate the American people who was stopping change? Or why they could not do more to help them out? Who was to blame?
Instead, their main message was things suck now but they would have been alot worse without us. No wonder we got spanked in message wars and the economy still sucks.
Everyone was complaining about the youth vote being low but maybe it was because they have no jobs and are living with their parents.
Republicans gain from gridlock in the Congress in the same way that Blue Dogs gained from digging in their heels to lobotomize the health care bill. They have nothing to lose by gridlock.
Obama seeks to get something done. He and Democrats are at a strategic disadvantage.
I still think that Obama should not provide a 2012 Presidential budget but tell the House to write one based on the information from the CBO. And warn against direct or indirect earmarks, either individual or collective and bipartisan.
Make the Republicans put on the table what they would cut and where they would get the money to pay for the rest. And then begin negotiation from there, with Democrats offering amendments to popular items that apply to everyone and not just specific districts.
Expose the military spending for jobs welfare program that the Republicans indulge in and their thirst for stuff for their district and denying funds for anywhere else. Expose them as the deficit and small government and national security peacocks they are.