Bipartisanship?

During the campaign a big topic was bipartisanship. Barack Obama said over and over again that he wanted to end politics the way they were and create a Washington where both of the parties worked together. He said many things during his campaign, and this thing turned out to be no different. There is no bipartisanship going on here. Just look at the healthcare reform. Democratic memebers of the government have made it clear that they have the votes, and that they do not care if they get the legislation passed without the republicans being involved. The President himself has said that he would be willing to do so in order to force his healthcare reform through. Does this seem like bipartisanship? Does this look like the type of administration Obama was talking about during his campaign? I don't think so.

At a town hall in Virginia last week the President said that 'he does not mind being held responsible to fix the problems we are facing in our country now, because he is the president.' (How many times do you think we are going to hear him say that he is the President? He loves hearing those words. 'I am the President.' Do you think his children still call him daddy, or has he told them to call him President? But getting back to the subject at hand he continued to say) 'but I just want those who made the mess to get out of the way and not do the talking, so that we can fix their mess.'

Who do you think he was reffering to? Do you think he was reffering to Harry Reid, or Nancy Pelosi? After all they playted a huge part in creating the housing crises, which is at the heart of these economic problems. Was he telling them to be queit? Maybe Chris Dodd? Or maybe even himself. I mean he has seen the deficit rise nearly 200 billion dollars, under his leadership this past month alone. Could he possibly have been telling himself to stop asking for more spending and asking for permission to raise the deficit even more? I do not think so. If he would be quiet who would be there to remind us who the President is?

I think it is pretty clear that he could only have been talking to the republicans. This does not seem very bipartisan to me. But would you have realy expected anything different? If he would be listening at all to the other side how would he be able to go ahead with any of his radical left agendas?

I for one am not a big fan of bipartisanship anyway. If one party were to give in to the other party, would that not remove the purpose of having the other party? The point of having a party is to make sure your beliefs get carried out. So if your party gives into the other parties agenda, you having your party is almost pointless. But that is a discussion for a different time.

The only thing that the President has to do with bipartisanship is his phony call for bipartisanship. For some reason or another, a majority of Americans want to see bipartisanship in the government. Obama knows this and he plays with it. Whenever he is trying to get something forced through the government he will say something along the lines of 'I hope that party politics will not come into play here and keep the republicans from voting for this.' He makes it seem that the only reason someone would oppose him would be because of party loyalty. What he forgets to mention is that the reason the republicans would oppose him is because what he is trying to accomplish goes against their philosophy. He did this over and over again when he began introducing Sotomayor, and he has done it plenty of times when talking about healthcare.

He knows what he is doing. People get mad when they are told that the republicans are keeping the government divided. They hear him say that the republicans are playing party politics and ruining everything, and they fall for it. They fail to see that this is the essence of what they should be doing. As the republican party, their job is to make sure that the republican beliefs are addressed. When a judge is nominated for the supreme court, they are not going to oppose her because they want to fight with the democrats. They will oppose her if they do not agree with how they feel she would act on the bench. Same thing with the health care reform. They are not dissagreeing with the democrats for fun, they are diagreeing because they feel the democrats plans are wrong and would not result in posisitve outcomes.

The President will not stop doing this until it stops working. We need to stop just listening to what politicians say and taking it as fact. We need to think about what they say. Think about what they do, and hold them accountable for it. Remind them that they work for us, not the other way around.

NEWSFLASH: I reported last blog about a project to spend $200 million dollars on planes. I was wrong. I appoligize to you congress. You would not be so skimpy. The number is now $550 million dollars.

PTP*: During one of the presidential campaigns the nominees were asked if healthcare was a privaledge or a right. I was a little puzzled by this. Healthcare is not a magical thing that falls from the sky. It is a service provided by one person to another. So I ask (and here is the PTP for all of you keeping score at home,) how could one person have a right to be taken care of by another person?

*PTP= Point to Ponder^

^This is going to be the last time I define PTP. So you better learn it. Write it on your hand, paste it on your fridge. I do not care what you do. But remember what PTP means... trust me, you will be happy you did.