Last week, Rep. Pete Roskam (R-Ill.), a leading lieutenant to House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), complained that President Obama should do more to make congressional Republicans happy.
"President Obama has an unbelievable opportunity to be a transformational president — that is, to bring the country together," Roskam said. "Or he can devolve into zero-sum-game politics, where he wins and other people lose."
On "Meet the Press" yesterday, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) made a similar argument.
For those who can't watch clips online, Gingrich, making his ninth "Meet the Press" appearance of 2012, argued:
"This president has a chance as he did in '09 to come in and say, 'I'm going to sit down and work with you. We're going to be bipartisan, we're going to put the country first,' or he has a chance to do what he did in '09, which is say, 'I'm going to write a stimulus package with only Democrats and ram it through unread.' He can continue down the road he's on right now. He guarantees a permanent war because everybody on the right at every level sooner or later is going to get sick of it."
Just to be clear, the former House Speaker wasn't kidding. He seemed to genuinely believe what he was saying.
In Gingrich's version of reality, like Roskam's, it's Obama who's a fierce partisan, unwilling to compromise with people with whom he disagrees.
I can't say with confidence how many Americans actually believe such nonsense, but it's remarkable to hear the perspective spoken aloud. For four years, congressional Republicans have refused to work with the Obama White House on anything. GOP leaders have freely admitted that made a deliberate decision never to compromise or work constructively with the president, even when he proposed Republican ideas.
On practically every issue, Obama reached out to GOP officials, pleading with them to work with him in good faith, and in literally every instance, they refused, instead embracing a scorched-earth strategy in which defeating the president was their sole priority. This began literally the same Obama was inaugurated.
The result has been unprecedented obstructionism and the most toxic political atmosphere since Gingrich led an impeachment crusade against President Clinton.
And yet, despite these past four years, according to Gingrich, there will be a "permanent war" between the parties unless Obama does even more to make Republicans happy. Why? Because GOP policymakers are "sick of" how mean the president is to them.
It's like peeking into an alternate universe.
Leave a Comment:
Newt Romney must not have gotten the memo, where everyone and their brother knows about the old bedroom trick rubber and glue, It's not working anymore. It took a ...Splat!
Gingrich and those he represents are blind to their privilege, ignorant to their resistance, and defiant in their obstruction to a changing American reality!
So, it is the easiest thing thing for Gingrich and his ilk to cast blame upon all others save themselves for the partisan shyt the rest of us have to put up with! -Kevo
and great job Lawrence on BBQing newt!
he has been and always will be a loser! and most of his followers are either less or more of the same LOSERS.
I think the title is one word off:
Gingrich encourages 'permanent' partisan warfare
That's the problem with you people on the left. The Republican Party worked incredibly hard to weave this new reality where they are always the heroes & you are always the villains to be blamed for everything. The fact that you don't acknowledge their hard work by submitting your will to this new reality makes them so angry, what option do they have besides...blaming you for everything?
Or as I've written before, if you are a Republican, tailoring your message to Republicans, your statements don't have to be true. They just have to be MADE, thus becoming Truth.
Well said!
I agree with you but there is an inherent flaw in that way of thinking. Reality has a well known liberal bias and it doesn't care who you are. History will pave right over you.
The other thing that is wrong here is what Woodward put his finger on, they are trying to re-litigate the 1990's and those days are long gone just like the cold war that Republicans almost pathologically can't get over.
What we need is a 21st Century solution to 21st Century problems and we aren't going to get it from 20th Century men with a 19th Century Agenda.
They were sent a clear message from the people on the day of the last election. Problem is that their heads are buried too far into the sand of denial (or some other dark place) to hear it.
I'm sick of them and will do everything possible to purge them from their jobs at each election from now on.
I say, "Let's get them off of the government teat" as soon as possible!
@Dragoon21b - OF COURSE they're trying to re-litigate the 1990s. They're like a dinosaur rock band on tour and aware that no one is buying the new album, so whether they like it or not, until they have a new tune people dig, it's officially a Greatest Hits tour.
@RealNeil - It's not JUST denial, it's dismissal (probably two sides of the same coin), and it's exemplified by Mitt's pre-AND-post election comments. "I need your help because all the minorities and poor people will vote for Obama to get free stuff." "I LOST the election because all the minorities and poor people voted for Obama for free stuff." Sorry to use the rock band analogy again, but Like Spinal Tap, it's not that they're less popular it's that their audience is more selective. They're getting "the right voters."
They won't acknowledge their stand on immigration issues and gay marriage and women's health are major turn-offs - as far as they're concerned, they're on the right side of history and the real problem is "you people" are too stupid to get it. So the solution is obvious, keep America sucking until the voters "get it." Stand in the way of progress. Act like terrorists and take hostages. Destroy the village in order to save it. And keep blaming the Dems until we the people are poor enough and desperate enough to fall for their line of bull and elect more Republicans...which is when they'll really f*** us over while insisting their f***ing is a mandate from the majority and not just "the minority that matters."
Honestly, you can't blame them for running this play, it's worked so well before. It's what helped bring us the Whitewater investigation and Clinton Impeachment, it's what helped keep Dems cowed in fear during the first 6 years of Dubya's reign, and it's what emboldened them to keep filibustering everything in the Senate since 2007. It's what brought the great Shellacking of 2010, which effects will continue, probably, at least for the next decade thanks to redistricting. It's the only play they have, and when they lose with it, they lose big, but when it works, they have championship seasons.
I turned off Meet the Press as soon as I heard they had Newt on the panel.
Of Course Newt Gingrich envisions permanent partisan warfare! That is the foundation of his entire school of politics!
No, that's the Alinsky method you're thinking about.
RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.
Translation: hurting people is good.
If you make the other guy look bad enough it camouflages your flaws and you don't have to raise your standards
And his income. Who would he be, where would he be financially if he stopped being invited to interject his ridiculous blather into political discourse?
The world would be a better place without Dick Gregory in it.
Ignore the hemorrhoid below. Do not scratch it.
While I don't like David Gregory's reporting focus, tonal inflections, or hosting of MTP, I do not think your comments here are appropriate or acceptable. They reminded me of the FOX host who criticized Rachel's parents a few years ago. I think you should withdraw this comment; it is hateful.
And ignore the hemorrhoid above.
Disgusted, I'm pretty sure you meant David Gregory, not Dick Gregory.
http://www.biography.com/people/dick-gregory-9320102
You are correct. It IS hateful. I meant it to be hateful. Sorry you don't like it. But I don't care.
Oops, yes, I meant David Gregory, not Dick Gregory. And the 2nd and 3rd posts weren't calling judy a hemorrhoid. I reserve that term for only one poster who doesn't deserve the respect of being called by his screen name.
Disgusted: you should warn us before bringing your mother along. :P
Strife sells, very well in fact. The movement conservatives and their media are selling permanent strife because it makes them wealthy. Hannity makes tens of millions a year, and Obama is his biggest allie. Lars Larson told my dad that Obama was the biggest boon to right wing talk radio in history. These people don't want a deal on anything, including the debt ceiling. Remember, this is important, Obamas favorability rating took a beating in the last debt ceiling fiasco, so crashing the world economy would be a victory to these greedy folks because Obama would take a hit.
Not so sure about that Dude , imo obama took a hit for allowing the gop to play obama and the dems as fools on the subject
Better get used to the idea of a picture window in to the conservative universe because it's real.
Higher taxes, more regulation, loss of civil liberties, drones and kill lists, not to mention just lying to people in general is making "no" the only sane response to the regime. Your side is blissfully ignoring actions that had Bush done them would make the left erupt into convulsions. But as always, IOKIYAD.
When one has the MSM covering up for the administration the narrative has no check or balance. Ask yourself, how has the MSM covered the Sandy response? I don't know because I never see any stories other than Springsteen giving a concert, or the Christie hug or climate change. Since there's no good news it's a safe bet there is none or Obama would be given a verbal medal of honor. As long as the MSM colludes with Obama, he can do no wrong.
Shooter that's paranoid nonsense and you should know better than that. Just by virtue that you are posting here and we are having this conversation you show that you aren't just tuned into FOX and are open to various sources of reporting on information.
Seriously think about what you are suggesting and how that bumps up against your other stated positions and beliefs.
Either there is a major conspiracy involving every major news outlet and reporting organization on the globe
or
It's the market at work and those corporations (which is what they are) are trying to make a profit by presenting things in a light and method that gets them ratings and brings in advertising review
Pick one
http://moelane.com/2012/06/09/troll-hunting-101/
If shooter were a Japanese businessman, your rage would be the panties "officially worn by Lindsay Lohan" he bought off ebay. Please consider that before responding, and have a nice day.
Dragoon, what do you think is the percentage of reporters that voted for Obama? 90-95%? Do you really think if Bush had done what Obama has, the press would be so complacent? Not a chance.
Shooter: keep in mind that there aren't Only American reporters in the world and I doubt you could get them all to agree let alone collude on anything as massive as pushing one person over another.
The way media works is just like anything else that's why you have FOX and MSNBC (both of whom do get called out regularly) with the other stuff somewhere in the middle.
Ask yourself how much of the "Bias" you see is in the way things are presented and how much is from the way you perceive them to be?
You haven't heard of Journolist? How about birds of a feather? People of like mind tend to gather together, just like they do here. And just like they do here, when they talk, they mostly agree with each other. I watch the Chris Hayes show weekends, and constantly marvel at how five people at a table can agree with each other so much.
No conspiracy, just human nature.
Did anyone on the show challenge Newt's comments?
No, how can you challenge the truth?
Gingrich and other republicans blame the Pres. for everything from the economy to their chewing gum losing it's flavor on the bed post overnight.
I really hate those people and MSNBC needs to fire Gregory and let him take his rightful place on a Fox news panel.
Victimhood continues...just look at the LAST two posters! 'Obama is bad bad bad and the Republicans would look like such DICKS if he hadn't made us this way!' C'mon. Look at yourselves TODAY as opposed to 10 years ago and tell ME how 'no is the only sane response!' BS.
Fortunately, for the next two years your opinion is superfluous.
Yes, Obama. You.
One man.
One man who needs to placate 435 Representatives in the House and 100 Senators in the Senate of our 112th Congress.
One man alone who must solve our governments gridlock.
One man who needs to come up with all the solutions to our current problems and then compromise those solutions to ensure the satisfaction of no, not the American people, but of the finicky pompous Republican leadership and their rich leashholders.
Is this how the founders created our government to work, one man alone, with the entire responsibility for everyone's happiness on his singular shoulders? Or did they create a government to work together, to compromise, to act in the best interests of those they represent...I'm no great politician, Newt, but even I know your advice is crap.
Steve, a couple of words are missing:
"GOP leaders have freely admitted that THEY made a deliberate decision...."
"This began literally the same DAY Obama was inaugurated."
Back in the Clinton years, Gingrich wrote a little manual for the GOP on "framing" the political argument, with lists of loaded words to use against Democrats, and other guidelines on how to attack, always attack. One method demonstrated here: pre-empt the accusations so if the opponent points out your offenses it can be dismissed as just you-too-ing (tu quoque). Republicans use this so often it amounts to chronic "projection"; you can tell what they're planning -- e.g. electoral fraud, vote suppression -- by what they accuse Democrats of planning or committing. Then even if caught in the act, they can say "but both sides do it" or "the other side started it." Accusing Obama of their own partisanship is just trying to "frame" the next four years, to "play the refs."
Just pure out and out bull! Rove and Newt disinformation - if your opponent will not just do what you want - s/he is uncooperative and partisan. Same line of attack as claiming President is a racist!
Newt is doing stand up comedy.
"She turned me into a newt!"
"A newt?"
"I got better"
I believe Mr. Gingrich (he is no longer the speaker) forgets that he took advantage of his political capital in 1994 and President Bush, after his victory in 2004, commented that he had political capital and he intended to spend it. While not surprised (as a political/diplomatic historian) that he chooses to forget this, I do wish Mr. Gingrich would go away. His political capital is spent.
The clearest evidence that it is Republicans, and not the President, who are being partisan, is their complete repudiation of policies that they once championed - if the President proposed them.
"Or he can devolve into zero-sum-game politics, where he wins and other people lose."
Other people in this case being Republican politicans, as opposed to those of us who struggle on a daily basis to make ends meet.
Or, How the Gingrinch Stole Christmas. Newt's heart is, unfortunately, not two sizes too small; he doesn't have one at all. Ask his ex-wives.
OK name one of these so called issues among "practically every issue" that Obama "reached out to the GOP" on. Were GOPs invited to discuss Obama care? No. Were they, as Mr. Gingrich correctly stated, invited to discuss the stimulus in 2009? No. It seems Mr. Gingrich's version of reality is one which you Liberals at MSNBC can't stand; the truth.
Guppy: get out of the fish tank and recall Olympia Snowe getting courted by Obama for months, or Chuck Grassley. Facts sting your side, because they are so gosh darn factual.
No, guppy asked for an example and he shall recieve an example, a big one:
ACA - single payer option off the table and concessions to Big Pharma, one of the Republicans biggest leashholders.
Obama included almost 40% tax cuts in the stimulus, against many Democrats wishes, to get Republican support. During the healthcare debate, do you remember Obama going to the House Republican membership to hold public negotiations, and they had every intention to make him look bad to the American people but instead he made them look so inept that they never wanted to debate him publicly again? During the grand bargain that Boehner was supposedly on board and bringing his caucus, at the last minute it was the Republicans that canned the deal.
In return for my example, Guppy, give us one example where the Republicans have compromised with Obama to do what's best for the nation...
[sounds of crickets...]
I've never seen such frothing at the mouth liberal bias in my life. ?You guys must really hate it when Gingrich gets it right.
Gingrinch was run out of DC BY HIS OWN PARTY , because he was so corrupt , and you hold this loser in high regard , that sums up the gop
Not sure how I'll react when Gingrich gets it right . . . I'll let you know if it ever happens.
the GOP doesnt understand the concept of "compromise" and still feels they should be made happy by the president caving to all of their demands. They refuse to see they lost the election and that its time to work together to reach a middle ground on things. As was mentioned in the article they were extremely obstructionist during Obama first term and openly commented they would do all they could to make him a 1 termer. Which they failed to do and have ignored the damage they have done in their obstructionist moves to the country and the middle class, perhaps thats why they lost the election. The current fiscal cliff talks are a continuing example of how they are willing to push the country over the brink rather then compromise in any respect. Obama provides specific details on the budget the GOP says "not enough what else do you have" without offering a single detail on how they would fix the budget other then demanding "painful" cuts to entitlements and sticking to tax breaks for the top 2%. As has been shown during Obama 1st term he continually brought them things he felt they would go for and with no discussion or attempt to work on a middle ground they said NO and used the debt limit as extortion which seems they are verbally saying they will do the same again. Is it as wonder why polls show by a 2:1 ratio the voters will blame the GOP if we go over the fiscal cliff.
Watching them in action, I figure Republican politicians understand compromise extremely well. They've compromised their integrity, their constituents, and their nation to sell out to anyone willing to bankroll their tiny piece of the pie.