Did Gingrich Invent Partisanship? The NY Times Thinks So

  • Bookmark and Share

The New York Times seems to think there was no such thing as partisanship in Washington, D.C. until conservative Republicans came around in the 1990s to invent it. White House reporter Sheryl Gay Stolberg's front-page Sunday Week in Review story, "Cutting the President Slack Is So Old School," is another example of that ideological blindness, impying that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich personally invented partisanship.

That requires ignoring Bill Clinton's "war room," his administration's persecution of the White House Travel Office, and before that, the personal attacks made by liberal interest groups on conservative Republican Supreme Court nominees Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas. Which is just what Stolberg does: 

....the concept of the "loyal opposition" came to mean that a president, especially a new one elected by comfortable majority, could expect cooperation from the other side, in deference to the will of the voters. But in the partisan politics of recent decades, another view developed, advanced by Congressional leaders like Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker, that the minority party has the right, even obligation, to stick to its ideological principles.

Some longtime Washington power-brokers are uncomfortable with this more partisan-based notion of loyalty. John Warner, former Republican senator from Virginia, is one.

"This president has been duly and fairly elected, no question whatsoever," Mr. Warner said, "and he must be given the opportunity to exercise leadership of his own choosing consistent with the will of the people who put him in office. That's not meant that we all stand there like a bunch of pigeons on the roof, but let's try to give him the benefit of the doubt for a reasonable period of time."

Sen. John Warner was one of Stolberg's favorite Republicans, no doubt because he so often sided with Democrats. Here's what she wrote in a May 2004 profile, using Warner's "willingness to speak his mind" as code for his opposition to Republicans and Republican causes:

In the Senate, Mr. Warner has demonstrated a willingness to speak his mind. In 2002 he helped orchestrate the ouster of Senator Trent Lott, the former Republican leader, over racially charged remarks. He describes himself as 'quite loyal to the president of the United States,' but he was willing to stand with Democrats this year when they fought for an extension of the ban on assault weapons, over Mr. Bush's objections. Democrats generally give Senator Warner high marks.

In her most recent story, Stolberg made do with a brief paragraph on an example of Democratic intransigence before returning to "hard-edged" Gingrich.

Republicans haven't cornered the market for blocking presidential initiatives. Democrats were so successful at filibustering Mr. Bush's judicial nominees that their Senate leader, Tom Daschle, was labeled "an obstructionist" and lost his seat in 2004.

Today it is the Republicans who find themselves accused of obstructionism. Mr. Gingrich, a veteran -- and, some would say, the architect -- of the hard-edged 90s, has emerged as a mentor to the current Republican House minority, in particular Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, the House minority whip whose efforts ensured that not a single House Republican voted for Mr. Obama's stimulus bill.

Stolberg rang up one of the Times's favorite liberal sources, professor Robert Dallek, which the paper can always rely on for an anti-Bush or pro-Democrat quote. Stolberg concluded by quoting the sainted Warner.

But opposition, or obstructionism, can be a risky game. Robert Dallek, a biographer of both John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson, suggested that cooperating with a popular new president can benefit the party out of power. For instance, when Dwight D. Eisenhower was president, Democratic leaders like Johnson and Sam Rayburn stressed the virtues of bipartisanship, fearing that "if they caused Eisenhower grief, the party would pay a price for it," Mr. Dallek said.

The stimulus vote, of course, is not the final word on the Obama presidency; the president will go to Capitol Hill on Tuesday to deliver his first address to a joint session of Congress. On Thursday he will submit his first budget proposal, which the White House says will include detailed initiatives on energy and health care. Mr. Obama has said he hopes his attempts to bring Republicans on board will pay off in the future. Mr. Warner, for one, is trying to be optimistic that the loyal opposition is not gone for good.

"Tomorrow's another day," he said. "Let's hope we can find common ground."

—Clay Waters is the director of Times Watch, an MRC project tracking the New York Times.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

This coming from Stolberg

This coming from Stolberg and the NYTs is no surprise whatsoever...

...all of the leftist msm of all venues love, love, love to quote the RINOs...we all know that.

They hold them up for everyone to see...(meaning other repubs) to try to bring about fear, therefore capitulation within the 'R' party.

Give it a rest you poor quivering leftist lemmings....you are the very people who are truly in fear, as you see your guy sinking, along with the dem party with the socialism being forced down our throats, while more and more people are speaking out loud and clear about this...Santelli is the latest example.

So behind the scenes, quake in your boots, you have good reason.

Got a lesson in that this week

At a function, no one wanted to talk about The Acting President Obama. Not the ones who were obviously for him and the ones who were against him. Just a short nothing then out of here.

They all saw what he was doing as not good and walked off.

My guess is the polls are reflecting the 'don't want to talk about it' as much as true feelings.

....... suggested that

....... suggested that cooperating with a popular new president can benefit the party out of power.

  The Republicans need not fear obama's popularity.  He is spending his popularity along with all of our money.  Standing up to obama because of his reckless spending will bolster the fortunes of the Republicans.  The overspending by the Republican Congress now looks like a mere pittance.

I musta missed something here.

 But in the partisan politics of recent decades, another view developed, advanced by Congressional leaders like Newt
Gingrich, the former House speaker, that the minority party has the
right, even obligation, to stick to its ideological principles
.

...and this is a bad thing?  Did I miss something?  I mean, is it wrong to expect liberals to act like liberals and conservatives to act like conservatives?  I've always found it ridiculous that a liberal would expect me to think like them and vice-versa.  If a liberal wanted to think like me, then they would be a conservative, right?  

Imagine a politician sticking to their idealogy.  Wow. 

"Liberate tutume ex inferis, liberal puppets."  Me.

Not only that, but Bill

Not only that, but Bill Clinton was elected with 43% of the vote in 1992!

Not exactly what I'd call a "comfortable majority."

However, Stolberg seems to think that Gingrich and the Republicans should have just rolled over and played dead.

If I missed it, someone please enlighten me, but I don't recall Stolberg fulminating when Democrats opposed GW Bush at every turn, even to the point of filibustering and refusing to send his nominees up for a full vote.

What a difference a "D" makes.....

I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson

   Well there's a reason

   Well there's a reason for the view that 'partisonship' started with Gingrich, the democrats pretty much ran Congress for 60 years.  The Republicans were just amusing strange little people who scurried around the Capital but no one paid them much attention.  But then HORRORS these cute little playthings got out of hand and deposed the legitimate ruling class.  That being the democrat party.  The dems are back in force now and they have no intention of ever leaving again even if they have to destroy the country to keep it.

Nailed it.

The dems are back in force now and they have no intention of
ever leaving again even if they have to destroy the country to keep it.

And there it is folks.  MidAmerica hit it on the head.  Now that the liberal socialists are back in majority, we are all screwed, and they damn sure won't go away without a fight, even if it means destroying all our Constitutional truths.  God save our Republic.

 

"Liberate tutume ex inferis, liberal puppets."  Me.

When you're as old as I am

When you're as old as I am you realize these things come and go in cycles..like a pendulum. What makes you think this time is any different?

  Well two things make this

  Well two things make this time very different.  One: we have the most left-wing democrat party ever and two:  we have never had the media so committed to the success of a President that it is a stronger voice for the democrat party than any official of the democrat party.  The total collapse of objective reporting by the media is the biggest threat to our country since the Soviet Union.

You weren't around for Jimmy

You weren't around for Jimmy Carter were you? Also, speaking of the media commited to the success of a President? What about JFK and the coverup of his 'hobbies' :)

   I was very much around

   I was very much around for Jimmuh.  Even though the media had a soft spot for all things Kennedy the media back then was run by WWII types who at the end of the day were patriots.  The boomers who now infest the upper echelons of power are the same hairy ragtags that used to take over universities and  shout better red than dead.

   As far as covering up JFK's 'indiscretions', it used to be that a person's private life was off limits.  Unless of course a person was comitting something not tolerated like homosexuality.  It was a man's world back then.  Comitting adultery was a man's personal business not public.

Ok, but you still have not

Ok, but you still have not convinced me this is not a cycical thing.

1) I am a hairy baby boomer who will soon be dead.

2) I have three children who are more conservative than I am. And I like Stephan Harper!!!

  Oh I agree.  All of life

  Oh I agree.  All of life is cycles.  Had the dems and obama not gotten so greedy so fast their 'cycle ' may have lasted longer than it will.  If the election were held again tomorrow I doubt obama would be elected.  I don't care what the media say his 'popularity' is.  His 7 point win could be erased by a shift of only 3.5% of the voters.  That's not much and a lot of people don't see the 'hope' and they don't like the 'change' they voted for.

MidAmerica is right. Sure there are pendulum swings,

people will always get tired of one particular party running things, especially if life ain't going so hot. But this chick is kind of right. All the years that the Repubs were out of power, they didn't court it overly much. Rush had a thing on this about 2 weeks ago, about the guy that was Speaker? years ago who would tell all the incoming classes of the very small Repub classes, that he was a loser, and they were all losers, too. Dems loved him! The Repubs spent most of their time on the golf course. I remember a degree of that, not as well as some here probably do, but until Newt there was no big "Audacity" of "Hope"  of taking over the Congress. The Dems want the Repubs to take all their advice now, and just fade back into the woodwork. Back to where they feel is our place. To expect us to give up our principles? Isn't that what got us in this mess, in the first place? If the Repubs had of stood on their principles, they would have been awfully hard to beat.

 

All a Democrat needs is the upper-story window of public attention and the chamber pot of rhetoric. How else to explain the rise of Joe Biden?  P.J. O' Rourke

Yep

The Democrats were very partisan before partishhip was cool.

Yeah but they have come back

as a more virulent strain. The Dems of old are gone. The Truman, Kennedy and even the great manipulator FDR type democrats are mild milquetoasts compared to the raging marxists which have taken over the democrat party. 

"Somehow, I told you so, just doesn't quite say it." Will Smith in 'I, Robot.'

I still remember when Newt

I still remember when Newt and the other Republicans took over.  One of the best moments in American political history.  They made promises-and delivered.  And the country got better.  And true to form, the MSM and other Leftists were all over him.

Republicans are always at a disadvantage during economic slumps.  They really don't have any 'plans' or 'programs', 'cept maybe reducing taxes.  They know that commerce will adust and move forward without interference.

Americans have been taught that Presidents (like Clinton) and the government in general can 'fix' the economy.  They will never learn, because the Socialists in the media, Hollywood, the schools/universities, etc. keep yapping loud and long this falsehood.

One of the 24% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 89% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.

It's laughable

It's just laughable that the NYT, as the standard bearer for liberal bias, finds a newfound respect for cooperation by the opposition party.  I think one would be hard pressed to find a similar suggestion over the 8 years of the GWB administration.

I'm struck by the memory of Ted Kennedy standing on the floor of the Senate proclaimin "Bush lied, people died."  How's that for respecting the will of the voters?

Hey tcm22

Ugh! aside from the topic of these posts, I remember Ted Kennedys OJ trial moment (if the gloves don't fit you must aquit....to...Bush lied blah blah blah). I lost any remnant of respect I had for Ted when I was watching the Bork "confirmation / Democrat inquisition" hearings. He's an illogical blue dog period. Don't get me wrong I wouldn't wish his cancer situation on anyone (but Hitler).

As for my reply, tcm you beat me to it. What I find even funnier is that the market value of 1 share of NYT is about $4. Their sunday edition costs about $5. I'm suprised that they aren't asking for bailout $$ after 8 years of the big bad wolf being in office. After all according to them everything is Bushs fault.

DLT... To add one little

DLT...

To add one little tidbit I heard just while ago on BOR, GE is now down to nine dollars a share....   ;-)

Talk about icing on the cake.

Of all people to proclaim this

Hey Teddy, who died while you lied?

Partisanship is as old as America

I can remember the Democrats actively working to undermine Ronald Reagan as soon as he took office.  And I'm no historian, but what I know of American history includes a lot of partisanship almost from Day 1.  George Washington's farewell address included an admonishment against partisanship.  Why would he feel the need to address a problem that didn't exist?  So don't give Newt credit for inventing partisanship.

When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.

nkv.... I share your

nkv....

I share your sentiments here...just wanted to throw in what the msm also did to tear Nancy apart too, every single chance they could, whether it was a total exaggeration or not, they despised these two (the 'R' party goes without saying, that is always a given), and their vengeance knew no bounds.

Nothing has changed either..just more channels to spew their propaganda. 

    and they ridiculed

    and they ridiculed Reagan for appearing in a movie with a (gasp) chimp.

MA... LMAO! I forgot

MA...

LMAO!

I forgot all about that...great catch!

How quickly the horrible 'off-teleprompter' remark

made by our new president about Nancy Reagan has been buried, never to be brought back to the surface again!  What a TOTAL JERK! 

It is no dishonor to be in a minority in the cause of liberty and virtue. ~ Sam Adams

Partisanship in the Past

Is as old as political parties and was much more visceral than it is now but as long as more than one opinion or view was allowed it has existed. I was reading about the years leading up to the Civil War. Partisanship was a hazardous pre-occupation. There has always been partisanship because we are human beings. The only thing that surprises me is that we still have a two party system. Many countries with Parliamentary type government may have dozens of parties which rule by coalition. I believe Israel has a coalition government. 

"Somehow, I told you so, just doesn't quite say it." Will Smith in 'I, Robot.'

BZZZT. It was media bias that was invented after Newt came along

 a new one elected by comfortable majority

 Now 53% is a COMFORTABLE majority.

 another view developed, advanced by Congressional leaders like Newt Gingrich...to stick to its ideological principles

  Yes, prior to Newt, the minority party just switched over and joined up with the majority until an election came along. Of course some of us would disagree. The some of us that actually read A HISTORY BOOK.

  Among the other things Newt invented after principles - honesty, integrity, values,  courage, honor. Or maybe we are giving him a little too much credit here?

 Mr. Gingrich, a veteran -- and, some would say, the architect...has emerged as a mentor to

  I can't follow the Media Conspiracy Theories train of thought here. I thought ROVE was teh architect.

"if they caused Eisenhower grief, the party would pay a price for it," 

 Really? Causing the guy that won WWII grief? Might pay a price for that? How about kicking Santa Claus? Think there might be some payback for that?

 What kind of grief could we expect from Obama again? He might want to cut & run from AFGHANISTAN as well as Iraq. Or maybe his terrorist friend Ayers will set off some bombs.

 Sincerely,

a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.

I feel stimulated. You guys feel stimulated yet?

Eisenhower proposed spending a MASSIVE amount of money, the result -   Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways. Those signs with 5 stars on them by the side of the road? Eisenhower was a 5 star general.

 Some other Presidents massive spending results -

 Roosevelt - Hoover Dam, Grand Coulee dam, Tennessee Valley Authority dams.

 Kennedy - A man on the moon. and a song by REM.

 Reagan - SDI and the collapse of the USSR.

 Jefferson - Louisiana Purchase, nearly doubling the size of the United States.

 Lincoln & following Presidents - Transcontinental railway linking the 2 coast of the U.S for the 1st time.

 Andrew Johnson - bought Alaska.

 John Quincy Adams - bought Florida.

 Teddy Roosevelt - Panama Canal. Created a shortcut so that ships would not have to go all the way around South America if they wanted to go from New York to California.

 Barry Obama - ACORN gets to hold squatter protests in foreclosed homes.

  YIPPEE! You feeling stimulated yet?

 

Sincerely,

a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.

I'm so stimulated

I need a cold bath.

I'm trying, very hard, to maintain my composure in the light of such galactic stupidity.  But it's getting more insane by the day.

I keep hoping I'll wake up to some sanity....but I am afraid we've truly entered the realm of the surreal and the just plain crazy.  (I wish I had a picture to go with that sentiment).

 

§ Blonde...I Feel Dirty.

I was taken advantage of...

...and I was SOBER!!!

Dirty.

Ster.

My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.

JWF,

oaf -sells Hawaii to the Chinese, to cover the national dept.

China required to bulldose the department of birth records building.

pURPLe pINKy

ucw - sounds like a plausible plan to me ;-)

It is no dishonor to be in a minority in the cause of liberty and virtue. ~ Sam Adams

Oh, are these the same $3 billion recipients of 'the one's'

great stimulus plan?????????????

GEE - I wonder if we could have some sort of standard that all recipients must meet before receiving $1!!!!!!

JWF  "...Barry Obama - ACORN gets to hold squatter protests in foreclosed homes..." 

It is no dishonor to be in a minority in the cause of liberty and virtue. ~ Sam Adams