On Slate.com last Friday, CBS News’ John Dickerson published a piece entitled, “Go for the Throat! Why if he wants to transform American politics, Obama must declare war on the Republican Party.” While essentially making an argument against government gridlock, the CBS Political Director wrote the following:
Washington’s partisan rancor, the size of the problems facing government, and the limited amount of time before Obama is a lame duck all point to a single conclusion: The president who came into office speaking in lofty terms about bipartisanship and cooperation can only cement his legacy if he destroys the GOP. If he wants to transform American politics, he must go for the throat.
Mr. Dickerson has been called out by conservatives for the brazen act of partisanship, and has reverted to the familiar, shopworn left-wing playbook: victimhood. (Dickerson whines about people objecting to his tone by varying on Sally Fields: “They hate me, they really hate me.”) You see, all the little brains out in conservativeland don’t know the difference between a call to go to “war on the Republican Party” and objective ‘analysis.’
John Nolte at Breitbart.com does a good job of giving Dickerson the benefit of the doubt, while pointing out the mainstream media’s problem:
But even if Dickerson’s DESTROY THEM! column is analysis, it’s ridiculously biased analysis, and biased only in favor of every premise Obama’s manufactured in his ongoing media/political war with the GOP.
Maybe that’s the problem… Maybe what the corrupt media now considers “objective analysis” is so comfortable in the tank with Obama, that those of us who live in the real world can no longer distinguish between the rantings of the politically bloodthirsty Left and the mainstream media’s idea of analysis. Because there is no difference.
Dickerson claims it was his reading of “political science” and not open advocacy that drove him to publish his missive for the president to destroy the GOP — if he wants to accomplish his second term plans. In the midst of his ‘analysis,’ he shows just how far the Democrat Party has strayed from the one of JFK:
“On Monday, President Obama will preside over the grand reopening of his administration. It would be altogether fitting if he stepped to the microphone, looked down the mall, and let out a sigh: so many people expecting so much from a government that appears capable of so little.”
Contrast the words of President John F, Kennedy at his first inaugural address, which offered an insipirational, unifying message in the face of immense national challenges:
How far the country has come from that day in January 1961, when Democratic President John F. Kennedy implored Americans to put aside their petty differences and do what was in the best interest of the country as a whole! Now, more Americans seem to be expecting government to take care of them, instead of taking care of themselves and their families. The ‘ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country’ ideal has been thrown into the dustbin of history, along with the notion of a ‘moderate’ Democrat party.
The President should not be setting an agenda to destroy the Republican Party, Mr. Dickerson, which was put into power in the House as a legitimate check on reckless government. The United States does not elect dictators, and Congress was instituted to compel parties to make reasonable arguments why laws should be adopted. No, we are not to scrap Congress, and we are not to call on the GOP to destroy the Democrat Party, either. Those who were elected to do their jobs should do so, without hysterics and without calls for ‘warfare’ on those who disagree with them.