Rush: 177, Obama: 0

Obama tried to charm them, Rush tried to bully them. And the results are in. Round 1 goes by unanimous decision to Rush Limbaugh. Not one House Republican voted with the president on the stimulus package even after his "charm offensive."

These guys are the barbarians at the gate, there's no charming them. President Obama went to visit them, he invited them over to the White House, he had drinks with them, he stood by while they bad-mouthed Congressional Democrats, he adjusted the bill for them, he cut out the contraception education and he added tax cuts. In the end, what did he get for his efforts? A big fat doughnut. Nothing.

Not one House Republican voted for his stimulus package. 177-0.

On the other side, they went groveling over to Rush, tripping over themselves to court his favor and take his tongue-lashings (how grotesque does that sound?). In the end, he got them all (and all the national attention -- which was his true goal).

Now, Obama might be playing a chess match here. He might be positioning himself politically to be able to say to the American people, "Now look, I tried to be bi-partisan. I did all I could. And they did not budge. They are obstinate, partisan and obstructionist." He would have an excellent case to make.

Maybe he is that smart. But I believe he was also partly naïve enough to believe that he could convince them. That they would listen to reason. That they would be swayed by his compromises. That's not how they roll.

The maddening part of all this is that the stimulus package, in my opinion, is bloated, vague and rushed. Does anyone really know how we are going to spend $819 billion? Let alone how we're going to pay for it? Has anyone done the analysis on whether spending $142 billion on education by the federal government is efficient or necessary? Could we have made do with $132 billion?

Instead, the Republicans went the same old tired route - more tax cuts. They have not had an original idea in at least 30 years. Look, we tried endless tax cuts under Bush. Did that seem to do the trick?

Why not argue for spending the money in a constructive and judicious way? Why not pick a project to get behind and say we should concentrate on that for job creation? It could even be green energy because they could argue it is to reduce our dependence on foreign oil for national security reasons - and it creates new, sustainable jobs. They would get huge points for being bold and actually caring about an issue for a change. But that would be constructive. And the Republicans don't do constructive.

What Obama said to the Muslim world in his inaugural address, he could have just as well said to the Republican Party, "People will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy."

Watch The Young Turks Here

UPDATE -- Vote in the AOL Hot Seat Poll on whether Obama was smart or naive here.

Comments

[joeyfoto]

"These guys are the barbarians at the gate, there's no charming them." What a a great metaphor. That line captures perfectly the brutal, crude and destructive aspects of those who entered Rome as vandals then trashed it. However, that figure of speech shows only one side of this coin. Internal political machinations precipitated and made possible that classical disaster. The cause of Rome's internal weakness was generations of imperial insanity. Loons who knew to rule only by keeping the people divided. "Find a dog to fight a dog..." is how Caligula understood it, while he kept Roman citizens diverted with "bread & circuses."

History doesn't allow "re-dos" but it does reruns. Our internally generated insanity comes from intellectually in-bred political hacks with pseudo-imperial delusions, who exploit "wedge issues," to accomplish a similar cynical purpose. These guys propagate lies to obstruct a natural unity by keeping the people angry, frightened and divided. Although not themselves barbarians, these rogue-Roves and limp-Limbaughs serve-up raw-meat to nourish the delusions of wanna-be-barbarians among us. For profit and the illusion of permanent political power, these whisperers willfully weaken our nation.

[rocketman69]

"I won"... bi-partisanship at his best. The house passed it and so will the senate, dems own it for better or worse. Why are you crying?

[joeyfoto]

rocketman69 writes: ""I won"... bi-partisanship at his best. The house passed it and so will the senate, dems own it for better or worse. Why are you crying?"

Don't be simple-minded, rocketman. If the Republicans did not have three 'moderates' to cast the filibuster -preventing votes they would have had to pay some of their own to fall on their swords to get it done. You don't think these heros would actually take responsibility for the errant nonsense that's shooting out of their mouths? That's silly. This is party fitting the paradigm of Robert E. Lee, to go down in valiant defeat. This is a noble effort for a cause that, in the end, the entire world judged to be evil. This is the last gasp of a party that promotes the values of the plantation; the final fit of an attempt to obstruct the re-growth of a middle class at the expense of the Master's capacity for largess.

If our president wasn't a better person and a more honorable leader than Karl Rove, he would put the video of his daily town meetings on the nightly news next to the Republican senators filibuster filler speeches about fly fishing or NASCAR racing. That would probably put the GOP out of its misery. Fortunatdely, for us. President Obama is going about the country's business while the Republican poseurs rant about principles --- principles which they clearly don't possess. Those principles, if followed, would have prevented this mess.

[argyle]

He is not naive enough to believe he can sway republicans. He knows well the politics they play else he wouldn't be the President. He is doing what they could not, winning graciously. It's the smart political play when you hold all the cards.

[cadawa]

Obama has some hard lessons to learn. He's spent far too much time listening to DLC advisors. As president he is forced to deal with the hard reality the Democratic leadership has refused to acknowledge.
The GOP are not interested in bi-partisanship or making the country work better. They are interested in maintaining their grip on power. The sooner the Democrats realize this and start behaving accordingly, the sooner we'll have our country back.

[Soundofthunder]

I'm gonna side with Obama on his tactic of charm and conciliation, for it makes the GOP's lock arms and jump off a cliff votes look petty and divisive, the politics of children, not adults.

GOP = Got 0 Popularity

SOT

[progressiverock]

Limbaugh is 50 Cent with white skin. Both do a great job spinning the media but fall flat on substance. Limbaugh's appeal? Divisiveness which tears the US apart economically, socially and emotionally. That does not work in a culturally diverse country such as the US.
Obama's first week in office proved to be a breath of fresh air. He is actually trying to include as many individuals on both sides of the aisle, critics and supporters alike, for objective debate. Obama actually listens to people, even to critics who constantly tell him "no". One observation about those in the "no" party (Dem, Rep or otherwise) - their economic and diplomatic ideals are what got the US into these economic doldrums and international conflicts. The sad thing is that the national GDP is down, people are out of work, we have practically zero clout with our international neighbors and the "no" party is still in business. As responsible citizens, we need to contact our congressional representatives and make an appeal for our country's future and end the bi-partisanship that has infected DC for years.
In the spirit of Barack Obama being a consummate listener, we should still give a respectful ear to the likes of Limbaugh, Kristol and Krautheimer. However, our final desicions need to be assessed with a much broader range of accountability - as witnessed in our last two national elections when the responsible citizens of our great country voted the puppets of Limbaugh, Kristol and Krautheimer out of

[DonRoberto]

I like your column, Mr. Uygur, and generally find myself in agreement with you, but I think you have seriously miscalculated the score --- which currently stands at Obama 1, Limbaugh 0. Limbaugh has gained nothing --- he can still energize his core audience, same as last year and the year before. But the swing voters have already spoken, and it wasn't for more of the same old Rushworld.

Meanwhile, the stimulus bill passed the Senate without a single GOP vote --- the takehome here is that Obama and the Dems ** DON'T NEED ** to curry a lot of favor with the GOP's base (which they will never, ever receive, anyway). Despite the attempts of Limbaugh and others to whip up the base, this new reality is even now settling into the brainpans of Republican politicos and policy wonks.

As to President Obama's courtship of the Republican elite, his M.O. so far has been to "kill them with kindness", which only reemphasizes the message: the train is rolling whether the GOP is onboard or not. There are other battles ahead, to be sure, and some of them can't be won by Democratic votes alone. But the word is out: If the GOP wants to be there at the finish line, they're going to need to have a horse in the race. Expect increased cooperation from Republicans (at least in the Senate) in the days to come.

[SwissChocolate1]

Ande NO republicans voted for the plan. This was Rush's goal. And he succeded. Obama lost. This is why the score goes to Rush.

[Ugonna]

actually, that wasn't Limbaugh's goal, Limbaugh's goal is to ruin the honeymoon Obama is having. Obama however, had the goal of winning over alot of Repubs, and didn't do that. Having lost that, I wouldn't call it 0(zero), it is 1, whereas Obama really wanted 2. Limbaugh has 0 because he didn't spoil the honeymoon.

[Pharos]

Obama was not naive, he knew exactly what he was doing. He was brilliant. Maybe some day the media will catch up to him.

[SwissChocolate1]

Do tell us, Phatos. How was this such a "brilliant" move by Obama~

[Johnagain]

He revealed the Republicans for what they are. The party representing the top 1% wealthiest in this country, and no one else. If even a few more people finally start to realize this, I'd call that a victory.

[AlwaysaLiberal]

I don't think Obama lost anything. I don't think he was expecting the House Republicans to vote for it. Rush and the house GOP were in a lose lose situation and they lost. I don't see how Limbaugh won when he keeps digging himself further into a hole.

[SwissChocolate1]

Ah, sure he was expcting a least ONE "yes" from the house republicans...come on, give it up...

[Ugonna]

He was hoping, but not altogether expecting. No matter what he was hoping for, this isn't a loss. Because what really matters is that the bill was passed. I mean, are you really gonna pretend that that didn't happen?? Yes, he needs a lot more work to do to get bipartisanship, but that's a longterm goal anyway, not achieved overnight, and has little to do with what's actually done for the ppl, which is what matters in my book anyway. Repubs didn't want the bill, and even with unanimous opposition, AND some Dems agreeing with them- guess what?- THE DEMS STILL OUTNUMBERED THEM AND GOT IT PASSED. So, all the rejoicing in the end for them is still ridiculous. Obama may not have achieved winning them over, but they achieved ZERO.

Find something else to celebrate, cause you look ridiculous celebrating this one too much.

[alumtrix]

..........­......"The maddening part of all this is that the stimulus package, in my opinion, is bloated, vague and rushed. Does anyone really know how we are going to spend $819 billion? Let alone how we're going to pay for it".......­..........

So why are you criticizing the Republicans for voting against it? What you state later in your column is exactly the way the stimulus package should be handled. Congress could pick road construction with 10 projects that are shovel ready around the country and send the money tomorrow. Everyone should sign off on it because in theory all the money would be accounted for for those specific projects. Then do the same thing for renewable energy. The whole package could be handled in bite-sized chunks and the public would be able to handle this a lot easier and without the partisan bickering.

[jaslyn]

Were Rush and Rove siamese twins that were seperated at birth? just asking.

[Pharos]

Never thought about it before but you've got to be right. It would explain a lot. Let's demand their birth certificates. I'll bet they're not even Americans.

[progressiverock]

I don't know but I just lost my appetite for Doublemint gum. Rush/Rove in "Matrix - Reloaded" would have been scary.

[jaslyn]

Clearchannel Radio pays Rush millions while letting go many better, underpaid hosts than him. The people should barage them with mail; Rush is anti-American, divisive and blathers out the hate speech. Keeping him employed with that obscene salary is almost treasonous. Clear channel , like many of these media giants is whoring their way to success.

[SwissChocolate1]

Like MSNBC?

[hmmmmm]

fine, republicans. Lets see you stick by your ideals and insist that NONE of the stimulus money go anywhwere NEAR your district, ok? All of it should be reserved for the Democratic districts that vote for it. Then, when your uninspected bridges start falling and killing people, when you've damaged your Bimmer due to a world class pothole, well, just remind yourself how glad you are to be a republican.

While you are at it, since you believe cutting taxes raises revenue, why don't you slash state and local taxes to nothing so you will have plenty of revenue to take on these projects yourself!!

[alumtrix]

Two suggestions based on your comments above.

First, all military bases, contractors for the military, and anything else that has to do with the military should be moved out of California. Dispurse these bases and contractors to other states that don't have an issue with OUR military recruiting at high schools and college campuses. That would solve that issue in a heart beat.

Second, let the stimulus go to the blue states and the tax cuts go to the red states. Give the blue states their GREEN energy but it can't be subsidized anymore than what big oil is today. Put them both on an even playing field and let's see which one is more efficient and saves the end user the most money. I think it's pretty well understood that Dems don't mind raising taxes on the rich. The only problem is finding a Dem right now who's actually willing to pay his/ her taxes that are due. If you're gonna talk the talk, you gotta walk the walk. Geittner, Daschle, Caroline Kennedy.......

[pjburke]

"First, all military bases, contractors for the military, and anything else that has to do with the military should be moved out of California."

ROFLMAO.

Yeah, right... have you got a deep-water port hidden over there in Arkansas, Oklahoma, Nevada or Arizona that you haven't bothered to tell anyone about?

Second: Red states all receive more federal money per capita than they pay in... they're freeloading tax-dollar suckers, not payers. Blue states pay more into the federal treasury per capita than they receive back. Blue states are floating this boat.

Last: don't even start about Dems not paying taxes, after the decades-long parade of unapologetic tax-freeloader, tax-cheat, and Treasury-robbing Republicans.

[SwissChocolate1]

I like the part about blue/red states, but moving all military bases out of California couldn't happen....sorry~

[aramos]

Create a bi-partisan bill and you'll get bi-partisan support.

[shockmagog]

Let us know when that will occur.

[AgentMuu]

Hey Cenk, if you report on Rush anymore, please use a photo without him. I had to adblock the picture that accompanies the story under "Popular Stories on Huffpost" because his torpid face makes me lose my appetite. Cheers