Pelosi's Interesting Definition of "Bipartisanship"

It comes as no surprise to me, but before the Democrats even officially take over control, Pelosi's empty promises begin to be exposed. Apparently among the first will be the emptiest and least sincere, that of "restoring bipartisanship."

"Democrats To Start Without GOP Input
Quick Passage of First Bills Sought

By Lyndsey Layton and Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, January 2, 2007; Page A01

As they prepare to take control of Congress this week and face up to campaign pledges to restore bipartisanship and openness, Democrats are planning to largely sideline Republicans from the first burst of lawmaking.

House Democrats intend to pass a raft of popular measures as part of their well-publicized plan for the first 100 hours. They include tightening ethics rules for lawmakers, raising the minimum wage, allowing more research on stem cells and cutting interest rates on student loans.

But instead of allowing Republicans to fully participate in deliberations, as promised after the Democratic victory in the Nov. 7 midterm elections, Democrats now say they will use House rules to prevent the opposition from offering alternative measures, assuring speedy passage of the bills and allowing their party to trumpet early victories.

Nancy Pelosi, the Californian who will become House speaker, and Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, who will become majority leader, finalized the strategy over the holiday recess in a flurry of conference calls and meetings with other party leaders. A few Democrats, worried that the party would be criticized for reneging on an important pledge, argued unsuccessfully that they should grant the Republicans greater latitude when the Congress convenes on Thursday."

The only thing less surprising is that the Post reporters actually state the following comment as though it is factual:

"the Democrats may have to resort to some of the same tough tactics Republicans used the past several years.

I wonder if Mss. Layton and Eilpern could possibly be referring to those tactics which kept the Democrats in the majority for the 40 years prior to 1994's "Republican Revolution?" Over the past 12 years, the Democrats received pretty much the same treatment and disdain with which they treated the Republicans throughout their 40 year reign in the House. The only difference that I can see is that the Republicans complained a whole lot less than these whiney Democrats.

It is an article of faith with Democrats and even more with Liberal Democrats that they are appointed by a non-specific, anonymous, and/or yet to be undetermined deity, to rule. Thus when they were defeated in 1994, they became unhinged. One true indicator of the effect of this heresy was the number of formerly powerful long term Democrat Representatives who failed to seek reelection in 1996. It just wasn't acceptable to them to play second fiddle. Hence the nearly ceaseless whining to which the American people have been subjected over the past 12 years. Now comes the retribution, the first evidence of which will be this rough-shod stampede of Democrat-Socialist legislation during the first 100 hours.

Now that's what Pelosi and the Democrats call bipartisanship.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below