Opposition, Explained
By Mitch Berg
E. J. Dionne on the leftymedia’s approach to all of us uppity peasants who are rooting for the GOP’s red-zone play:
Obama’s network appearances were planned as a response to a wholly unanticipated development: Republicans — short on new ideas, low on votes, and deeply unpopular in the polls — have been winning the media wars over the president’s central initiative. They have done so largely by focusing on minor bits of the stimulus that amount, as Obama said in at least two of his network interviews, to “less than 1 percent of the overall package.” But Republicans have succeeded in defining the proposal by its least significant parts.
The fact that the “stimulus” would “stimulate” more if it were paid directly to the people in cash -that it creates a tiny film of jobs, mostly for Democrat constituencies, in exchange for a ruinous avalanche of pork – is the “least significant part?”
Heather Cromar responds:
Just imagine for a moment if my two daughters took my credit card on a spending spree of their own and came back with a whopping $80, 000 bill. Now try to imagine that the little sister, who flat out opposed the whole nonsense, in complaining to me about it, happened to mention that the older sister had bought some items that were sure to make my hair stand on end the moment I found out about it. Which would be the bigger issue to me? The couple of no-nos, or the total bill that is going to set our family budget back by a considerable amount for decades?
The thing to remember as you watch the media rally, legs a-tingle, around The One; they need you to be stupid.
February 6th, 2009 at 8:25 am
Republicans — short on new ideas
Obama compares his ‘stimulus package’ to the New Deal and Republicans are short on new ideas? I suppose Dionne thinks that with this bill and a little bit of luck we might be able to achieve the same unemployment rate the US had in 1936.
February 6th, 2009 at 10:25 am
“But Republicans have succeeded in defining the proposal by its least significant parts.”
Bzzzt. Wrong.
We’re warning the public about an extremely bad plan by highlighting it’s very worst parts.
But, thanks for playing.
February 6th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
I think that the real test here is that if Republicans are really only objecting to the “least significant parts” which amount to “less than 1 percent of the overall package” and it’s causing problems for passing the bill which Obama thinks needs to be passed IMMEDIATELY, how hard would it be for him to pick up the phone to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and say “please take these parts out and bring it up for a vote again”?
Or better yet, break it down into several bills – one for the 5.28% of the bill that’s actually going for infrastructure, one for expanding unemployment benefits and/or COBRA/Medicaid coverage, one for the tax cuts, and so forth. That way the most important parts which need to be passed IMMEDIATELY can get passed by Congress and signed into law as quickly as possible.
If he hasn’t called for removing those portions or breaking the bill into several separate appropriations, then it’s either going to stand or fall together as one piece and he can’t credibly object to those who oppose the bill for things that he and his own put in it and are fighting to keep in it.
February 7th, 2009 at 10:51 am
Obama got a field goal if you count Rino defections as points.