What Kind of Bipartisanship?
As Newt Gingrich points out today in The Wall Street Journal, there are two different bipartisan paths that President Bush can take:
Will there be a Ronald Reagan approach to bipartisanship which appeals to the conservative majority of the House? Or will there be an establishment bipartisanship which cuts deals between liberals and the White House?
The latter, of course, would split the Republican party; the former splits Democrats. And, as Ginrich notes, the choice has immense implications for America's safety and prosperity.
A liberal coalition will focus narrowly on Iraq and seek to avoid thinking about the scale of threat we face internationally. A conservative bipartisan coalition will look first to the larger threat to American security and will then seek to find solutions in Iraq to strengthen American security.
Certainly, the Reagan approach to bipartisanship yields much less praise from the MSM, fewer pretty photo ops, and a lot more complaining from the leftists who dominate the Democratic leadership. But it's the right choice for the country -- and for President Bush's own legacy.
Will there be a Ronald Reagan approach to bipartisanship which appeals to the conservative majority of the House? Or will there be an establishment bipartisanship which cuts deals between liberals and the White House?
The latter, of course, would split the Republican party; the former splits Democrats. And, as Ginrich notes, the choice has immense implications for America's safety and prosperity.
A liberal coalition will focus narrowly on Iraq and seek to avoid thinking about the scale of threat we face internationally. A conservative bipartisan coalition will look first to the larger threat to American security and will then seek to find solutions in Iraq to strengthen American security.
Certainly, the Reagan approach to bipartisanship yields much less praise from the MSM, fewer pretty photo ops, and a lot more complaining from the leftists who dominate the Democratic leadership. But it's the right choice for the country -- and for President Bush's own legacy.
posted by LadybugUSA at 8:24 AM
2 Comments:
What happened to it, Editor, was that it hit the nail directly on the head. Sensible people recognized the truth of his WWIII declaration. Everyone else simply ignored it.
Gingrich is a great thinker. It doesn't surprise me that the left doesn't recognize that.
Whatever happened to Newt's declaration that World War III is underway?
The answer you get from a Somali could surprise you.
Post a Comment
<< Home