Andrew Sullivan continues to let his Obama mania cloud his reasoning.
The most recent case in point comes in this post about the Republican opposition to the “stimulus” bill:
Their clear and open intent is to do all they can, however they can, to sabotage the new administration (and the economy to boot). They want failure. Even now. Even after the last eight years. Even in a recession as steeply dangerous as this one. There are legitimate debates to be had; and then there is the cynicism and surrealism of total political war. We now should have even less doubt about what kind of people they are. And the mountain of partisan vitriol Obama will have to climb every day of the next four or eight years.
Andrew, this is politics not an afternoon tea.
If Judd Gregg and other Republicans in Congress truly believe that Obama’s stimulus plan is the wrong plan at the wrong time, then they have every right to oppose it and to do everything in their power to defeat it.
It may not work, and Obama’s bill may pass in the end, but at least someone will have stood up and said no to what is, in reality, and incredibly bad plan.
Update: A further thought in a comment I left elsewhere:
So what are Republicans and the rest of us who think Obama’s stimulus plan is a horribly bad idea, or that his idea of getting the government even more involved in the health care system would be a disaster, supposed to do — roll over and play dead ?
It seems to me that the current definition of bipartisanship involves letting the left get away with whatever they want and not complaining. If that’s what it’s supposed to be, then the heck with it.
If I think Obama is doing something wrong, I’m going to say it, loudly and do whatever I could to help defeat it.
That’s representative democracy.
Update # 2: Bruce McQuain makes this excellent point:
Obviously Sullivan can’t think of “legitimate debates to be had” concerning this awful bill j(turn toward the White House, bow and sign). And you have to assume that he doesn’t consider putting this bill together without letting the Republicans participate as a party (not as the ‘picked off three’) a cynical declaration of “total political war”. In fact you have to wonder when he began paying attention to “mountains of partisan vitriol” that presidents have to climb over every day.
You didn’t think that people were just going to let Obama do whatever he wanted, did you Andrew ?
Update # 3: James Joyner also makes an excellent point:
[W]hat of those of us who dislike the idea of massive spending but are halfheartedly persuaded that it’s nonetheless necessary in the present case and simply want to direct it appropriately? Can we at least argue for spending no more than necessary and targetting it in ways we’d prefer?
And, more importantly, weren’t we told for the past eight years that dissent was the highest form of patriotism ?