“Political Bickering” Is Not The Problem

There are many left leaning politicians out there, most notably President Obama, that want to see the partisan bickering stop. What does that actually mean? It means be quiet and just let us do whatever we want.

It is completely false to think that that “partisan bickering” is to blame for the many ailments in Washington and politics in general. I actually favor partisanship when it comes to our politicians, it allows for healthy debate and a place where a plethora of ideas can be presented, rather than just one.

They play this card because they need to turn debate into what they call “bickering.” It should be called healthy debate, because its not like they are choosing a color to paint the walls, they are making life changing decisions. Butting heads in politics is a good thing, it would be far worse for a politician to do nothing, because that is not what the people elect politicians to do. What reason would I have to vote if every candidate, afraid to step on the others sides toes, did nothing and gave in to the powerful party in Washington. Would there even be a powerful “party” in Washington? No, and this reasoning makes no sense. Its an emotions game.

We need to look at this as a diversion. Its one of the last plays that the President and his congressional friends have to offer. This is no different than when they tried to make the Republican party look to be what they called “the party of no.” When that is the furthest thing from the truth. As I said when President Obama won the election, when he does something good he deserves credit. But when he bows down to Nancy Pelosi and congressional leftists, essentially handing over the reins to this sled known as The United States, that scares me. And that is something that has happened far too much in the first five months of his presidency and that is what leads to a lack of compromise on the Republicans part. Its so far left that if the Republicans were to give in, even a little bit, they are still very left of center. So what good does compromise do for the Republicans if the only two options are very left and pretty close to very left, not even close to the center.

As I said earlier, this is an emotions game, they point to one thing as they do another, in hopes of making the people feel bad about it. The Democrats know that with an election in 2010 they must take every chance they can get to continually make it look like Republicans are to blame for everything. And this is how they do it. Blaming lack of progress on the Republicans, whether they call them “the party of no” or blame “bickering” on them, Republicans get blamed. But again it can only be blamed on the extremely left leaning ideas presented.

What may look like a lot of fast work and a good effort trying to get stuff done on the part of the President, turns into what can only be looked at as a get it done while we can approach. I think that he doesn’t think the Democrats will gain seats in the 2010 elections. Which on my part is a fair assessment, considering how the proverbial political pendulum works. But I also have think he wants, even more, to see these far left wing ideas passed before he looses that power. So putting blame on the Republicans turns into something that doesn’t guarantee anything, and is rooted in a hope that some people will fall for this trick. A hope that only he can believe in.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: