The words “bipartisanship” and “unity” have been paraded for the last few years as a altruistic goal. President Obama, Rep. Pelosi, and other Democrat big-wigs have repeatedly said both are their intent, preferred governance tactic, and goal. Why and what do they really mean?
Webster dictionary defines ‘bipartisan’: “of, relating to, or involving members of two parties ; specifically : marked by or involving cooperation, agreement, and compromise between two major political parties“. Nice dream but they seem to be missing a HUGE point here: what if the result of this desired bipartisanship and unity is actually BAD?
For example; what if a majority of Democrats and Republicans agree to pass a bill that strips Americans of their right to free speech, bare arms, or legal council when charged with a crime? This would definitely be bipartisan and definitely wrong.
Anywhich . . . the latest howlings by Pelosi and Obama blames Republicans for attempting to derail their $819+ billion special interest payoff scheme deceptively called a “stimulus” bill (the bill passed anyway). Republicans are branded as “partisan” as usual.
I really don’t care for bipartisanship since I believe in getting the correct results, and don’t give a crap how many of the other party voted with me. However, for those out there who cling to the notion that “bipartisanship” is some holy grail, here’s the breakdown of the House vote . . .
For: 244 Against: 188
Votes for: 244 Democrats + 0 Republicans.
Votes against: 178 Republican + 10 Democrats.
Now, for those who actually read the definition of the word “bipartisan” (see above), which side on this bill was BIpartisan? Which side was partisan?
Yep, you read it correctly – the Dems, led by the Obamessiah and St. Pelosi, got their bill passed by the House with a 100% PARTISAN vote. The bipartisan vote was AGAINST their bill.
President Obama’s first attempt at leadership and gaining bipartisan support for a pet project bill has failed spectacularly but . . . the partisan side of the House still passed the bill.
I guess “bipartisan” has been re-defined by the left as “preferrably, but not required, two-party support for what Dems want”.
Typical. No “change” here.
