The Bipartisan Spirit
January 30th, 2008 by Peter SudermanI’m busy working on some other projects, so posting may be light again today, but in the meantime, I’ve got an op-ed on the stimulus package in today’s American Spectator:
Ah, bipartisanship. What would Washington be without it? It’s a lovely word that gives politicians the opportunity to link arms and claim that they’re working for the common good of the American people — while mainly working for their own good.
Case in point: the economic stimulus package, hailed far and wide (which in the nation’s capital is defined as “both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue”) for its refreshing bipartisan spirit.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi wants to make sure everyone takes note of this spirit of comity. Her fact sheet emphasizes that it’s not just an economic stimulus package, but a bipartisan economic stimulus package.
According to the Washington Post’s Peter Baker and Jonathan Weisman, Pelosi used the words bipartisan and bipartisanship 10 times when announcing the deal — just to make sure she got the point across.
The Posties seem to have bought it, too. According to their article, the package spotlights the “rarity of bipartisan action.”
With all the fuss over the two parties’ lovey-dovey hand-holding, you’d think we’d somehow achieved peace on earth and good will toward men, or at least a four day Frenchified work week.
But no, the parties have come together to push a stimulus package that looks to be largely ineffective — an election-year political pander, pure and simple.
Whole thing here.
January 30th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
So, thanx for making it clear to us that “bipartisan” is a bad word. What are you guys drinking over there anyways?
Ah yes, when in doubt…bash the French. Look at it this way…you can buy a whole lot of those “Freedom Fries”, that I’m sure you love so much, with your tax rebate.
January 31st, 2008 at 9:20 am
Well, there’s more to the article than the except here, including more specifics about the problems with the stimulus package, and I’d encourage you to read it.
January 31st, 2008 at 8:11 pm
Wow, a response…I’m stunned…
February 2nd, 2008 at 6:02 pm
Interesting. We both (Peter and I) think the “stimulus” package is just so much political pandering, yet this blog still has up a bogus statement about Bill Clinton without a single correction…for days now. So I have a hard time believing you guys are the genuine article, Peter. You guys pander in falsehoods and platitudes as much as Congress is, but for whatever reason you don’t see it.
I still don’t understand why you pulled the Measure D post, but I’m not going to ask why anymore. My guess is that this operation is funded by FreedomWorks Foundation (that’s who pays Kinnan’s salary, and he’s in charge of the online division according to his bio) and since FWF is charitable, it has rules about what it can and cannot do in the political realm. But that would mean that the main website if Freedomworks, Inc., which is structured differently and can play in politics if it wants. Or maybe there’s even a separate entity called FreedomTalks structured some other way.
I don’t know if that’s true or not, but if you guys really wanted to stay above the fray and position yourself as serious policy guys, then I would think you’d want to disclose all of this for the benefit of your readers. I’m not saying you have to publish donor lists or something, but you should explain the relationship this blog has with FW, Inc. and/or FWF. There’s nothing inherently insidious about operating FW Inc. one way and FWF another way, either.
I’m not alleging any funny goings-on or anything, but let’s face it: the more your disclose, the more trusted you will be. The less you disclose, the more suspect you appear. Just look at all the hullaboo in Oregon two years ago over your association with Manix. Hell, you guys and Russ Walker even fashioned two ballot initiatives to—get this—regulate lawyer’s fees. That’s right, anti-regulation FreedomWorks bankrolled a campaign to introduce anti-capitalist market regulation. Russ Walker’s stock took a big hit with that one.
In other words, start putting your money where your mouth is. Be honest about who you guys are and what you’re trying to do.
February 2nd, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Hey, at least you got them to pull that BS statement about that CA proposition. That’s enuff for one week…there’s always next week Sickle.
These guys are just hacks, period. No need to overanalyze it IMO.