Getty Images
President Obama spoke yesterday at the Building and Construction Trades Department Conference, delivering a spirited message to union allies, but also taking some time to note those responsible for standing in the way of labor's goals.
Speaking specifically about infrastructure, Obama revived the "party of no" theme that hasn't gotten much attention lately.
"Again and again, I've said now is the time do this; interest rates are low, construction workers are out of work. Contractors are begging for work, and the work needs to be done. Let's do it. And time after time, the Republicans have gotten together and they've said no.
"I sent them a jobs bill that would have put hundreds of thousands of construction workers back to work repairing our roads, our bridges, schools, transit systems, along with saving the jobs of cops and teachers and firefighters, creating a new tax cut for businesses. They said no.
"I went to the Speaker's hometown, stood under a bridge that was crumbling. Everybody acknowledges it needs to be rebuilt.... They still said no.
"There are bridges between Kentucky and Ohio where some of the key Republican leadership come from, where folks are having to do detours an extra hour, hour and a half drive every day on their commute because these bridges don't work. They still said no. So then I said, well, maybe they couldn't handle the whole bill in one big piece. Let's break it up. Maybe it's just too much for them. So I sent them just the part of the bill that would have created these construction jobs. They said no."
Now, part of this clearly has to do with assigning responsibility. Obama wanted this audience to know he sided with them and congressional Republicans didn't.
But as Greg Sargent explained yesterday, there's also a larger thematic effort underway. "Party of no" is making a comeback in part because the president's campaign team is "burnishing Obama's character, by painting him as willing to persevere against implacable opposition -- represented here by the GOP itself -- and tremendous odds."
We talked briefly yesterday about the Obama campaign's new video, making the case for the president's re-election, but did you catch the section on Republicans saying no to everything? The narrator notes that Obama "persevered" against Republican intransigence.
With this in mind, Greg's take rings true:
The revival of the "party of No" phrase in this way points to a strategic dilemma the Obama campaign faces. The question surrounding Obama's constant railing against GOP obstructionism has long been: Will swing voters care? [...]
Resolving this problem is what's driving the effort to highlight GOP obstructionism -- along with inheriting two wars and the worst financial crisis in decades -- as yet another obstacle Obama persevered against. Obama and his team recently concluded they needed to reframe the standoff with the GOP as one that didn't showcase Obama's inability to get things done in the face of political obstructionism but as one that demonstrates Obama's continued action, in spite of determined and implacable opposition, via the exercise of executive power and his "We Can't Wait" campaign.
It's a campaign theme well worth watching.
Leave a Comment:
Obama is the most divisive president in history!
No, Obama is the most partisan president in history!
Make that the most incompetent president in history!
I think you may have forgotten Bush, Nixon, Hoover, etc.
Not hard to conclude this person has never actually read a history book, or probably much of anything else. Who needs elitist books when Faux News is on 24/7?
Obama's Ohio River bridge example is probably not the best one to highlight.
yep they went forward after the June 2010 ARRA deadline. They had to close the bridge in sept due to a 2" crack which never would have occurred had they accepted the money and used it wisely instead of trying to squander it , take credit for the many projects they used it for .
Obama is correct . they did refuse to repair it until it became unpassable. it was fixed using 25% of funds from federal government and Indiana had to use emergency funds because they are stubbornly stupid.
Hope no emergencies arise. Oh heck , theyll just cry top Obama to declare a state of emergency and get funds from the government they profess to hate because of spending so much. hypocrites.
Considering Obama has pushed executive power to new heights, rebranding him as ineffectual, yet well intentioned, is going to ring hollow. After all, he could tell Mr Geithner to send everyone a million dollars this afternoon, and we'd get it tomorrow.
Shooter, good to see that you are drinking the Fox kool-aid.
Excuse me? Isn't everyone getting a million dollars a liberal dream?
No, the liberal dream is for it to be possible for everyone to earn a million dollars. Given that the system is currently set up to keep the poor penniless and provide the rich ever-increasing money for nothing, you might understand how the dream is not yet alive. Or you might not, given to whom I'm responding.
And maybe, just maybe, this approach will have an impact on Congressional races. Hopefully it will get voters to start asking whether their GOP Senator or Rep is part of the solution, or part of the problem.
How can the "party of no" make a comeback when they never stopped saying no? Did he mean they left town for a while?
Let's be fair. To say "Obama inherited two wars" is disingenuous. One - Iraq - was agreed to end by the Bush admin. The other - Afghanistan - PBO chose to escalate without offering a way to offset the cost.
The first two years PBO had majorities in Congress. Aside from Ledbetter, what labor items did he push? Labor favors the Keystone pipeline. PBO goes half way. Does anyone believe he will not approve the rest if reelected? He's playing politics and the environmentalists will be very disappointed.
PBO continues to argue Keynesian economics despite a huge debt. He has not stated the case, other than catering to labor, why the additional debt would benefit the economy.
Last I checked we were still in Iraq and Afghanistan in 2008. So yes, Obama inherited 2 wars and the worst financial collapse since the Great Depression. Spin them how you will, but those are the facts.
As for 2-years to get stuff done, yeah right. Obama had about 10 months, and then the "party before the people" crowd owned the filibuster outright. You might remember that Franken was not permitted to be sworn in until summer 2009. Lieberman is an Independent who campaigned with McCain, and Scott Brown was seated in Jan 2010.
@fromnytosc
Thank you for your thoughtful post - though there are a few things I do not quite understand. Perhaps if you have time you might give us more detail. One - that the Bush administration agreed that the Iraq war ended during their administration. Would that have been the "mission accomplished" speech of 2003?. So the troops from the Iraq war have been home for 9 years? I really must get out more.
Second - that President Obama escalated the war without offering a way to offset the cost. That of course is a little joke you are having with us - no? War is free - President Bush told us that - anyway - we will be reimbursed by the oil companies as soon as the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline is completed. Everyone knows that. But still - good joke.
The first two years President Obama had majorities in Congress - well yes but could you explain filibustering and cloture to me - I never did quite understand how that political stuff works.
You state that President Obama is both against labor and yet caters to labor. Again perhaps a more detailed explanation would penetrate my aging brain cells.
I promise to follow your future posts most carefully and I hope you will be patient with me if from time to time I ask for clarification.
Pravda means truth!
Adam_Selene
Beep, Beep!
Keith Looney seems to have run out of hot air momentarily over on Lawrence so I thought I'd take a drive and possibly send some trolls scurrying back to their hidey-holes...
Place is too big, though. Like driving in New York... Never made it that far east but Seattle scared the hell out of me...
And a note to Clarke Barry since I know you'll read this: Would you tweet your pal Olbermann and ask him for me if "Paging Dr. Kevorkian" was too over-the-edge in reply to the the "Murdoch Unfit" news we're seeing out of the UK this morning?
I don't Tweet. Too much like writing metered poetry...
Cabbie - nothing much here - a sniper or two - there is one who occasionally appears who may be working the long con and may fall into the TWL category (troll writ large). I have more research to do. I may lurk after you since I still think the little rascals cannot resist being in your presence.
Adam_Selene
The Keystone Pipeline north section is running into resistance in Canada and the US which is why Obama deferred to the State Dept. There are many farmers, ranchers and sportsmen that are fighting the pipeline for a good reason. That reason is the Gulf Oil Spill, the one that BP thinks we have forgotten since they have promised everything they do will be environmentally safe. The farmers, ranchers and sportsmen who use the lands where the pipeline will be located do not trust the oil companies. I don't either. This is in addition to the baloney about all the jobs it will create lies being spouted.
The press can usually smell-out "a dog bits man" story and run with it until it loses its news cycle worthiness.
You'd think the press could use its nose to hunt down "the Party of No bits itself in the Ass" story that's right in front of its face! -Kevo
That's funny, and I'm not gonna tell you why :)
I'm trying to visualize that statement with the nose and face and other parts. It must be some sort of violation of topological theory - would this be an example of "pointless topology"? Google only helps so much - never a mathematician around when you need one!