Getty Images
It didn't take long for congressional Republicans to start complaining about President Obama's second inaugural. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said, "I didn't hear any conciliatory remarks," as if it's incumbent on a re-elected president to pacify those who tried to defeat him. Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), and John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) all made similar comments.
And wouldn't you know it, a variety of pundits from the D.C. establishment soon followed in the same vein. National Journal's Ron Fournier said Obama had been "fiercely partisan" and paid no mind to the "delicate art of compromise." Michael Gerson, perhaps listening to a different speech altogether, heard a president argue "even the most commonplace policy disagreements indicate the bad faith of his opponents."
Dana Milbank seems terribly disappointed that the president could have presented a "unifying" message, but didn't.
What followed was less an inaugural address for the ages than a leftover campaign speech combined with an early draft of the State of the Union address. Obama used the most visible platform any president has to decry global-warming skeptics who "still deny the overwhelming judgment of science." He quarreled with Republicans who say entitlement programs "make us a nation of takers." He condemned the foreign policy of his predecessor by saying that "enduring security and lasting peace do not require perpetual war."
"We cannot mistake absolutism for principle or substitute spectacle for politics, or treat name-calling as reasoned debate," the president informed his opponents.
For some reason, Milbank even complained about Obama having "mocked" the song "America the Beautiful" in an ad last July -- though that's not what happened.
Taken together, it seems many pundits and Republicans agree: Obama should be nice and bipartisan, reaching out to the right at all times, careful not to upset delicate sensibilities. Since his inaugural address didn't do this, it somehow came up short.
Indeed, this seems to be a strain of thought that's dominated much of the political discourse in recent weeks. How dare Obama nominate a Republican Defense Secretary he knows Republicans don't like! How dare the president present an ambitious agenda to prevent gun violence over the objections of his critics! How dare Obama use his inaugural address to present an unapologetic vision of progressive governance in the 21st century!
Who does this guy think he is, the newly re-elected president of the United States?
The hand-wringing is unpersuasive, to put it mildly. Obama used his second inaugural address to offer a forceful defense of collective action and a governmental role in problem solving, which might make Republican senators and some media figures uncomfortable, but it's hardly unprecedented -- as E.J. Dionne reminds us, plenty of iconic presidents used their inaugural speeches to present a set of principles that guide their approach to policymaking. That Obama did the same need not be considered controversial.
As for the notion that the speech lacked a "unifying" theme, I hope some of his critics will consider going back and looking at it again. The president used the word "together" seven times. He used the phrase "We, the people" five times. He stressed "you and I as citizens" twice.
This is, by definition, a message intended to unify. Obama's detractors will say, "Yes, but it's about unifying around an agenda the president likes." And my response is, of course it is. He's the president, hoping to persuade people to follow his lead. That was the point.
As for the notion that Obama should have been most "post-partisan" and made his address more Republican-friendly, I sincerely hope we're not going to let the last four years slip down the memory hole too quickly. As we discussed yesterday, Republicans spent Obama's first term on a scorched-earth campaign, hoping to destroy his presidency and nearly everything he proposed. GOP leaders met privately exactly four years ago yesterday to plot their comeback by obstructing the president wherever possible, and refusing to compromise with Obama on literally anything, even when he embraced Republican ideas -- and then they executed that plot without hesitation or shame.
That the president has learned lessons from those experiences isn't a shame; it's a relief.
Leave a Comment:
This new Obama attitude will be bolstered by his campaign team fighting on with it's amazing database. Get ready for the complaints from the far right...
Head there now! Join ! Donate !
Think about the gerrymander and what the state republicans are trying to do to democracy.
https://my.barackobama.com/
Confusion, dissent, smoke and mirrors is all they (plutocrats, theocrats, any tyrants) have. In order for the wealthy few to rule the many, they need to keep the poor majority from uniting as a means to make themselves heard above the ranting of those willing to say and do anything for money.
Preying on peoples' fears (they disenfranchised millions of Americans without taking anyone's guns), dividing ('us versus them', race, sex, education, east, west, north, south, anything), unfounded rumor and innuendo ...
The Republican voices raised in concern are those bought and paid for by the Kochs Coaltion. Climate change deniers are supporting the Kochs oil interests. Anti-environmental protectionists are supporting the Kochs' Georgia Pacific and Investa pollution. The Keystone pipeline voices support the Kochs' fracking operations. The Kochs are losing some control over the Republican House, but they are still wielding tremendous power there and in at least 25 states.
It's interesting in all the conversations on the media that the Kochs are not mentioned by name. Part of the reason for that is the control that comes when 80% of all media are owned by a few .1%ers.
The Kochs are enemies of America, but they will have continued power unless Obama's Organizing for Action can continue to put pressure on Congress and enable Democrats to win the 2014 elections on the federal and state levels.
And may the Republicans and pundits continue to whine in the face of a President who finally learned his lesson after four years.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. And get ready for the country, under Obama's "progressive" leadership, to be more right than it is today. And today it is more right than it was 11/5/12. And on 11/5/12, it was more right than on 11/5/08.
Still going the wrong direction, people. And Obama isn't changing direction. Here's what all the pundits, including Steve, have decided to ignore:
You know what that means as well as I do: Obama is going to cut earned benefits. All that is happening right now is Republicans moving the goal posts so that when Obama does agree to earned benefit cuts, they get to say he didn't go far enough. And the press will be lead around by the nose.
Obama: still going the wrong direction.
Further proof that a tactical nuclear strike on the Washington Pest would be a good thing. I would suggest 10 a.m. on a Wednesday, to insure we get them all.
Alert Robinson, Dionne, and Sargent just in case they're not working from home.
You ignore what has been accomplished in a country going off the cliff. Obama is going in the right direction and the country was never "moving right"... the right just got louder while the citizens watched them expose who they really were and began rejecting them even more. What country are you living in because America has woken up more and more and is a center left natioin with a more extreme right faction of ludmouths. Don't buy into it.
Wrong. All Obama has done is righted a listing ship and put it right back sailing in the same direction.
McCain and most republicans you all need to enter yourselves into institutions and begin chemical therapy !
Haldol drip..
Oh, no - the Village Press see pitch forks and torches coming from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., and their coming right at them! Quick, run away Dana! -Kevo
I despise and disrespect fake centrists like Dana Milbank more than complete idiots like Jennifer Rubin. In the end, they are much more damaging.
Please, use your influence to keep Milbank from "guesting" on any of the MSNBC shows, at least this week! He doesn't add to the conversation, choosing to agree with the Jon Meacham, Woodward, Hume, O'Reilly position on this President, his speech, and his vision. I could barely watch 15 minutes of BillO last night, especially when he said Obama was striking out against Republicans b/c they advanced White Privilege. Gag! Meacham said Obama just disagreed with their ideas, while Hume agreed that Obama was smart, but not wise. They all agreed with BillO that the President just didn't know how to get the economy growing faster, and so decided to speak about social justice to cover his ignorance. So, Milbank is not a guest I wish to see given time to speak such drivel in support of FOX guests. BTW, please don't give Meacham any more time either.
The Republican Posse has gotten so used to pushing the President around that they're astonished that he's not bending to their will. That was called bullying. I hope that President Obama's wonderful, inspiring speech at the Inauguration and his behavior in recent negotiations foreshadow a march to getting the government machine back on track, whether John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Kelly Ayotte like it or not.
On another note, just wanted to point out that I was doing some research a few years ago and coincidentally came across the story of John Thune and Dan Nelson, the now-convicted used car dealer in South Dakota who bilked Metabank out of millions. Thune was closer to that scandal than he would like us all to know. Check it out on Google. Pretty interesting stuff.
I loved it. His speech wasn't long, but it was inspiring and elegant, moving and righteous. I love this country because we always have the potential to lead the world. It seemed as though America's time at the summit of human dignity would die out as other countries and societies made more of themselves than we, the lumbering giant, could expect to keep up with. Eventually, I figured, we would grind to a halt and I would watch other countries become greater than my own as I grew older.
This has still not happened. We are the groaning bedrock now, squeezed and desperate, but I do believe that America, my friends, can lean towards the sun and begin moving forward. It has already begun.
Barack Obama didn't bring change? Check again.
The Southern Strategy of appealing to the worst in us has revealed itself for what it really is: the racism and bigotry of earlier generations handed down to us like a horrid family heirloom. This President had people screaming expletives from an evil age at him. This President has had insane conspiracy theories about himself to deal with, more threats on his life from American citizens than any other President in history, and he has handled the vitriol of the (mostly) southern racist population of this country with astonishing grace. He has done this; and all the while, attempting to work professionally with a Republican party that refuses to discipline its racists and imbeciles as they squawk to a wrathful set of constituents.
The Tea Party, a coalescence of a few greedy rich and the millions of fearful, ignorant innocents they manipulate, was spawned from the minds of objectivist prats interested only in avoiding the responsibility of our collective social safety net. They don't need healthcare because they are wealthy? Get rid of it. Neither do they require any help in the way of free public education for their children, so even education as a general public good is now "debatable". Free healthcare was somehow billed as a tyrannical swipe at the necks of the American people.
This Republican party was forced to divide itself into factions of the sensible few and the raging many. The identity crisis of using the Southern Strategy in a country that is finally, objectively, and visibly less racist than it once was has at last broken the back of the "values" coalition.
With arguments for marriage equality disseminating amongst the entire population, and the first vocal support (not to mention the empathy and energy) from a President has turned the tide. The fight for gay rights is being won, every day, everywhere in America.
The fight against treating immigrants like non-persons is finally up for discussion again, after at least a decade of hushing and political reprisals.
Science, the notion that we might want to know what we are doing when we do stuff, is something that Barack Obama does not revile. Throughout his presidency, he has been stonewalled by people unwilling to do anything that might allow him to have been thought of as an effective Commander-in-Chief. He wants more research initiatives and more funding. They call him a tyrant. The silliness of it all has broken some valuably smart people out of their reverie and most understand that education and science will have to fight it out in the political ring if they are to remain valued in our society for posterity.
This President didn't change things? Please. He walked into his White House and turned the light on the ugliest and darkest problems of America's next few decades.
sorry for the wall of text-- um, I love you Rachel! and I love the show!! <3
No apology needed here...great rant and good points...
No need to be sorry, Shoe. Your post is full of heartfelt and valuable ideas. Thanks for sharing. (I see that Sunmusing beat me to the punch. But I'll second his message.)
Nope, great rant.
The Repubs appealed to the very worst strains in this country and they lost, again.
I'm not convinced about "ignorant innocents" either but it does look like "we the people" are finally on to their game.
Thanks! You saved me a bunch of time! :)
If the tea party of today were put in place of the original tea party they would have been invited onto the decks of the ships carrying the East Indie British Trading corporation to drink tea and bitch about stubborn Americans too cheao and insensitive to pay a little more for 'good' tea...imported tax free because why should the East Indie company have to pay higher taxes for bringing in the good stuff?
The misinformed and made angry Tea party were useful schills for millionaires and billionaries deregualtion and tax avoidance schemes and still don't know it.
What amazes (and unfailingly amuses) me is when Republicans try and pull the "Abuse of Power" and "Complete disregard for the constitution" bit knowing full well that if Obama had so much as put one toe across that line in the last four years they would have been on him like mold on cheese.
The crime he is guilty of in their eyes isn't "Abuse of Power" it's "Use of Power" and the President has a lot of it. (I think it comes from these things some old guys once a long time ago called "Checks and Balances")
Same ol' righteous bullcrap from the right. If not for AM radio, the GOP would become extinct.
How I long for restoration of The Fairness Doctrine. The Right would be gone in 90 days and dead in 180.
I agree totally.
"Taken together, it seems many (Republican) pundits agree." There I fixed it for you. The pundits carping on the speech are to an angry white man, Republican mouth pieces. I wouldn't be surprised if Frank Luntz coordinated the Republican response. Somebody did and Fournier, Gerson and Milbank certainly got the email.
Denigrating the President is easy.
Offering a positive alternative, not so much.
(As an easy to understand example, tune in to Fox News any time, and watch the brickbats fly)
He did make it more Republican-friendly, I heard more references to God than in any other Obama speech in recent memory. As someone who admires the President's usual inclusion of me and my fellow heathens, I was a bit disappointed, but if that's the sugar-coating it took to prevent greater Republican freak out about the speech's contents, I'll bite my tongue this time.
Obama does go to church , has his faith , and goes to church , many democrats do , would that make us MORE REPUBLICAN TOO ?
Maybe in this instance , winning the presidency was a bit more PERSONAL for him this time around? So maybe he was compelled to speak about it on a more personal basis , with respect to his faith and god ..
I also appreciate it when he uses such words wisely , but I am also a person of faith , and can appreciate if he decides to use the word GOD , you might consider being as gracious as TPOUS , your easily offended snobbery could be seen as more REPUBLICAN , than obamas speech
How conciliatory would Romney's inaugural speech have been?
No kidding. He didn't even have the grace to attend the Inauguration. A sort of childish, petulant, passive-agressive slap in the face, if you ask me.
How contradictory (full of blatant lying) would Romney's have been,,,
My democrat's town's republican paper's headline read, "OBama calls for unity"..
President Obama won the election. No need to apologize, or bend under Republican pressure.
Try again,
My heavily democrat city's very republican newspaper's headline reads,, "Obama calls for unity". This is an AP feed, David Epso,..
All clear.
You mean your heavily DemocratIC city.
There is only one speech Obama could make that Republicans would be happy with, and it is this: "Having thought long and hard about my re-election, and what it means for this country, I've come to realize that the Republican Party is right about everything. This should be a time of unity, and since I am the most divisive President ever--Republicans all agree on this, so it must be true--I have decided to resign and let Mitt Romney take the oath of office. He may have lost the popular vote along with the electoral vote, but he won old rich white straight men in a landslide, and those are the only people who matter. And now, if you'll excuse me, I have cotton to pick and mammy songs to sing."
": Obama should be nice and bipartisan, reaching out to the right at all times, careful not to upset delicate sensibilities...."
Been there, done that - and even then it wasn't helpful - the GOTP were obstinate in their obstruction! The President that spoke yesterday - that's the man I voted for! The man that explained that WE are all in this together and need to work to together to help US all out!
Funny how "WE" are in this as welfare is gifted to: BIG OIL/COAL/PHARMA/Agribusiness and yes perpetual war; yet when it comes to the elderly/sick/disabled/poor/children - people that need a helping hand - they should be able to stand on their own without assistance and a dime! At what point can WE say - ENOUGH! WE have been down that road for 30+ years, we have more unemployed, underemployed, people on food stamps, shrinking wages and a more powerful Oligarchy since before the Depression of 1929!
So maybe the GOTP can tell me why that is "good for America", "how does it square with our ideals/values/morals", and "why do WE need to continue on the wrong path"?
So much for that "librul media bias", more like ticked off corporate owned conservative media crap; if the President was just more conciliatory, if only he bowed and scrapped and gave a few more social bonding functions, if only he put his nose up the GOTP's behind - all the while forgetting exactly how obstinately obnoxious, disrespectful, mean-spirited and hippocratic the GOTP have been, the nerve!
The only messages that I hear from these teapublicons is "Conform to us-Conform for us" Adolph Hitler would be so proud of them ! We all know where the Koch bros. roots are from - Nazi Germany - That's Right - Look it up !
I guess what struck me about the title to this segment was how similar it was to Mitt Romney's book, No Apology. In it, Romney presented a Republican view of "america's greatness" and seemed to claim that they know what is best for the nation.
Now, when Democrats offer an alternative viewpoint that a majority of citizens voted for, why are some so threatened/angry/surprised?
Actually, didn't he give them just enough rope?
That was the point, dumbasses.
Where we help by saying the things Steve can't.
I keep thinking that after 4 years of crying, whining, and blubbering, the GOP will pull on their big-kid underpants and get to work. Oh well, we can always hope. In the meantime, even more reason to reform the filibuster NOW and retake the House in 2014.
Good point, but I think I see some diapers showing underneath those fancy suits.
Obama say: The burning question, which needs to be answered, is: Why do Republicans, in spite of their checkered history, always think they know best? (Obamasay.com)
I had an old acquaintance cynically going over the speech line by line reading all kinds of conspiracy into every word on MyWasteOfSpaceBook yesterday.. What a retard, and he's one of the more reasonable retards I've known. I told him that I might have read into "I'm the decider" in much the same way, of course to no avail. I wonder what the actual ratio is of Hot:Medium:Cold disappointment out there really is?
Let me translate what they are actually saying: Why is he still so uppity? Doesn't he know his place?
President Obama tried for 4 years to reach across the aisle. Everytime he did the Republicans moved the goal post farther to the right. I hope that he has stopped letting them pull him over to their side. If they want bi-partisanship, let them reach across the aisle.
If the Republicans want to be on the side of the majority of the people, they will have to move towards the President because the majority of the people are behind him; not behind the Republicans.
this is the kind of utter b.s. this president has had to put up with from day one. i rarely give the larded limbaugh or the muddled mcconnell credit for anything, but they are at least honest in expressing their antipathy. limbaugh said in 2009 that he'd gladly see this country go to hell if it meant defeating obama. mcconnell said the same in a different way. the milbanks, gregorys, and shieffers of this world simply don't get it.
it's amazing to hear from the G.O.P that the speech was more of the same, not going after SS, medicare , debt tax cut and deficit.when W was in power for 8 years , they did not care for the deficit, and suddenly the debt and deficit is their everything and by the was cut everything except the defense .
It would have been hypocritical and just plain stupid for the President to be "conciliatory" when he was right in the first place, and in November the voters made that very clear. He spent way too much time and effort reaching way across the aisle to nitwit bullies who consistently refused to ever compromise on anything.
Another example of the GOP / msm " hearing " what obama says
Gadfly Peg Noonan on ABC This Week
"Obama needs to lead on the DEPT CEILING , he never leads , if he would just lead , what is wrong with him, why won't he lead america? blah blah "
1 minute later
Gadfly , "Obama is scaring america with all this talk about GUN CONTROL , he needs to stop talking about gun control , he is frightening people , please tell him to stop talking about gun control , it is counter productive and making it all worse "
All in about a 3 minute time period
Lets hope obama and the dems have learned that listening to the gop or msm is actually counter productive to doing their jobs , just stick with sanity and the majorty that put you in office
Sadly, if Mr. McCain had won in 2008 and won re-election in 2012, there wouldn't be a peep of this type of criticism. How do I know? Because these very same purveyors of shame have such short memories that they continue to invite Mr. McCain on Sunday shows as if he's the arbitor of political saneness. When it comes to writing about Mr. McCain, there's NO mention whatsoever at how foolish a campaigner he was. There's no recall at how badly he struggles with facts - basic facts - about policy. He gets plum, rosey headlines with zero emphasis on the lies he's told and the company he keeps.
And here's Mr. Obama. Trying to be the best person he can, following the rules, and using his brain to think matters through so that the ends justify the means. What some White people will never understand is Black people have a sense of duty to remember our history; how we were treated for centuries. We watched as White men justified their hypocrisy and even made laws to set them in concrete. We listened as Black men time and time and time again did exactly what was necessary; said exactly what was required, played by rules they didn't create and yet, still, they were relegated to second class citizenship, unworthy of even being remotely considered a part of this country, or its intellectual class.
What I see when I read stuff like this from Milbank and others is a continuation of the type of lynching (albeit, intellectual) by folks who simply can't stand that there is a Black man as the President. This Black man. A man of brilliance, dedication, and sincere devotion to his country, his people. I see jeolously and envy by those who would assign some kind of unwritten burden on him and him alone. Who would ascribe a different set of standards when it comes to anything he says, including God Bless America. See, the man can't do anything right in the eyes of some, simply because he's Black. It's in that vein of suspicion that some White people have shown their true colors and memorialized their hypocrisy for other people to reference. Mr. Obama has again and again outsmarted those who feel he never earned to be where he is. They choose to ignore and go out of their way to mischaracterized his political adversaries as anything other than the racists they are.
Folks, there is a racial undertone to even the most mundane events when it comes to Mr. Obama, and that is truly sad. Mr. Obama is just a man, our President. That he happens to be Black, is cool and inspirational. But to apply some kind of measure to him that has never applied to anyone else only underscores the weakness that is America. We will fall, mightily, if we don't get over it.
That's quite a statement, and unfortunately you're right. The subtext of these calls for reaching out, etc., is "OK, we'll grant just this once that you're the President, but since we're the real owners of this country you still have to make nice to us." Revolting.
Also no mention of "Wet-Start Johnny," who killed 177 of his fellow sailors on the USS Forrestal in 1967 with a "joke" gone wrong, and who got his chance to be a "hero" because he was a dumb-enough moron to turn around and fly back over the target he'd just bombed, not to mention the entire rest of his incompetent career that would have have existed but for the accident of his birth with his last name.
718BKNYC.....I believe you are quite right, I happen to be white and no spring chicken and as such have been spared such unfair judging. Pres. Obama is the most principled president I have observed in my more than sixty years, one of the smartest and possibly the smartest. Clinton being the other choice. How anybody can look at him and his family and not be proud and thankful he's our president is truly beyond me. The attacks on him have been much worse than I expected but then, as I said, I am white.
Like Steve says, we saw what happened when he called for unity and bipartisanship at the last inaugural. The GOP leadership was meeting the same day and forming its plan to block every single effort to enact his agenda. There was not much "reaching across the aisle" being discussed among those attendees. I'm sure someone has the list of formerly supported Republican ideas (e.g. individual mandate) that Republicans no longer could support once they were part of an Obama agenda.
So I feel Obama had nothing to lose by this speech. Whether he called for compromise or pushed a progressive agenda, the GOP will still behave the same way. There's no point in griping about not hearing enough about compromise when your party has no intention of governing that way.
"Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said, "I didn't hear any conciliatory remarks," as if it's incumbent on a re-elected president to pacify those who tried to defeat him."
George W. Bush failed miserably in 2004. Republicans held majorities in both the House and Senate, so Bush's response was to all but ignore the Democrats. Remember the "I have political capital and I intend to use it (on abolishing Social Security)" remark. He couldn't have come up with a bigger declaration of political war against "those who tried to defeat him" and he knew it.
Republicans had four years of conciliatory remarks from Obama. They responded by slapping him in the face over and over again.
Obama learned slowly, but he seems to have learned that he can't pacify the Republicans by "compromising with" (meaning "capitulating to") them.