TPM LiveWire

Jarrett: GOP Leaders 'More And More Extreme And More And More Marginalized'

Spread the word and support this article on Reddit!


Senior White House Adviser Valerie Jarrett

Share

Twitter Facebook Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

Senior White House Adviser Valerie Jarrett said on ABC's This Week this morning that the GOP civil war in the NY-23 special congressional election shows that the Republican Party's leadership has become "more and more extreme, and more and more marginalized."

Yesterday, moderate GOP candidate Dede Scozzafava suspended her campaign after polls showed her trailing both the Democrat and a Conservative Party candidate that many prominent Republicans had declared their support for.

"It's rather telling when the Republican Party forces out a moderate Republican," Jarrett said. "And it says, I think, a great deal about where the Republican Party leadership is right now."

I think it's becoming more and more extreme, and more and more marginalized.

"And if that's the direction they want to go -- fine," Jarrett said.

House Minority Leader John Boehner, appearing earlier on CNN, suggested that the NY-23 situation is the exception rather than the rule and that "we want moderates in our party."

Regardless, Democrats are now trying to convince Scozzafava to back Democrat Bill Owens in the NY-23 race. "We would love to, of course, have her support," Jarrett said.

Pushed by George Stephanopoulos about President Obama's promises to get bipartisan backing for many of his policies, Jarrett tried to shift blame back to the GOP.

"What we've seen from the Republicans is really the desire to have the status quo, and George, that's not acceptable anymore."

Obama, she said, has "reached out. He's listened. He's reached across the aisle."

"Ultimately it's up to the Republicans to decide if they want to be a constructive force and come to the table and work with us in a positive way," she said. "The door is always open."

And on the recent announcement that Afghan President Hamid Karzai's main rival was dropping out of the Nov. 7 runoff election, Jarrett said that "we don't think that it's gonna add a complication to the strategy."

Late Update: Here's the video.

Join the Conversation!

27 comments

Recommend Recommend (5)

November 1, 2009 10:39 AM   

I call this the GOP "clinched fist" policy. The party of No cannot compromise nor negotiate. That might show maturity.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 11:36 AM    in reply to gonzone

"The tighter you clench your fist, the more star systems will slip between your fingers."

--Princess Leia, speaking to Darth Vader from the original Star Wars

"A hand can do a lot of things. A fist can only do damage."

--Anon.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 11:41 AM    in reply to Doc Magnus

Are Republicans out of touch with main stream?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=6410

.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 3:05 PM    in reply to JeffB

Fuck you and your punk ass polls

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 3:33 PM    in reply to gonzone

That refusal to cooperate or compromise is, as nearly as I can tell, a standard technique among fascist right-wing parties trying to take over control of the government.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 4:09 PM    in reply to Richardxx

It's the same with BOTH parties!

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 10:58 AM   

We will probably always have a two party system in this country (not that I think that that's the best form of process) but it seems that one of these parties will no longer be what we call "The Republican Party."

On the plus side for them they did last over 150 years.

The real question is when the Democrats split up, which side will get to keep the name "Democrat."

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 11:33 AM    in reply to mjshep

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"

Will Rogers

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 3:41 PM    in reply to mjshep

The Republicans were marginalized into nothing by 1933, and did not begin to recover nationally until after WW II. The Republican Presidential nomination in 1952 was considered a shoe-in for the conservative until the moderates selected Ike and nominated him. He still was forced to choose Nixon from the hard right to try to hold the party together.

I don't think we have seen the end of the Republican party. But if Obama gets a health care bill, they are out of power nationally for a while. And if the Republicans can block serious health care reform, then it's still all up in the air.

You can't beat something with nothing, and nasty as the conservative Republicans are, they are something. If the Democrats can (won't?) seriously deliver on their promises, they are nothing.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 11:23 AM   

My guess for what the ultimate name of the Republican Party will be:

"Palin, party of four?"

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 11:35 AM   

Hopefully, Jarrett is channeling Obama on this. Maybe he'll get off of the "bipartisan" wagon and board the train of correct thinking.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 11:43 AM    in reply to 714Day

I suspect you are doomed to disappointment. Obama appears to genuinely believe in reaching out. But I don't think he's so naive that he doesn't see what's going on. He was much more polite to his opponents in the primary and the GE than we wanted and it worked out. Now, whether by design or not, he's got the Republicans criticizing him on absolutely everything while having no plan of their own on anything.

I don't get, however, the apparent fascination with Sen. Snowe.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 2:36 PM    in reply to 714Day

I am still convinced that Obama's 'bipartisan' strategy has been a clever one: it has shown the Republicans to be more and more rigid, obstructionists and obtuse than ever before. He's accomplished a lot by marginalizing them from power in just 9 or 10 months.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 4:11 PM    in reply to MyMy

What power?

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 12:00 PM   

While Ms. Jarret is entitled to puff the administration's pastry, it is telling that she does not recognize the role of her own party in the divisiveness rampant in the Washington community. The "we won, get over it" attitude is creating...or rather, reinforcing...the do-nothing tradition of our government.

It is that do-nothing tradition that is wounding our nation.

That is not what Obama was elected to do!

If it requires a bipartisan approach to get things done, then he should...must...embrace the notion.

I'm sorry. The time for business-as-usual is over.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 12:10 PM    in reply to TheOwl

If it requires a bipartisan approach to get things done, then he should...must...embrace the notion.

Please inform your Republican friends of this wonderful bipartisanship you so desire.

Frankly, the "do-nothing tradition that is wounding our nation" today is a result of the search for bipartisanship with an opposition that has no desire to do anything but obstruct. The nation would be far better off with an administration that just went ahead in a partisan, but effective, manner.

Oh, and we won, get over it, or get with the program and work with the winners to get something done.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 1:00 PM    in reply to mjshep

"Bipartisan" hasn't been in evidence anywhere near the halls of Congress for years. The Democrat-controlled Congress passed the Civil Rights Act in 1965 with the help of a lot of Republicans. Never would that happen now. When the Republicans were the majority in the Senate by one senator, Sen. Daschle and the Democrats insisted on "sharing" power in the committees. Of course, the wishy-washy Republicans went along with that noble idea. As soon as Sen. Jeffers was convinced to jump ship and Daschle was Majority Leader, all that "sharing" was out the window. Not surprising, though. When the Democrats are the "loyal opposition" their obstructionism is overlooked. When Republicans stick to their guns (sometimes literally) against the attempts of the Democrats to expand government beyond anything the founders could have possibly imagined, they are "the party of NO." I say it's about time SOMEBODY said NO!! PS. You did win in 2006 and 2008, but if the Democrats continue on the path they are on you may be disappointed in the results of the 2010 and 2012 elections. We shall see.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 1:29 PM    in reply to Subrider1962

That was in 1964. Today, you could count on one hand the number of Congressional Republicans who would vote for it. Treating blacks like human beings - too much government interference.
And I'm sure you'd agree with them.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 4:23 PM    in reply to hoosiertransplant

That is just asinine! just like they want to see people die.. Blah Blah Blah

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 11:03 PM    in reply to Odel Roo

They probably don't much want people to die so much as they simply do not care if people die. They have no trouble rationalizing that if something bad happens to you, you must have deserved it ... and principled religious fanatics everywhere agree!

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 4:20 PM    in reply to TheOwl

I am so in agreement... it is funny reading these comments in not only these comments, but the same on the other isle each smacks down the others like the others have been doing the same damn thing for years. The only people getting the short end of the stick are the general public.

This Hatfield/McCoy or Sunni/Shia shit has got to stop. Not a damn thing gets done anymore. Look at congressional approval and it has been in the toilet for years and that is BOTH parties.

This whole health care "crisis" is a complete and utter sham. The only beneficiary of the reform will be the US Gov. We the people are getting screwed and we better come together quick on both sides and remember we are Americans first!

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 8:28 PM    in reply to Odel Roo

We are the government!! Peddle your b/s somewhere else.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 8:40 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

Really?? Aren't you clever... so full of wit and insight. Fill me in on how you conclude "We are the Government".

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 11:13 PM    in reply to Odel Roo

OMG! Harvard's recent study of premature deaths in America due being uninsured or underinsured estimated nearly 45,000 deaths every year. That's another 911 every month, month after month......

But our rethuglican friends write those lives off in a moment as just the price of doing business. Tut tut. Who cares Odel Roo? It wasn't you this time eh??

Conservatives value a limitless immoral selfishness above all else.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 12:06 PM   

The people who thought "Amos & Andy" to be an accurate portrayal of black families, now think Al Sharpton represents a segment of political thought among black people when he represents nobody and nothing other than himself.

It is not journalism to put this unrepentant, race baiting clown on a panel of a major Sunday morning program to debate Ed Gillespie and George Will. It is, instead a beltway-like attempt to paint alternative views as absurd and foolish. ABC News should be ashamed and apologize and George Stephanopoulos should hide his head in shame.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 3:23 PM   

Limbaugh got FOX Sunday, so what's wrong with Sharpton on ABC? Who should be ashamed?

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 1, 2009 7:19 PM   

FOX,as we understand it, is not a news organization. Its mission is political propaganda. They used to have a show which had a guy named Hannity show how weak kneed liberals are by his ability to pummel some little whiny nobody named Colmes into a hole, but who expected anything else from them ABC News purports to be something else, but maybe they are not since they bring out a clown to represent progressive thought to underscore the meme that liberals are lunatics. It's Hannity and Colmes all over again.

ABC should be ashamed. FOX is beyond shame.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

Leave a comment

Your response:

Follow us!

Most Popular

TPM Stories Now Surging on