Obama’s barbs fuel partisan bickering

Republican lawmakers searched Thursday for ways to support President Obama, but said his calls for bipartisanship fell flat amidst his lecturing tone and the repeated barbs he aimed at them during his State of the Union address Wednesday night.

The stark speech seemed to draw lines not only between parties, but between branches of government and even between the two chambers of Congress. With six Supreme Court justices seated in front of him, Mr. Obama attacked last week’s campaign-finance ruling, and at two other points, he had House Democrats standing on their feet and applauding as he challenged their Senate colleagues to speed up the legislative process.

As for partisanship, all told, there were more than 30 times when Democrats stood to applaud while Republicans sat on their hands, and only a handful of occasions when Republicans applauded the president while Democrats did not.

“This was my 30th State of the Union message, and I have got to say that I don’t remember one that was more partisan than this one,” said Rep. David Dreier, California Republican. “The idea of taking on the United States Supreme Court, the idea of looking over to us and saying to us that, rather than listening to the polls, we should do what’s right.”

Mr. Obama has promised to try to do more outreach, and said in his address to Congress that he would like to begin holding monthly meetings with the leaders of both Republicans and Democrats in Congress.

“I know you can’t wait,” he joked.

Both sides said they’re willing to talk, though it was unclear what they would talk about. Much of the back-and-forth Thursday seemed to center on whether the president will actually listen, and what Republicans actually have to say.

Mr. Obama will address House Republicans on Friday in Baltimore, and along the way he will stop at a small business and announce a tax credit for businesses that hire new employees or boost wages or hours for existing employees.

But that may already be putting him on the wrong foot with Republicans, who said the proposal is actually a redux of a Carter administration policy and is unlikely to help much in spurring new hiring or investment.

Republicans also were taking umbrage at Mr. Obama’s attack on the Supreme Court, which last week ruled free-speech protections apply to corporations’ and unions’ political ad spending. Mr. Obama warned the ruling would “open the floodgates for special interests, including foreign corporations, to spend without limit in our elections,” and he called for Congress to curb the court ruling.

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., one of the majority justices in the 5-4 decision, who was sitting on the House floor in front of Mr. Obama, was visibly angered by the attack, and shook his head and appeared to be muttering.

Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, Vermont Democrat and chairman of the Judiciary Committee, continued the attack on the Senate floor Thursday, saying it was the first time in more than three decades in the Senate that he was compelled to use a floor speech to denounce a ruling.

The attacks, particularly those from Mr. Obama, outraged Republicans.

Sen Orrin G. Hatch, Utah Republican, called it “rude,” and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican, said the president was “completely wrong” in saying foreigners could meddle in U.S. elections. He pointed to both law and Federal Election Commission regulations he said remain intact to ban that sort of activity.

The White House said the court should have dealt specifically with the issue in its ruling, and spokesman Bill Burton said Justice Alito’s reaction is a reminder that in American democracy “powerful members of the government at high levels can disagree in public and in private. This is one of those cases.”

Story Continues →