Paul Begala: Forget Bipartisanship

[babylonsister]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-11-08/forget-bipartisanship/full/

Forget Bipartisanship

by Paul Begala

Health-care reform passed the House with just one GOP vote, and the fetishists of bipartisanship are clucking. But Paul Begala says that after the bipartisan march to war in Iraq and other disasters, the Democrats are making a smart bet.


Led by the unshakable Nancy Pelosi, whose grace in the face of bitter and sometimes sexist attacks is truly admirable, congressional Democrats are showing rare courage in passing major health-care reform legislation in the face of implacable partisan opposition. History suggests they’re making a smart bet.

snip//

The health-care debate is generating similar—and if possible, more hysterical—predictions. House Minority Leader John Boehner pronounced health-insurance reform “the greatest threat to freedom that I’ve seen in the 19 years I’ve been in Washington.”

Wow. I guess he means the freedom of insurance companies to dump you when you get sick, or exclude you for a “pre-existing condition,” or jack up your rates if you’re a woman, or discriminate against you as you get older.

Referring to the health-care reform bill, Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) did her best impression of Glenn Beck (without the tears; one presumes Ms. Foxx is considerably tougher than the weepy Mr. Beck), saying, “I believe we have more to fear from the potential of that bill passing than we do from any terrorist right now in any country.” That’s a little over the top—even for a hyperbolist like me. As someone who lost friends on 9/11, as someone who was driving past the Pentagon when that plane hit, who felt the shock wave of the explosion, I should be offended. But lately I’ve been taking my cues from Elvis Costello: I used to be disgusted, but now I try to be amused.

Obviously, passing major laws with bipartisan support is preferable. But not always. Twenty-eight House Democrats and 12 Senate Democrats voted for the Bush tax cut in 2001. Coupled with the 2003 Bush tax cuts, which also had some Democratic support, that vote ran up $2.5 trillion in debt. And for what? They didn’t create jobs or reduce poverty or raise incomes for the middle class. In fact, median income fell by about $2,000 per family. Sure, the Bush tax cuts were bipartisan. But they were disastrous policy.

And who can ever forget the bipartisan march to war in Iraq? That was bipartisanship at its worst. Had more Democrats either had the courage of their convictions or the wisdom of Teddy Kennedy, Paul Wellstone, and Robert Byrd, we might not have lost more than 4,000 heroes and spent $2 trillion invading, conquering, and occupying a country that was no threat to us.

Reporters say Democrats are nervous. They didn’t look that way to me. Bill Owens, the newest congressman, defeated Sarah Palin’s conservative candidate last week in a New York district that hadn’t elected a Democratic congressman in 157 years. He did it in part by attacking the Bush-Republican economic policies of handouts for the wealthy and hammering the middle class. Owens said he wants to see greater assistance for small businesses and protections for his local forestry and paper-products industry, but at the end of the day he did not flinch. Neither should the rest of the Democratic Party.

[AndyA]

1. The Republicans are hypocrites.

They rush through a pharma bill that was a blank check to the drug companies, and the result was Medicare pays more for drugs than it needs to. So much for trying to save money.

The Bush tax cuts. The wars. The no-bid contracts. Who the hell do they think they are? They've wasted more money than anyone.

Kick their sorry butts to the curb. They aren't helping, they're just delaying, trying to make Dems look bad so they can pick up a few seats in 2010. Don't let them get away with it.

[babylonsister]

2. I think their actions speak volumes; they know what a feather in the

cap of Democrats passage of a health care bill will be so they're trying to thwart that by any means necessary. In the process, they're showing just how shallow and mean-spirited they are.

[boobooday]

3. To hell with calling them the party of NO

We should call them the party of MEan, and point out their greedy selfishness and heartlessness every chance we get.

Greed and selfishness are way out of style.