Thursday, October 29, 2009

Monopartisanship

I guess if you look hard enough, there’s probably an upside to most situations. Every time the “news” people report on a political event or process, they are bound to inform us that, while the Democrats have to attempt to balance their initiatives so as to appease both the liberal and the not-so-liberal wings of the party, whilst the Repubs present a solid front—united in their nay-saying. They have “No” down to a fine art it would seem. So, what might the upside to such a situation be? Well it occurs to me that, if the Repubs have settled in as the official government nay-sayers, marching in lockstep to their very right wing drummers, then it no longer matters what the Dems actually do. It has been established through multiple attempts at “bipartisanship” that, it matters little what one promises the “loyal” opposition, they will, in the end, say No. But I regard that as a freeing signal. Now, it would seem, the Dems can do whatever they like. The Repubs will say no, but everyone already knows that.
So, on health care “reform” they should proceed with a public option in whatever form they can devise that will satisfy their own conservative wing. And on Afghanistan, the President is free to do what he believes to be in the best interest of the American people, and the world actually. And on government regulation of our various “too big to fail” commercial entities, regulate away.
Now, with every upside, there is always a potential downside—the yin and yang I guess. The downside is that, whatever they do, the Dems will own the solution, and the repubs will use any negative outcomes as ammunition during the election. So, it behooves the Dems to be sensible and to attempt to craft solutions that might actually work—i.e., produce the intended results without any awful unintended consequences. But any successes can also be claimed as “mono-partisan”, i.e., without regard to the “loyal” opposition.
And, Guys, lay off the Fox News shtick. They are not worth the time it takes to blow them to hell. So, forget about them. They’re an entertainment outlet, not a news outlet. Treat them accordingly. That means, you should laugh at them more often.
Post a Comment