TPM LiveWire

Gibbs Denies That White House Is Giving Up On Bipartisanship

Share

Twitter Facebook Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs says the administration is "absolutely not" giving up on efforts to come up with a bipartisan health care reform bill.

Gibbs took questions this morning about chief of staff Rahm Emanuel's comments that Republicans are bent on defeating reform efforts.

"Our goal is to get this done in a bipartisan way," Gibbs said. "There are several more weeks to go in potential negotiations between Republicans and Democrats. I don't know why we would short circuit any of that now."

He added that President Obama would do whatever it takes to get a bipartisan bill.

"He would get in a rocket and fly to the moon if that's what it would take to get everyone together," he said.

Join the Conversation!

54 comments

Recommend Recommend (3)

August 19, 2009 11:56 AM   

I started seeing this blurb pop up on Kos and liberal blogs and just wanted to be the first to warn people not to freak out when they see this.

Gibbs is promoting the official PUBLIC line, which is that Obama stands for outreach and bipartisanship. They don't want to be seen as too trigger happy.

Believe that everyone who needed to hear the go-it-alone message from last night heard it, and it reflects the contingency planning in the WH.

If not, it would be serious malpractice on the part of the WH political people.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 12:33 PM    in reply to fbacon2

Good Lord! Now TPM is fronting the story while the HuffPo goes postal with the Washington Post report on anonymous WH officials trashing progressives over the public option.

I swear, we're our own worst enemy.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:01 PM    in reply to fbacon2

It cracks me up to read just exactly which messages each commentor interprets as the "secret" "nudge, nudge, wink, wink" one.
Hell. Such nonsense.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:08 PM    in reply to 714Day

Josh has a history of being a reporter first and lefty/democrat second so it's no surprise to see all sorts of stuff like this.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:16 PM    in reply to 714Day

Was that an agreement or an accusation (with me representing said commenter interpreting my own 'wink, wink')?

At any rate, I think it's better for everyone's mental health to at least wait to see how these statements fit in the context of not just the day's news, but in terms of the shape of the health care debate as a whole. Most of the readers on this and other sites are very much focused on every single bit of news and are prone to the roller coaster reportings of the 24/7 news cycle.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:28 PM    in reply to fbacon2

Neither, and your parenthetical is frankly unintelligible to me.

Just pointing out that Josh is always happy to present stories in a way that hurts Democrats the most so this is par for the course for him.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:33 PM    in reply to MNPundit

Think that was meant as a reply to 714Day.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:55 PM    in reply to fbacon2

Ah yes, my formatting is screwed up.

Sorry.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 2:52 PM    in reply to fbacon2

I think we are getting such foggy switch-ups 24/7 that we news junkies are prone to resorting to tea leaf stuff. It would be nice if the WH would choose a solid tack and hold to it. I dream the impossible dream.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 4:26 PM    in reply to 714Day

I think this is more or less accurate. The story has boiled down to tea leaf stuff because we don't have a bill, the August recess is a typical news vacuum to be filled by teabagging craziness, and the press is amplifying whatever little stuff their is into big blowups.

Yes, the WH needs to adjust. I think that's what we're seeing.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 2:17 PM    in reply to fbacon2

Its our fault, right? Its not the fault of the anonymous sources or Gibbs. Its our fault because we don't understand the multi-dimenessional chess game that's being played, blah blah blah...

Bullshit, these guy have a very real message problem. Their all over the board, Public Plan isn't essential, nothings changed, etc..

If you look at the Bush run up to the war with Iraq they ALL spoke with one voice. For a horrible cause, yes but they were effective. This White House really looks like the gang that couldn't shoot straight. What happened to that well oiled campaign machine?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 4:24 PM    in reply to henk

I also call BS on equating anything I said with the "multi-dimensional chess" meme, which has become an empty riposte to anyone trying to defend Obama or at least temper the fire from people who are criticizing Obama.

Whatever message problem the WH has is representative of the absence of a bill to defend and the intense media frenzy that is amplifying any perceived shift in their position. They aren't helping themselves by not clamping down more on this problem, but it's a product more of the situation than of their political outfit.

And no, I don't blame you or other TPM readers for any of this--except maybe the widespread panic that accompanies the frustration. It's not productive and it's not proportional to the reality we're contending with in the Congress.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 12:54 PM    in reply to fbacon2

Good Lord--again. Now Josh is piling on, lecturing them on public option v. bipartisanship.

Everyone just chill for a second.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/08/time_for_choosing.php

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:38 PM    in reply to fbacon2

I know. Calm down already, people. This is lip service to "bipartisanship."

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

sbv

user-pic

August 19, 2009 11:58 AM   

as horton would say, say what you mean and mean what you say; but don't ask those of us who worked so hard to get you elected, to believe our lying eyes.

when rush limbaugh first loudly broadcast what became the gop mantra, "we want you to fail," it was not just the ranting of a far right wing radio talkshow host.

when grassley said even if he were given all he would want in a health care reform package, he would not vote for it; he was not just saying one thing for the public consumption and honestly negotiating for a passable compromise behind closed doors.

when dick armey on meet the press conceded what the gop really wants is the abolition of medicare and social security, he was honest.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 12:02 PM   

The GOP will not vote for anything, so give up on being bipartisan.

You must much this clip of Sean Hannity being a huge hypocrite about the public option and the health care debate.

Here is the clip.

http://progressnotcongress.org/?p=2603

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 12:04 PM   

Yeah, I'm not reading too much into this. It's basically saying: Hey, if you guys want to come aboard and work in good faith, hop on. Of course, the White House knows it's not going to happen, and of course the GOP isn't going to go for it. This is for public perception.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 12:35 PM   

This statement sounds eeriely like ole Ari Fleischer's statements on how the Bush White House would "love" to have a bipartisan approach by bringing on "like-minded" Democrats.

Which, in this context, is a good thing.

If they can get a Snowe on board with our plans, fine. But I don't think this signals taking it in the shorts for a Grassley non-committal committal. I think the White House has seen the writing on the wall. That Rubicon is crossed, methinks.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 12:40 PM    in reply to LarsThorwald

That's a good point. It's in the WH's interest to make sure Snowe and Collins don't feel burned. They're the only concrete reason to keep the partisanship from spinning out of control.

The preferred frame is not Dems v. GOP, but reform v. status quo, America v. the Insurance Industry. Collins and Snowe can still vote for reform in the latter two cases.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 12:37 PM   

I know this isn't very eloquent but... SCREW THE REPUBLICANS!! They CLEARLY don't care about passing sound and sane legislation on ANYTHING, so why bother with them? Just for show? Quit wasting time and get together with the people that can actually be worked with and get some reform passed!

I've about had it.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 12:39 PM   

Well I have. A long time ago. So F*** You Gibbs.

C

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 12:40 PM   

The purpose of talkingpointsmemo, as I understand it, is to report on talking points. Which means that they are in the unenviable position of publishing something different nearly every nanosecond--as often as the White House or some beltway ring leader opens his or her mouth. I guess it's important to separate real news from talking points. Both are PR and spin, but there are different audiences for all these quotes by Gibbs and Sebelius and Emanual--we can't expect that they're always talking directly to, or responding directly to us.

So grain of salt all around.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 12:47 PM   

This is probably the most immoral statement I have heard during this entire health care debate. Sean Hannity would rather see 15 million people suffer and die than see health care reform pushed through.

You have to see this to believe it.

http://progressnotcongress.org/?p=2608

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 12:55 PM   

Unbelievable! This White House is consistent with inconsistencies.

It's like amateur hour at this white house.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 12:59 PM   

Somebody please remind Gibbs (and his boss) about the definition of insanity.

He added that President Obama would do whatever it takes to get a bipartisan bill.

Can you say, "one-term President"? I knew you could!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:13 PM   

what would be most helpful is if the WH would come up with a single message to put out today, rather than the 2 or 3 we're being subjected to - and it's not even 10 am on the West Coast. Losing control of the message?!?! What's the message? This is ridiculous. Tuning out.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:15 PM   

Bipartishinship? What part of bipartisanship is the "hitler/nazi" messaging, "death panel" lies, gun toting protesters, and scripted "town hall" screamers represent bipartinsanship?

What's the middle ground? ... Stop portraying Obama as a Nazi and we'll drop the whole health care thing. If I was confronted with some gun toting protester, I would not only drop my liberal position on health care, but also give him all my money.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:20 PM   

in all the confusion and noise, i realize i am still backing this president and this team. man, what a lot of heart...can you imagine waking up everyday and tackling what they are tackling..
i think we have to step up and show support as well as advocate
issues.
I believe we were/are in danger of becoming the silent majority here.
letting the extreme right toe hangnail shout louder than the whole body.
so, body, get moving !

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:20 PM   

What would Obama do without all you backseat drivers?

Never heard of "good cop, bad cop"?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

dtr

user-pic

August 19, 2009 1:30 PM    in reply to Virginia

Who's the bad cop here?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 2:34 PM    in reply to Virginia

I am pretty sure that we need to take Obama's license away from him, because he is too blinded by his need to be liked to be driving anything including the health care debate. Oh, wait...my bad, he isn't driving the health care debate, he's going on vacation. Guess, he is leaving the driving to the folks in the backseat, right?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:30 PM   

And the reason Obama & Company are so in love with "bi-partisanship" is ????????

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:40 PM    in reply to Mauimom

...that it's good PR? Helps win elections? Makes the Republicans look like obstructionists, when they vote no even after Obama has reached out to them?

It's called politics, kid. It's saying "we want to craft bi-partisan legislation" in public while in private saying "fuck those bastards. We've got the votes so the Republicans can all go to hell."

It's not pretty, but it often works (not saying it will in this case, but...) See also: sausage-making.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 2:27 PM    in reply to commie atheist

I'm not really convinced that there is a "fuck you Bastards" in the back ground. That's the problem. They've lost my trust with the reports of deals with big pharma, all this game playing you all keep talking about. He said it'd all be out in the open, but its not so some of us have lost faith and we don't trust that the right thing will happen in the end.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:36 PM   

Sorry Bobby, the Kitchen Table wing has taken over the GOP.

It's not bipartisanship if all the giving is by one faction in the face of the other's declaration that it won't vote for anything no matter what you come up with - it's idiocy.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:36 PM   

The Obama team wants to continue to look like they are being bipartisan for now but they have made it perfectly CLEAR that they have NO PROBLEM going with just Democrats in the end if they have to.

Expect the trigger to be pulled in mid-September.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:39 PM    in reply to Maritza

Bingo! The Bushies were supposedly in favor of bipartisanship, too. They said it! It must have been true!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:39 PM   

I have them right where I want them.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:41 PM   

Folks need to calm the hell down. It sounds as if some of you have no idea what White House Press Secretaries are for. It's Gibbs' job to read the official White House spin. Which hasn't changed since the campaign: bipartisanship, working together to solve problems, yadda yadda yadda.

Meanwhile, the un-official White House arm-twister points out the obvious: you can't work with people whose only goal is to prevent any work from getting done.

The official message: we'll still work with anyone who is willing to work with us. The unofficial one: look how far we've gone to try to work with these unreasonable dickheads, only to have them announce publicly that they won't support anything at all.

We might be able to chalk up the mixed messages about public option from last weekend to the same strategy. No sooner had the White House suggested that they might drop the public option than the Republicans came out immediately and started attacking co-ops. The message that's being reinforced over and over and over again: look how reasonable we're being. We've suggested several different ways this could be done to get the support and cooperation of the Republicans. They've made it clear that there is no reform of any type they will support because they don't believe that reform is important. That's why they haven't offered an alternative plan and why nothing we have offered is acceptable to them.

It's a good strategy, even though it's confusing at times when you're getting those mixed messages. But they are accomplishing some things with it: turning out supporters of public option and luring the obstructionists into revealing their true agenda.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 2:34 PM    in reply to JennOfArk

Thank you...

Although I am skeptical about the WH and Dems actually playing hardball in the same manner as Repubs did during 43's admin.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:50 PM   

One can only expect that "whatever" it takes does not include selling out the American People to appease the minority of Americans who did not vote for Democrats. The president should be trying to appease those voters who actually voted Democratic.

There is no health insurance reform until the insurance robber baron corporations are actually regulated by setting maximum costs to Americans and minimum restrictions on delivery of health care; whether this is done by competition or regulations!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:53 PM   

Mr. Gibbs, I would like to inform you that the balustrade you and the other Blue Dogs are sliding down is fast turning into a razor blade. Dunno if you are familiar with this but you are just about ready to loose your collective asses. If you would remove both the blinders and ear plugs, look and listen for a few minutes to the sound of Bipartisanship that your friends the Repigs are issuing, you should be hearing their contented grunting at the troughs. The Republican Party has nary a thought of being bipartisan on any issue, they are so completely stupid that they still think that they won the last election and that Gawd speaks through the mouth of King George II and his friend Little Dick.

Get a clue peep's, These clowns have been bought and paid for by the "for profit" health care / insurance industry.

The majority of the people know that medicare / medicaid are programs that work. Ask any retired military person or anyone else who is qualified for the program.. Ask your federal government officials such as your congress critter... They all are on it. We get good health care and there is NO Government intervention by bean counters telling us what tests we can have or not have, Doctors make the decisions not some secretary in an office half a continent away who knows nothing of medical proceedures or much of anything else for that matter.

Just this Old Chief's 2 cents

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:56 PM   

Oh, brother.

I don't know why we would short circuit any of that now.

How about because they publicly announced that they will vote against your bill no matter how many concessions are in it?

It would be great to see Gibbs knock them for those bad faith comments. Maybe he did....

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:58 PM   

Pure spin.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 2:02 PM   

If there is no public option there will be no Democratic majority or Obama in the white house in 4 years. I don't know why he doesn't stand up for the people who elected him and stop pandering to the far right. It's disgusting.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 2:14 PM   

What I am wondering is why every "murican" I see gobbling smart pills, doesn't realize those "little green round things" were manufactured by the rabbit.

I may be old, but I am not stupid! I have been to more goat ropings than the average bear. And folks, this one is of World Class Caliber.

The whole world is watching, so perhaps you should quiet down and let them think that you are stupid. Instead you let those who speak trough their collective asses do the talking and thereby proving that stupid is as stupid does....

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 2:28 PM    in reply to raiatean

Me finks, mayhaps, you've eaten a few too many of the green pills yerself cuz I'm all like, "WTF is this guy's point?"...and off the topic, do average bears attend goat ropings? No, seriously, I have no clue as to bears and goat ropings. Now, on topic...the Obama administration is coming apart at the seams and they just have no idea what whether or not they are coming or going. The Repubs have them tied in knots. I'd normally be mad about this stuff, but it is actually quite funny. I mean, we all had such high hopes for Obama and he turned out to be THE WORST possible option. I admit, he punked me almost as bad as Grassley punked him over the public option.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 2:17 PM   

It sounds as if some of you have no idea what White House Press Secretaries are for.

You must think they're for making the boss sound like a fucking idiot. Because after the wave of Rethug statements as to how NOTHING the Democrats could offer them would lead them to actually vote for any health reform bill, that's exactly the effect Gibbs continuing to wank about bipartisanship.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 2:21 PM   

Old Barack W. Bush would do anything to secure a bipartisan bill...he'd even orbit the moon to bring folks together and, no doubt, the Waffler-in-Public Option will get right on that just as soon as he gets back from vacation at the ultra-upscale Martha's Vineyard. LOL...I can't believe I voted for this tool! I swear, the Obama people have just decided to give up...either that or they are the most incompetent administration since Hoover.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 2:21 PM   

"Bipartisanship" cannot be a one-way street. The Republicans have adopted the negotiating practices of the Communist Party. Remember "Mr. Nyet", Andrei Gromyko, who made a career of rejecting all compromises? Or the Soviet negotiator maxim: "What's mine is mine, what's yours is negotiable"? The result was that any concession made or even hinted at was immediately pocketed as the new baseline from which to "start negotiations".

Who would have thought that the Right were such faithful students of Marx, Lenin and Stalin?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 2:38 PM   

"We were for the public option that got in the way of the bipartisanship that wasn't attainable even without a public option. So now the public option isn't that important even though the president ran for president on health care reform including a public option, because now we have cut deals with pharma and the AMA and everything is okay, except that the people who elected us are starting to feel betrayed because they are starting to figure out that we're a lot less liberal than they thought we were. In fact, we're a lot less liberal and Bill and Hil. You really should have know that." Anonymous White (really white) House source.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 3:29 PM   

I just think the White House is in a complete meltdown. It is like watching a million clowns trying to get out and back into a VW Bug before the light changes color. The Obama administration is become a farce and I, a onetime HUGE supporter, just can't help but laughing my butt off. Why? Because I was actually foolish enough to think Barack was serious about all that change he was a bringin' to the White House. If a cross between Carter and Hoover is change, well, we sure got change...short changed!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 3:52 PM   

With over 75 percent of the american public never having been in the military, and 80 percent of the military never have been in the Navy, I understand completely your lack of knowledge on goat ropings. It's an old navy term, sorta like a "Chinese Fire Drill" cept it is racially correct... Like I said I AM old, and been retired from the before many of you were even thought of, let alone born....

Ah...... The New AmericA!!!! Makes me glad that I became French! And, you wonder why the world considers you all to be mentally deficient.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 5:45 PM   

"He added that President Obama would do whatever it takes to get a bipartisan bill." He might also have added: "If a meaningless bill is what it takes to get Republicans to sign-on, then, he's for a meaningless bill" or "If the American people get little from the bill, he's for sacrificing their needs, in order to achieve 'bipartisanship'." The President and his advisors are delusional or disingenuous. Either way, panting after the fantasy of 'bipartisanship' is not what got Obama elected; it was "Change You Can Believe In".

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Leave a comment

Your response:

Follow us!

Most Popular