Will Republicans Take Responsibility for Lies About “Socialism”?
 Printer-friendly
|
 Email article |
Related subjects: Economic Recovery, Healthcare Policy, J.E. Robertson, Obama administration, Opinion, U.S. Economy, U.S. news, U.S. Politics, Vote 2010 Comments Off
The Republican party has developed an increasingly obstructionist, radical ideology, based on fundamental distortions of the process of government and the aims of opponents. Party strategists openly admit there is a calculation that such distortions will “reframe” the Democratic agenda in a light average Americans view as hostile to their interests, and so indirectly, will generate support for the Republican party. But they have failed to produce viable policy proposals that deal with the pressing crises of this historical moment.
Analysts from both sides of the political spectrum have warned loudly and persistently that such a strategy, devoid of productive policy work and based almost entirely on devotion to uniform opposition to passing productive legislation, will harm the party over the long-term. Polls show no discernible increase in support for the Republican party, even where support for the specifics of Pres. Obama’s agenda has been eroded.
There are concerns the Republican party’s stated strategy of total opposition to Pres. Obama, on all fronts, will backfire, leading to a split in the party and the rise of the most credible third-party threat in a century. Now, conservatives in the party have produced a 10-point “purity” checklist, which they say must be used to determine whether the Republican party will endorse any individual running for office. One of the ten items is reportedly a commitment to decisive opposition to Pres. Obama’s entire agenda.
With the president still popular, and his approval ratings apparently tied to the demand that his agenda succeed —and with Republicans in Congress by far the least trusted political element in Washington—, such a strategy could be, in the phrasing a former McCain aide used to describe the rise of Sarah Palin, “an electoral catastrophe” for the Republican party. It is expected Republicans will gain seats in Congress in 2010, because the president’s party almost always loses more than a dozen seats in the first mid-term elections of his first term in office.
But whether such a gain will be seen as endorsement of an increasingly radicalized Republican party or as simply a critique of Congressional Democrats by independent voters (the typical explanation of midterm “corrective” elections) remains a serious question. Pres. Obama is a patient campaigner; he repeatedly trounces rivals who spend months assailing him in the most improbable and outlandish ways, striking firmly and decisively with policy successes and coalition-building efforts that resonate with the electorate.
He is already winning the key battle over vocabulary, on the healthcare reform debate. A year ago, as president-elect, and two years ago, as senator from Illinois, Barack Obama was demanding “quality, affordable healthcare for all Americans” and Republicans were touting the need for “tort reform”. Now, however, Republicans are denouncing Democratic health insurance reform legislation for “not doing enough to control costs” and for not adequately expanding “patient choice”. Amazingly, they are defending Medicare as a vital government program that must be prioritized, funded and saved, and they are pushing Obama to guarantee its funding.
Whether they know it or not, the Republicans have fallen into the same political trap as Obama’s other unfortunate rivals have continuously done: after Obama effectively frames the debate, explains all the moving parts of policy, and demands action, his opponents attempt to attack him by entering into debate about whether his plans are workable. They use his vocabulary, because it proves to resonate with the public, and they seek to out-do him on the same policy turf. The result has consistently been the elevation of Obama’s agenda and the ceding of the coveted political middle ground.
Responsible Republicans have to take responsibility for the lies they are telling about Pres. Obama’s agenda. While he uses democratic processes to reform the regulatory framework —whether on energy, finance or health insurance— in order to strengthen market dynamics and spur innovation, growth and quality of product, they absurdly harp on about rampant “socialism” and a “Stalinist takeover”. Once Obama’s reforms pass, and it is clear that no such cataclysmic event has taken place, the Republicans will be left with the empty shell of dead rhetoric, out of date and out of touch.
This might be a problem not only for the Republican party, but for the process of representative government itself: if one of the two major parties so totally abandons the obligations of responsible public service, it leaves a void in the political system, which will lend itself to the rise of radical factions, splinter groups and the ideology of division and hate. This would be disastrous for the Republican party’s long-term goals, but also for the welfare of democracy in general across the US.
Real government of the people, by the people and for the people, requires balance. It requires responsible public-service action on both ends of the political spectrum, and ideally a vibrant middle-ground where practical solutions and issue-relevant coalitions take priority over inflexible devotion to ideology and partisan warfare. If Republicans show themselves to be so extremist as to institute a “purity checklist” for candidates, they will end up looking like the Soviet-style authoritarians, while Obama governs from the pragmatist center.
| Printer-friendly
|
Email article |
CafeSentido Partner Sites: