Chilly D.C. not warming to Bush plan

Chicago Sun Times ^ | 3-9 | Robert Novak

[stan_sipple]

It was harsh enough when former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin last weekend called on fellow Democrats to reject President Bush's proposed bipartisan commission on curbing runaway entitlements. It was all the more stinging because six weeks earlier, at a White House dinner, Bush had made a personal appeal for Rubin's help on the project. ... For Bush to make a third try at a bipartisan commission signifies the triumph of hope over experience. The Social Security and tax commissions were dominated by former Democratic senators (the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan and John Breaux, respectively) who came up with products that neither met Republican specifications nor appealed to Democrats. But Moynihan (once a senior aide in the Nixon White House) and Breaux occasionally strayed from the Democratic gospel. Not so Rubin.

Rubin's left-wing activism dates back to the McGovern era when, as a young investment banker, he was a volunteer party fund-raiser who im- pressed older Democratic workers as rigidly doctrinaire. In 2004, Rubin was an economic adviser to presidential candidate John Kerry. In 2005, he urged congressional Democrats not to cooperate with Bush on Social Security reform.

So, why would Bush think Rubin would help him? Perhaps Bush was naive and misled by superficial impressions. Rubin, now chairman of Citigroup, is a handsome, well-dressed, soft-spoken, charming multimillionaire whom Bush might have mistaken for one of his rich Republican friends from Texas.

[FlipWilson]

Dear President Bush,

Please stop reaching over to the other side of the aisle. You only withdraw a stump. The new tone was a nice thought but it takes two to tango. You have a majority in Congress, find common ground with them. Grow a set, use the bully pulpit and beat your opposition into the ground.

Hey, you tried. We admire you, somewhat, for that. The voters will admire you as well and you can get some milage out of claiming you are trying to be "bipartisan." But it should be clear to you by now that if you want action, you must stop relying on the other side. They are out of power and out of their minds with getting it back at all costs (including rooting for defeat in Iraq).

Now, take out the wooping stick and bring the fight to the enemy. If you achieve nothing else, please illuminate clearly for the American People that you and your party are trying to solve the problems facing this country and the opposition offers nothing, nadda, ziltch.

Yours,
FlipWilson.

P.S. Say it with me, "immigration." Secure the borders or face the voters rath in the mid-terms.

[stan_sipple]

The president is looking at the opposition with rose colored glasses

[Spirited]

The President is a glove. It's the hand that does the moving.

[coconutt2000]

The President has disloyal, uncooperative Republicans on one side and a belligerent Democrat opposition who opposes everything he proposes.

If he reached out to the Republicans and they said, "No," it would hurt chances of Republicans winning elections by putting them in a tight spot. By making the Democrats refuse to cooperate on issues Americans feel are important, the Democrats look bad.

At this point the President is reduced to trying to coddle the Republican majority and keep them from losing their seats. He has to do so without their help, which makes it all the more difficult.

Politicians don't like it when men who are elected to office won't bend their principles. It makes them uncomfortable and triggers feelings of guilt. They don't like the President.

We have a three branch government. If Congress is not conservative, that isn't the President's fault. The President is left with the unenviable task of trying to make sure Republicans keep their majority, without the satisfaction of receiving the same support from his fellow Republicans.