John McCain, in Congress for 26 years to Barack Obama’s four, has the longer record of producing bipartisan alliances on tough issues. He has bucked his party again and again to do just that — on immigration, federal judges and campaign finance, to name three.
Obama has a much thinner record of bucking his own party. With the exception of tough fights for ethics reforms in the Illinois Senate and in Washington — where he angered Democratic colleagues by insisting on the disclosure of lobbyists who bundle campaign donations — Obama has rarely challenged party dogma on the sort of big, contentious issues he’d face as president.
None of this is to say Obama couldn’t turn into a consensus-building, party-challenging president.
Based on their records so far, though, it takes a greater leap of faith to believe that of him than of McCain.
— USA Today editorial
In Illinois, I reached across the aisle to put $100 million in tax cuts into the pockets of hard-working families. And I opposed members of my party to pass the first major ethics reform in 25 years, ending the outrage of politicians pocketing campaign contributions for personal use.
I’ve bridged the partisan divide in the Senate to bring about change. With Sen. Dick Lugar, I fought to keep nuclear weapons out of terrorist hands. With Sen. Tom Coburn, I helped end the abuse of no-bid contracts and made government more open by putting every contract, every grant and every dime of federal spending online.
My opponent speaks of bipartisanship. But you cannot claim independence from your party when you vote with George W. Bush 90 percent of the time. You cannot end partisan divisions when you embrace the Karl Rove politics that’s polarized this country for so long. It’s time to reject the cynicism that treats bipartisanship as little more than a slogan.
— Barack Obama’s response in USA Today
10 Comments
Palin/McCain
Thanks, but no thanks.
It seems that as the Republic Party has moved more to the right and Karl Rove has gained power that McCain has fallen more in line with GOP orthodoxy. His % agreement with the party leader (Bush) has increased over the past 8 years.
On the other hand Obama – in order to get anything done in Illinois, has had to put together coalitions in their de facto three-part system: Machine Democrats, Reform Democrats, and Republicans. As an Illinois Republican myself I often found us working with refoem Democrats to do things.
In some ways this is similar to Kansas’ three-party system; sometimes it takes a mix of Democrats in coalition with moderate Republicans to pass legislation.
When your side is repeatedly wrong, more opportunity to buck the party.
Indeed. The issue is not so much “bipartisanship” but to what end. The Iraq War had bipartisan support, and the Patriot Act only had 1 “nay” vote in the Senate (Russ Feingold).
Obviously, someone who completely refuses to work with members of the other party (cough!cough!bushcheneeyy! cough!) is a real detriment to governance. But based on that limited (and not very useful) criterion, either McCain or Obama is acceptable.
That would also be true of some of the most partisan members of the Senate.
One of the regular memes of the Republic Party is to cook the books and claim whomever is their target du jour, they’re determined to be the “most liberal person in Congress.”
It’s sometimes Ted Kennedy, Hillary, used to be Kerry, and now it’s supposed to be Obama.
We’ve heard that old song so often we know all the words. But the latest incantation is as sad as an oldies radio station.
On the flip side, it turns out John S (for Senile) McCain the Third (for Shrub’s 3rd term) is the most erratic member in the Senate.
He’s voted both sides of dozens of issues. He says one thing on Tuesday and votes the opposite way on Wednesday. What’s been spun into McCoot’s “maverick” persona is better known among his colleagues — of both parties — that you can’t count on him. McCodger is an unreliable ally on any issue or legislation (remember his own Immigration Reform bill?) and he’ll betray alliances for any or no reason at all.
Now maybe that can also be spun into some permutation of “bipartisanship,” but is sounds a lot like a mercurial, flighty, irresolute loose cannon.
Readers of this forum need to be reminded of the dog that isn’t barking. None of the CONs have anything good to say about McC*nt; they can only attack and lie about Obama. If they stood up for any issue or position the Republic Party standard-bearer might advocate today, they know they’re likely to have to do a one-eighty tomorrow.
Interseting article about campaign ads by both sides:
So far, several analysts say, most of Obama’s ads mislead and misrepresent in familiar ways — twisting a statistic or a snippet of video to make a questionable point, for instance. They say McCain has been in a different league, epitomized by Education.
“McCain is making no effort to be truthful,” says Farhad Manjoo, author of True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society. “The lies aren’t routine political lies where they stretch the truth of what a candidate might have said, or take a candidate out of context.”
PolitiFact.com, a fact-check team from the St. Petersburg (Fla.) Times and Congressional Quarterly, rates 22 statements and ads from McCain as barely true, 23 as false and six as “pants on fire” (absurdly, ridiculously false) out of 117 analyzed. For Obama, the score is 14 barely true, 18 false and one “pants on fire” out of 120 analyzed.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-09-22-ads_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip
MH
Ok, I’ll give it a shot, he was a POW and has a hot wife
Rags- Obviously, someone who completely refuses to work with members of the other party (cough!cough!bushcheneeyy! cough!
————————————-
yeah buddy! 11 vetos in 8 years!!!
(I think there was 1 in his first term)
“Ok, I’ll give it a shot, he was a POW and has a hot wife”
He comes from a great state to visit in January and February when the valencia oranges start coming on.
I don’t mean literally, but I mean as zoo-like as the Senate of cough could be, this was it. Well, maybe it’s just because I was coming from members. So at the past 8 years I was in former-East and former-West Berlin.