What's the Difference between Partisan and Politics?

The short answer: Not much.

The shorter answer: nm. (lol, omg, g2g, insert emoticon here)

The long answer: There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of difference between partisanship that President Obama and Arkansas Gov. Mike Beebe lament so fervently in their orations and the axiomatic politics that — often begrudgingly by most — defines the sport.

There's a whole screenplay's worth of rhetoric bloviated by politicians, local, national and otherwise, about bipartisanship. Come on people, now, smile on your brother. Everybody get together, try to love one another right now. It's very heart-felt and I believe very honest at times. Everybody likes somebody who gets along. Nobody likes the guy at the bar who walks in, smashes a bottle on the ground for no apparent reason and picks fights with the first guy they see. Politicians have a need to be liked, and nobody likes exclusion. Bipartisanship has also become a synonym for open-mindedness, which isn't necessarily so. There can be two logical conclusions that are incompatible with one another, thus causing a partisan divide. So bipartisanship is acclaimed by the masses.

You have these politicians who have made careers out of talking the talk. Then when it comes to walking the walk, they do so like the fat kid in gym class jumping rope; They can keep it up for awhile, but only for so long.

There are two instances of note, one local and one national, where the name 'partisan' was attempted to be seared on the flesh of political opponents, like an ominous scarlet letter. Neither were necessary as they both reigned in the majority, yet neither really stuck as anything out of the ordinary day-to-day routine, as these two Dimmesdales might have you believe.

First, locally, the tumult over tobacco in the Arkansas legislator drew a quick line between Republicans and Democrats. While Republicans, who columnist John Brummett rightly dubs "tax-cutters," quetched the notion of a 56-cent increase on cigarettes, Democratic leaders balked, as if such a thing as fundamental toward the nature of a Republican like tax cuts was shockingly distasteful or something.

Beebe ran to the papers — an odd place to go these days if you're wanting to get some information out to people (zing!) — to decry these Republicans for being what he called "overly partisan," and "divisive politics."

House Speaker Robbie Wills...Well, we've gone over his contributions toward Arkansas Republicans.

Sure, they're gumming up swift legislation, but swift and hasty can run around the same pace. The reason multiple parties and sides have developed, from the days of Publicus and the Federalist Papers (number ten, specifically) is so that all sides of an argument can be heard. Overly partisan? How about doing their job.

At the national front, president Obama has claimed that "the party is over," and rightly so. With a stagnant economy, nobody's got enough money for streamers or balloons anymore, and Obama is proposing a whopping stimulus bill that would call for a tremendous expanse of government on numerous levels.

Without getting into whether or not this is a necessarily good thing (that's another whole article that somebody much smarter than me will have to write), Republicans are not only known as "tax-cutters" but as small government types. Brummett didn't say so in his column, but you can take my word for it; It's one of their sticking points. Aside from the gravity of the circumstances surrounding such a bill, you can pencil in most conservatives to not be thrilled by this idea.

So Obama broke his silky smooth character and went off on the House GOP members who unanimously voted against his bill, equating them to sheep of the Rush Limbaugh flock. At a Democratic rally, he lost his composure a bit as he stressed the importance of this bill. Watch out; now Barack Obama means business. There's going to be no telling how many furrowed brows and sternly-worded letters flying out of the gate, roasting their targets with nothing but charitable malice.

Not surprisingly, few Republicans have shifted their position. In fact, the oft wined-and-dined John McCain, who many expected to go with Obama's plan at the get-go, is one of the most vocal opponents. And why? Do people really think that this is an us-against them matter? It's against most conservative principles. Just overlook that whole George W. thing. He was kind of bad for business across the board and across the aisle.

Since when has bipartisanship become a noteworthy issue? It kind of seems to me to be the name of the game. Sides differ. Lines are drawn. Conclusions are made. People gripe. What am I missing here?


How for some things that I do like:

• Sadly, the last eight years weren't a dazzling example of good policy and many would like the Left to return the favor of a nice legislative kick to the junk. But Obama is still striving for bipartisanship. I like that somebody is attempting to keep his word about that.
  
  He's acting like he needs the Republicans, which he most certainly does not, being backed by the House, Senate, MSNBC, ESPN, Kellogg's cereal, Pizza Hut, Mountain Dew, Oprah and most importantly of all, LeBron. He seems to both fully back his agenda with complete confidence, yet understands the opposition, even if he does vent in public. He understands the alluring warmth of bipartisanship, so much so he might be posing for it if it's not available.

• I like seeing the GOP stick to their guns. There's a lot of publicized support behind this deal, and it can be easy to get swept up in the hoopla. And for those in the Arkansas House who crossed party lines? That's okay by me, too. So long as that's actually what they believed in, while my instincts lead me to believe that isn't necessarily what happened.
  
  Some closed-door, behind-the-scenes meetings, threats against legislators never being able to get their meaningful legislation off the ground? Wouldn't put it past some people.

• Finally, I like seeing people make a big deal out of this stuff. Like it's important. Bipartisan, partisan; It's not going to make a heck of a lot of difference. Votes are just numbers, after all. Politics will go on, even if everyone is on the same side.