Fox News cut live feed of Obama debate with GOP halfway through

[TennTradition]

I personally also buy Paul Begalla's points that people claim they want bipartisanship, but that really doesn't always show up at the polls.

We can all argue that we want bipartisanship, because obviously, it can lead to reasonable policy. However, if Obama negotiates continually with the Republicans, his base will hate the fact that he squandered a majority and become disillusioned, the right still won't vote for him, and independents could get interested in him, but they will be discouraged by the fact that they can't find anyone say anything good to say about they guy (on the left or the right).

I guess the easiest way to say it is politics are ugly....and so is the policy that is a result.

 

[volinbham]

Bipartisanship is a by-product of elected officials approaching their jobs as they should.

It's not a goal - it's a result.

I don't buy Begala's point directly. People won't reward crap policy simply because it is bipartisan. However, people will reward good policy and given the fractious nature of the electorate good policy is likely to require bipartisan crafting and compromise

None of the leaders in Congress or the WH seem to understand this - all have put ideological stakes in the ground from which they cannot move (or believe they cannot move).

I'm just getting tired of the Lecturer-in-Chief telling one side that they are the only ones guilty of this sin. It's annoying and more importantly completely counter-productive to good policy development.

 

[TennTradition]

I can agree that they will honor good policy, but the problem is that for the policy to be made - the leadership has to be on board. Pelosi is still focused on railroading policy through. As long as that is the case, you are risking your seat if you 'work with the enemy' ... because you'll pretty much accomplish nothing to show that it was worth your 'fraternizing'.