Ted Kennedy: The Art of the Deal

Media Matters has a post on the way Repubs like McCain and Hatch are portraying his deal making ability.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/200908260011

To be fair, both McCain and Hatch have some standing to talk about Kennedy and how he approached health care. McCain co-sponsored the Patients Bill of Rights with Kennedy and John Edwards, and Hatch was a very close ally on getting S-CHIP done. That alone tells you a lot about how Kennedy approached these things. Would he have hung in there for the public option? We will never know, but my hunch is that Ted’s calculation on concession would have hinged on what he thought he was getting in return.

Come on Karen, at some point you have to recognize that McCain and Hatch are living on their reputations. These guys are no longer acting like the statesman from the other side that Kennedy could make a deal with. McCain just finished shamelessly using Kennedy as a foil implying all the deliberate lies and propaganda the GOP is putting out there isn’t the reason health care is on the ropes, it’s because Ted Kennedy isn’t there to keep us honest?

Give me a break. There has to be some point where journalistic perspective intersects with the truth. You begin your comment with “His reputation is…” Couldn’t this one time you not give homage to the GOP and call it like it is rather than how they’ve trained you to write about it?
.
When you talk about his reputation, then by all means talk about his reputation for bipartisanship and pragmatic deal making. But for rest of it you need to tell the truth at least this one time. And actually say that while Republican propaganda has portrayed him as a fierce partisan, in reality he was…

KT, great piece.

At the risk of sounding like a partisan, I do blame most of the current tempature in Congress on the Republicans. Just watching Dems argue among ourselves about health care shows we remain ever the unherdable cats, putting policy and local concerns above national political partisanship. Obama has the same problems with his own party that FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Carter and Clinton did.

However, while Dems still have conservative, moderate, progressive and liberal wings in our party the Republicans now are mostly ideological conservatives. Reagan’s “children” inherited none of his good qualities, including his pragmatism, and all of his worst attributes.

while Dems still have conservative, moderate, progressive and liberal wings in our party the Republicans now are mostly ideological conservatives.
,
Actually, contrary to your assertion, there are indeed two separate kinds of Republicans. There are those who absolutely believe in their hearts all the hateful vitriol that they hear on talk radio and read at HotAir and FreeRepublic and there are those who merely see such ‘true beleivers’ as a means to an end who might be aware that they’re spouting Horse Manure but are nevertheless perfectly willing to do so if it results in the continued flow of gravy.

I’m trying to think of something lower than pushing a political agenda on the back of someone’s death, but it is very difficult.

Well, Paul D., those are indeed two different types of Republicans and frankly the second kind is more despicable. Though the first type is scarrier.

Karen, now is the time for McCain and Hatch to step up and compromise on the Public Plan and go down in history with Kennedy on passing health care.

I find it hard to believe that they want grandchildren to wonder why they did not vote for health care.

Pat Tillman
.
‘nuf said……

Dee said it much better than I (and nicer t’boot)
.
http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/08/26/ted-kennedy-2/comment-page-1/#comment-90359

Paul, thanks for bringing over Dee’s comments. Very well said, Dee.

And the MSM are also to blame. CNN’s coverage of the health-care debate has been dreadful, very much favoring the rightwing propaganda.

In many ways it is unfortunate that Kennedy chose to remain a Senator until he passed away. It is considerably more difficult to discuss the objective political impact of the loss of Kennedy from the Senate when it is all emotionally wrapped up in Kennedy’s actual death. But I will try…

As a liberal, I am having a hard time seeing Kennedy’s departure from the Senate as a tremendous political loss. The fact is that, despite Kennedy’s years in the Senate and his deal-making prowess, Kennedy just doesn’t leave behind much of a liberal track record. In recent years, (like Moynihan before him) Kennedy’s presence was counter-productive. He gave Bush cover for the odious NCLB. He was an easy villain for the GOP to attack. And his liberal vision was decades out of date: You could always count on Kennedy to reliably stick up for some of the more archaic provisions in the Voting Rights Act, but he was never going to challenge the corporate power structure that poses a far greater threat today, particular to minorities, than the legacy of Jim Crow.

Such a trite and typical statement by a Democrat. A cackling hen , who flails around at anything in hopes that something might stick.
.
Is this a cue from Nancy Pelosi, southernbell? It is definitely a statement you would hear her say without a doubt.
.
“Astroturf” anyone??

I think, you know, that he was more interested in getting things done incrementally than in not getting them done at all and being able to demonize the Republicans because they were obstructionists.

Kennedy’s departure from the senate effectively last year was such a loss that we may not get health care reform or insurance reform, and certainly won’t get as much of what we want as we would have if he were vigorous and able to participate in the wheeling and dealing.

I live in a state (Vermont) where the Progressives have been very much “our way or the highway.” Very high minded. But as a result they’ve been very willing to split the vote of the left with the Democrats, with the consequence that we’ve had a Republican Governor ever since Howard Dean left. A little compromise would have meant a great deal of difference to us here. Now this year they’ve made clear there are litmus tests the Democrats have to pass or they will once again challenge with a Progressive candidate for Governor.

If they had enough support to elect someone this would be one thing, but we are very unlikely to elect a progressive Governor. Even Bernie, who is almost beloved here and does not have to worry about his seat in the senate, would probably not have been elected Gorvernot.

Where the hell are the paragraph breaks.

Karen – is there another liberal Democrat prepared and able to reach across the aisle in anything like the way Ted Kennedy did? (I know that my own senator Pat Leahy was voted by Republicans the least likely to reach across the aisle, which I think is too bad).

Kathy, I gather that the paragraph breaks (and color for links) don’t work in the Reply to this comment mode, although they do work in regular posts. In reply, you have to go back to the character style.
.
Yet another reason the Reply to annoys me.

Karen, is there any Republican prepared and able to reach across the aisle in an honest way?

Paul:

And a army investigation cleared the record. Can we expect the same of Sen. Kennedy’s record?

ivy Thanks. That makes sense. I think it’s only in the reply mode I’ve had that trouble

I think, you know, that he was more interested in getting things done incrementally than in not getting them done at all

When it comes to legislation, incrementalism is a poor strategy for implementing fundamental change. Which is why Kennedy spent 30+ years on this issue and America went backwards (Nixon’s proposal for health care reform was as bold as anything we are likely to end up with.

It is a nice counter-factual to believe that if Kennedy were alive now and healthy that we would be in a significantly different place wrt health care. In reality, Kennedy has been a major backer of Obama and, to my knowledge, has never criticized Obama’s willingness to hand “reform” over to the Blue Dogs and spend endless weeks desperately begging for one or two GOP votes.

As far as Vermont politics goes, I don’t pretend to be an expert. Plus, I find that political labels are often more confusing than clarifying. Was Howard Dean a liberal? Most liberals I know loved him. But my understanding was that, as governor, he was considered “centrist” with broad appeal to independents. It was only when he went to D.C. that the corporate whores-friendly DLC treated him like a dirty hippy.

Are progressives in Vermont too dogmatic? I suppose it is possible, but my guess is that, like most progressives, they are tired of having their votes taken for granted and being told to wait for a tomorrow that never comes.

Ivy, this is a question that should be asked and answered.
Karen, how many of Kennedy’s deals were made when the Democratic party was in the minority? Please ask this question now that the Republicans are saying that health care is not done because Kennedy has been missing.

carotexas, I heard a number of comments today about the deals Kennedy made when they were in the minority and I think that’s an important part of this discussion. Especially as the Repubs are behaving now.