Thursday, November 27, 2008

Some sour grapes with that turkey, sir?…

posted by Bill Arnett @ 12:41 PM Permalink

…would be the singular question I would ask of the rnc (republican nutcase conference) regarding their obvious animosity for all things Obama.

Excerpt from the NYT:
President-elect Barack Obama is receiving heaps of good tidings from both sides of the aisle during this Thanksgiving season as he puts together his administration. But at least one office is not giving him a free pass.

With each day’s announcement of another cabinet or White House appointment, the Republican National Committee has been blitzing out critical statements that look no different from the blasts issued throughout the campaign. Mr. Obama’s selections so far, the Republican committee says, have been tax-raising, partisan Washington insiders, hardly the agents of change he promised.

The aggressive approach contrasts with the tone so far from Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill, who are greeting the incoming administration with what has ranged from wait-and-see politeness to an almost warm embrace. Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader from Kentucky, for example, offered praise for Mr. Obama’s initial decisions last week and signaled that he was relieved to be done with President Bush.
Mitch must be tired of being the whipping boy for bush.
“I think the new administration is off to a good start,” Mr. McConnell told reporters. […]

“Our members, in one way,” Mr. McConnell said, “are kind of relieved by the departure of an administration that became unpopular and made it very difficult for us to compete.”

But if Mr. McConnell considers this a good start, the memo did not reach the Republican committee headquarters. Here is how the party has characterized various selections made by Mr. Obama:
[And you just gotta know that these will be cogent, thoughtful statements showing reason, good sense, and a modicum of respect for the president elect, right? Bill]
¶On Representative Rahm Emanuel as White House chief of staff: “Barack Obama’s first decision as president-elect undermines his promise to ‘heal the divides.’ Rahm Emanuel is a partisan insider who played a lead role in breaking Washington.”

¶On David Axelrod, Mr. Obama’s campaign strategist, as White House senior adviser: “For a president-elect who promised to change the tone in Washington, it’s disappointing that he is filling his White House with partisan bomb-throwers. When people think of ‘change,’ they don’t think of political consultants like David Axelrod.”

¶On Tom Daschle, the former Democratic majority leader in the Senate, as secretary of health and human services: “For voters hoping to see new faces and fewer lobbyist-connections in government, Daschle’s nomination will be another disappointment. Obama promised to change America’s health care system, but his nominee to be secretary is no change agent.”

¶On Eric H. Holder Jr., the former deputy attorney general, as attorney general: “Instead of bringing the bipartisan ‘change’ to Washington that he promised voters, Barack Obama is rewarding yet another one of his political loyalists in Eric Holder. The only person who thinks Eric Holder represents ‘hope’ is Marc Rich,” the convicted financier pardoned by President Bill Clinton with Mr. Holder’s acquiescence.[…]

It is not entirely surprising, of course, that a party organization would remain in feisty campaign mode even after the election while legislators in Congress would take a more accommodating tone. Republican lawmakers now have an incentive to work with Mr. Obama, at least for a while, particularly since Republicans lost enough seats to make it harder to exert influence. But the Republican party apparatus has an incentive to keep the heat on Mr. Obama and show donors and activists that it will not crumble despite the tough losses in this month’s elections.
So with a trembling lip, tears in their eyes, a knot of emotion in their hearts, and that warm, fuzzy way down deep feeling, the rnc (they no longer rate capital letters), "…has an incentive to keep the heat on Mr. Obama and show donors and activists that it will not crumble despite the tough losses in this month’s elections."

I think they are referring to this month's totally ignominious, humiliating, crushing, total repudiation of their party and its tenets in the absolute rout of this month's @sswhuppin…uh…elections.

But that's just my opinion and I could be wrong.

Labels: , , ,


Post a Comment

<< Home