Monday, June 11, 2012

What is Jeb's point?

Jeb Bush correctly says that the Republican party has gone so far to the right that neither his father nor Ronald Reagan could be nominated in today's environment. So far, he makes sense.

But then he goes on to blame Barack Obama for the harshness of the political divide.
"His first year could have been a year of enormous accomplishment had he focused on things where there was more common ground," he said, arguing that Obama had made a "purely political calculation" to run a sharply partisan administration.
Say what?

Is there some possible way that Obama could have sold out his base further? His voters wanted NAFTA renegotiated, no further free trade policies, public health insurance, a quick pullout from Iraq and Afghanistan, the closing of Gitmo, the end of torture, a reconciliation of the war on terror with the rule of law, a HOLC-style plan to help people keep their homes, Wall Street crooks behind bars, and a return of our tax structure to Reagan-era levels (or at least Clinton-era levels). Most of all, liberals wanted our economic future in the hands of people like Krugman and Stiglitz, not Larry Summers and Tim Geithner.

One other thing, Jeb: If Obama had given partisans what they really, really wanted, your brother and Cheney would be in the dock for war crimes at the Hague.

How can Obama find common ground when Republicans (including, I am sorry to say, John McCain) have voted against their own legislation, simply because Obama had decided to support that legislation? If the GOP is willing to do a 180 on their own ideas simply to prevent Obama from getting anything done, then you can't blame our Appeaser-in-Chief for the current tone of partisanship.

Incidentally, I wish to hell people would stop pretending that the Republicans went crazy only recently. The wackiness set in during the Clinton administration.

So why is Jeb saying these things? Is he off his party's message, or is he slyly on message? Are his statements an example of 11 dimensional chess strategy -- or is he just being a Big Silly? And for chrissakes, does he really believe this crap?
Good observation. The real question is how anyone could believe that bilge about Zero being divisive...hell, he even jacked Dubya's old slogan "I'm a Uniter" during the 2008 campaign. They claimed Hillary would be "too divisive." But welcome to campaign season. Our side is manufacturing mild faux outrage, too, and is hard to distinguish from the right sometimes: latest example is fury over badmouthing the president overseas. It's as if the Dixie Chicks brouhaha is ancient, long-forgotten history.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?