The latest dispatch from Planet Clueless
goes something like this: President Obama has somehow chosen to “pick a fight”
with Republicans by nominating … wait for it …
A REPUBLICAN to serve as Secretary of Defense. Ordinarily, this would be
heralded as a modest step in the direction of bipartisanship. After all, former
Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel would be the second Republican to join Obama’s
Cabinet (Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood, a former Illinois Congressman, has
served since early 2009 and may stay on for Obama’s second term). Alas, Hagel’s
selection has brought out the long knives, captured, with typical obsessiveness
for the optics and politics of Washington, as opposed to the policy, by The Washington Post blogger Chris Cillizza:
Cillizza’s column makes passing
reference to purported concerns Republicans have about Hagel – something something
about his supposed lack of support for Israel and concerns over Iran, but what
Republicans seem most chapped about is Hagel’s iconoclasm and unwillingness to
kowtow to prevailing Republican orthodoxy. Apparently, he also committed the
ultimate sin of endorsing fellow Vietnam Veteran (and Democrat) Bob Kerrey in
the latter’s losing Senate race last year. Of course, when Joe Lieberman
endorsed John McCain in 2008, no such dudgeon was raised in GOP circles and
Democrats in the Senate returned Lieberman to his perch as Chairman of the
Homeland Security Committee after Obama’s victory.
And this is not to impugn Cillizza
specifically, the media-industrial complex is in full gear to frame this as
just another chapter in the food fight that they portray Washington to be. But
in reality, the so-called “battle” over Hagel is really just a massive
Republican temper tantrum over the fact that one of their own chose sides
against the party in a Senate race and (rightly) abandoned party orthodoxy
during the Bush Administration. That Hagel is otherwise qualified, both by
military and political experience (two things that ordinarily matter) and that,
barring some legitimate disqualifying circumstance, Presidents are entitled to
have their appointees confirmed (Republicans had no problem affirming Iraq war
hawk Condoleezza Rice as Secretary of State) appears to be of no moment.
Instead of framing this “fight” as one
Republicans are picking over a President’s right to have the appointees of his
choosing, the media has perversely flipped the script in pointing the finger at
the President for having the temerity to select the person he wants at the Pentagon.
Having muscled out Susan Rice from consideration at the State Department,
Senate Republicans are feeling their oats. A party that is on the one hand
portrayed as being in disarray is chalking up tactical victories on everything
from permanent extension of tax cuts to dictating Cabinet appointments. It
plays in nicely to the media narrative of Washington as a zero sum game where
power is either accumulating in, or ebbing from, one party to the other;
however, it does little to ensure sound policy and decision making is made. That
the mainstream media stokes these flames in the name of ginning up controversy
is simply another example of why people outside the Beltway do not understand
what it is that goes on inside it.
Obama has picked fights with the Republicans since 2007 when he dared to step outside his place. He picks a fight each and every day he wakes up and doesn't step down!
ReplyDelete