« Ben Nelson: centrist, incoherent | November 5's Blog | Finding our better angels in the foreclosure crisis »
Gregg is right: it's his mistake, not Obama's...
...but that hasn't stopped most media outlets from referring to this episode
as anything from a blow to a catastrophe for the Obama administration.
Call me a political naif, but I don't see it. This makes Gregg look
like an idiot, but otherwise it looks like once again Obama has
extended the hand of bipartisanship and had it slapped away.
A couple caveats: I have no idea why Obama wanted Gregg in the first place. No one seemed able to explain why the guy who a few years ago voted to abolish the Commerce Department was the best pick to lead it. Also, Gregg's withdrawal is clearly bad news in the sense that the department is still without a leader, and it shows that Obama may have once again misjudged the magnanimity of a potential GOP partner.
But honestly - what was Gregg thinking? You take a job in the President's cabinet, and you get to argue your positions vigorously...but in the end, you carry out the President's directives.
It strikes me that Republicans have decided that bipartisanship means "The President has no principles." Inviting Republicans to the negotiating table on the stimulus, offering them tons of concessions (even when the American people have given Democrats overwhelming control of the entire government) - that's not bipartisanship. Bipartisanship is letting the Republicans write half the bill - or perhaps more. Inviting Republicans into his cabinet isn't bipartisanship. Bipartisanship is letting Republicans run their cabinet agencies according to their own ideology.
Personally, I see this Gregg episode as reflecting well on Obama. If Gregg thought he'd be able to do whatever he wanted at Commerce, then he thought he'd be able to run roughshod over a weak president, whose desire for bipartisanship trumps his principles. Obama balked, stood strong, and Gregg had to withdraw. I'm not by any means suggesting this is what Obama regularly does. I'm among those who thinks the concessions to the GOP have been overmuch at times, in terms of what's best for the country.
But in this case, it seems that's what Obama did. And I think it's great, not just because I prefer his views to Judd Gregg's, but because hopefully it signals that Obama is starting to recognize that bipartisanship - while still a great long-term goal which I hope he continues to work on - is not as important right now as delivering on the policy goals which the American people elected him to achieve.
A couple caveats: I have no idea why Obama wanted Gregg in the first place. No one seemed able to explain why the guy who a few years ago voted to abolish the Commerce Department was the best pick to lead it. Also, Gregg's withdrawal is clearly bad news in the sense that the department is still without a leader, and it shows that Obama may have once again misjudged the magnanimity of a potential GOP partner.
But honestly - what was Gregg thinking? You take a job in the President's cabinet, and you get to argue your positions vigorously...but in the end, you carry out the President's directives.
It strikes me that Republicans have decided that bipartisanship means "The President has no principles." Inviting Republicans to the negotiating table on the stimulus, offering them tons of concessions (even when the American people have given Democrats overwhelming control of the entire government) - that's not bipartisanship. Bipartisanship is letting the Republicans write half the bill - or perhaps more. Inviting Republicans into his cabinet isn't bipartisanship. Bipartisanship is letting Republicans run their cabinet agencies according to their own ideology.
Personally, I see this Gregg episode as reflecting well on Obama. If Gregg thought he'd be able to do whatever he wanted at Commerce, then he thought he'd be able to run roughshod over a weak president, whose desire for bipartisanship trumps his principles. Obama balked, stood strong, and Gregg had to withdraw. I'm not by any means suggesting this is what Obama regularly does. I'm among those who thinks the concessions to the GOP have been overmuch at times, in terms of what's best for the country.
But in this case, it seems that's what Obama did. And I think it's great, not just because I prefer his views to Judd Gregg's, but because hopefully it signals that Obama is starting to recognize that bipartisanship - while still a great long-term goal which I hope he continues to work on - is not as important right now as delivering on the policy goals which the American people elected him to achieve.
Advertisement












Good post. I agree. Obama's conciliatory gestures - which are off the scale in terms of decency when compared with the adolescent dickishness that seems to be all that Republicans can ever summon forth - are a good strategic move even if they don't spark cooperation, because they demonstrate who the principled adults are, and who the childish, deluded whiners are.
But what was with this guy??
February 13, 2009 9:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Judd Gregg: Trojan Horse.
February 13, 2009 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Geez,
When the R's were in control I can't remember them reaching out to the D's for anything. Their way or the highway. Now it seems that they can only hope for total eco depression. the R's need to bury the ghost of Ronald R. and live up to the fact that there are no bigger spenders than themselves. Obama reached out and they bit him. Rally around those lost principles if they can be found I suppose.
February 13, 2009 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink