The Computer Wore Menace Shoes

Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.), yells, "You lie!" during President Barack Obama's speech to Congress Wednesday. Democratic leaders are considering a resolution condemning his outburst, even though Obama accepted an apology.

Democratic leaders in Congress are threatening to proceed with a resolution condemning Rep. Joe Wilson’s “You lie!” outburst during President Barack Obama’s health care address to the legislature Wednesday.

Uh, Democrats … do you realize what you’re doing? You’re acting like the stereotypical Republican you’ve been so glad to get a majority over because now you can get things done. By focusing on Wilson’s heckling, which he already apologized to Obama for, you’re not working on the health care debate.

And if you aren’t working on the No. 1 national priority, then you aren’t getting things done.

“How great it’ll be to have a president from our party and a majority in Congress,” you thought. “Imagine all the wonderful, socially responsible things we can accomplish,” you whispered excitedly among yourselves.

Yet here you are, stuck on two words yelled out during the president’s speech.

“I am not going to apologize again. I apologized to the president on Wednesday night. I was advised then that, ‘Thank you, now let’s get on to a civil discussion of the issues,’” Wilson said. “I’ve apologized one time. The apology was accepted by the president, by the vice president, who I know. I am not apologizing again.”

Not all Republicans are sticking up for Wilson, either. Texas Sen. John Cornyn acknowledged Wilson was out of line.

“Well, there’s a time and a place for everything, and that was not the time or the place for that kind of comment,” he said. “This is not the time to be demonizing anybody, calling anybody names on either side. This is a time to try to work together to solve a practical problem.”

And if that’s not enough for Democrats, all they need to know that Obama is over it and ready to get back to a civil health care debate instead of stew over something so insignificant in comparison.

“See, this is part of what happens. I mean, it just – it becomes a big circus instead of us focusing on health care,” Obama said on “60 Minutes.”

So get over it already, Democrats. There are bigger fish to fry, and every time you defer to such a ticky-tack issue rather than shrugging it off and returning to the real matter at hand, you stir up doubt in your ability to be the “ruling party.”

Just six months ago, President Barack Obama called for an end to partisanship in Congress. The confirmation hearings for Sonia Sotomayor, the first Supreme Court justice picked by a Democrat in 15 years, prove that legislators haven’t heeded Obama’s request. And that was just day one.

If you can come up with a better reason than partisanship to explain why Republicans vehemently dislike his pick while Democrats vehemently defend it, I’d like to hear it. (Although, it’s going to be hard, considering Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., came out and said the confirmation “is mostly about liberal and conservative politics.” At least he’s honest.)

Sonia Sotomayor answers a question at her confirmation hearings.

The confirmation committee’s Democratic chair, Sen. Patrick Leahy, warned Republicans off attacking Sotomayor at the beginning of the proceedings. “Let no one demean this extraordinary woman,” he said.

Republicans complied, but they weren’t out to fast track her to the bench. Barring a “complete meltdown,” Graham said, Sotomayor would be confirmed, but out of power and out of popularity, the GOP has a chance to remind Americans it’s still relevant by debating Obama’s decision making.

And so it did, with most of the attacks directed at Obama’s desire for a justice with empathy. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, pointed out that Obama opposed Janice Rogers Brown, a black candidate, when he was a senator because he questioned whether she could set aside her personal views as a justice.

“But today,” said Hatch, “President Obama says that personal empathy is an essential ingredient in judicial decisions.”

Sen. John Kyl, R-Arizona, said Obama was “simply outside the mainstream in his statements about how judges should decide cases.” And Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said no one should vote for a nominee with any degree of prejudice.

“Call it empathy, call it prejudice or call it sympathy, but whatever it is, it’s not law,” Sessions said.

The idea of judicial empathy was well known going into the confirmation process. Obama said he wanted his candidate to have it. Nobody thinks it’s a good idea for a jurist to be swayed by anything but the law. Yet here the two parties are, on opposite sides of the issue.

It could be that Democrats are out to even the score after feeling stung by President George W. Bush’s nominees, Chief Justice John G. Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., said the court “has not kept the promises of modesty or humility made” when the two were nominated.

The more likely explanation, however, is we’re just not ready to give up partisan politics. One-eighth of Obama’s term has passed, and it took just one day to show that no progress has been made in moving past partisanship. Obama has really been able to get anything done through Congress because his party is in firm control. (John McCain alienating some Republicans to the point of endorsing Obama didn’t hurt, either.)

Every president could make a big show of wanting to do away with partisan politics as usual, but that’s just what they are – usual. Pick an issue – abortion, gun control, health care – and chances are the parties hold opposing stances on it and can’t be moved in the name of progress.

That attitude has pervaded the electorate, too. There’s no debate among Americans about issues. You’re on my side, or you’re wrong. Perhaps it’s a good thing there’s only two major political parties. Imagine the headaches that would pop up with three opposing ideologies.