A Little Perspective

Digby gives us some much-needed perspective to temper the euphoria from Question Time yesterday in today's must-read:

I suspect that average voters don't see Obama being persecuted as Clinton was, or subject to non-stop calumny by a rabid Republican majority. The Republicans aren't doing anything (and that's the problem.) I think people see Obama conceding that he hasn't been bipartisan enough and that he intends to keep trying. And that will never be a winner for our side because all the Republicans have to do is continue to obstruct to prove him a failure.

She has a point.  The Village now has to admit that the GOP has 41 votes and now has to take some responsibility for that endless wall of saying no, but let's be honest here, the Village will never actually extract a price from the GOP for actually continuing to block every piece of legislation that Obama could possibly take credit for, especially for the legislation they agree with (every single Republican in the Senate voted against Pay-Go last week.)

I'd argue the "average voters don't see Obama as being persecuted" but then again, racists don't admit they are being racist, so again she has a point there.  But here's the kicker (emphasis mine):

If all this only means that Democrats will continue to move further right in order to reach across the aisle then I don't suppose it hurts anything --- they are already stretching themselves into pretzels to get there. But if the Republicans continue to successfully obstruct and then criticize Obama for failing to achieve his promise of bipartisanship, I think it exacerbates the problems we already have coming up in November. I suppose the American people may see through their ruse, but I think it might be just a little bit too complicated: they just see Obama unable to achieve bipartisan agreement with people he repeatedly portrays as rational actors. Therefore, he is weak and the Democratic agenda isn't mainstream.

I'm happy to be wrong about this and hope fervently that this interaction really did create a whole new dynamic in Washington. At the very least, Obama got to answer his knuckle headed critics so there is some satisfaction in that. But my intuition tells me that it won't change anything and could make things worse in the long run if Obama further backs himself into the bipartisan corner.

So, the question becomes this:  should Obama even try to negotiate with a group of people that have no intent of giving an inch?  One one hand, the Republicans have paid back every single bipartisan effort Obama has made with nothing but bad faith and vitriol.  Even when it's a Republican measure that they supported during the Bush years, they immediately attack, mislead and obstruct every single time.  That got us Scott Brown.  They are very rational, it's just the rationality of fanaticism.


On the other hand, America needs to see Obama correct the lies if anything's ever going to get done.  The Teabaggers refuse to portray Obama as a rational actor in any way shape or form.  To them, he's an amorphous monster, the right-wing equivalent of Cthulhu or something.  If America sees Obama doing this on live television, that starts to break down, and then the burden of rationality flips to the Teabaggers.  Besides, the Village does love them some bipartisan overtures.

On the gripping hand, if Obama doesn't get the foreclosure meltdown fixed, he's screwed and so are we.  It's a moot point.

Anyway, do read Digby's post.

[UPDATE 8:37 PM]  Then again as Steve M. reminds me the Village does love bipartisanship, but only because that means they can criticize both sides instead of merely holding everything against the President and the Dems.