With the State of the Union address approaching, the partisans on the left would like you to think they are all about bi-partisanship. Exploiting the mass shooting in Arizona is all the rage. First it was for the standard calls for stronger gun control legislation, then it was extra limits on public speech, and now it is the continued debate about political rhetoric. It's all about tone.
Senator Udall (D-CO) - the same one responsible for introducing legislation to change the rules of the filibuster - has another idea. He thinks it would be swell for the members of Congress to all intermingle and sit wherever they chose. All wily-nily. He thinks that the act of Republicans and Democrats mixing it up and sitting amongst each other will be a show of 'bi-partisanship'.
Udall said he hopes that such a seating arrangement will “begin to rekindle the common spark that brought us here from 50 different states and widely diverging backgrounds to serve the public good.”
It is nonsense.
Like it or not, there are two parties in politics and there is suppose to be a sound, distinct difference in philosophy, or else what is the need for both? The two parties sit separately to show unity within each party.
Trying to use the tragedy in Arizona to make cheap and grandiose gestures is not worthy of the memory of those lost in the shooting performed by a mad man. This is solely to score points in the name of politics. Again, this is the same guy who wants to tweak the filibuster rules to favor his party, now in a much smaller majority in the Senate.
Could it be that with the huge majority in the House the Democrats will actually look like the party in the minority? After controlling Congress since 2007, the Democrats are now re-learning the life of the minority party. When they sit or stand to show reaction to whatever is said by President Obama, the impact will be minimal.
All of a sudden the Democrats start talking the talk about bi-partisanship. They have yet to walk the walk. No further steps towards working with them by the Republicans should be taken until real movement is shown from them. These are the same people who voted into law the massive new entitlement of health care reform on a completely partisan vote. That has never happened before.
For those concerned about the opposition's reaction to the Obama State of the Union address, they should remember that all President's experience opposition. All Presidents experience very partisan reactions from Congress from the opposite party.
It is what it is. That's politics. Keep the seating chart in tact.
1 comment:
I agree that the GOP shouldn't agree to this seating arrangement: it's a political trap.
It puts Republicans in a box, so if they refuse, they look like the partisan ones.
If they agree, it will appear on television as though the entire chamber is applauding, even if half of it isn't.
Plus, there's the psychology of standing ovations: it will be hard for individual Republicans to stay seated when everyone around them is standing to applaud.
The media would take this opportunity to make it look like Obama has moderated and is growing in popularity.
Post a Comment