At times discourse on the Internets can be a rich source of solutions to our political problems. One such solution to the Medicaid impasse between the republican controlled Missouri General Assembly and sane people in our state is offered by dpm at Balloon Juice (in reference to Iowa). Take the same Federal money and relabel the program.
….as long as the program is called something like the “Non Obamacare Medical Workhouse Plan for Undeserving Moochers Who Should be Shamed”….
The republican General Assembly just might go for it with slight modification – refuse the Federal dollars and completely defund it. The shaming part could remain.
High Broderism – Also frequently seen as merely “Broderism.” A fetishistic attachment to bipartisanship for bipartisanship’s sake; reflexive adherence to false equivalencies, regardless of whether what one side says is patently insane. The result of forty years of believing that Dirty Fucking Hippies may be hiding under your bed. Whereby a center-right pundit, often Broder himself, decrees that bipartisanship is a good thing and can be achieved if only everyone would agree with the center-right pundit. For the last ten years or so, High Broderism has been the shorter version of virtually every op-ed from David Broder.
Like this would be something to celebrate? Apparently so:
Senator Claire McCaskill The nonpartisan National Journal released their annual rankings of members of Congress from liberal-to-conservative today-and Claire has landed exactly in the moderate middle, ranking #50 out of 100….
That is, ignoring the reality that the Overton Window has been moved so far to the right that what once was “moderate” is now considered extreme left and:
….the GOP knows that the middle DOES matter. They know that by playing to their base in very well-crafted ways, they can shift the very definition of what the middle is. By introducing radicalism into the public discourse (and taking initial heat for it), whatever used to be radical within this context becomes moderate by comparison….
And, our “all things are equal” old media’s view is, not surprisingly:
Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., found the Senate’s sweet spot, at least according to a ranking by National Journal, a nonpartisan Washington publication. The Journal released its much-anticipated annual rankings Friday, and McCaskill landed in the No. 50 slot on the liberal-to-conservative scale….
….Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., was ranked as the 40th most conservative senator. Blunt landed in between Sen. Mike Johanns, a Nebraska Republican, and Thad Cochran, a GOP senator from Mississippi.
It’s not surprising that neither of Missouri’s two U.S. senators are at their party’s extreme ends….
Think about that last one for a second. Apparently Senator Roy Blunt (r) is considered something of a moderate because there are more people in his party in the Senate who are batshit crazy.
Forget for a moment that the National Journal‘s definition of what constitutes liberal or conservative is useless in our presently skewed political environment. If the obstructionist opposition party is populated by extremist right wingnuts you’re not a “moderate” when your party’s extreme left is labeled as the likes of Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D) and you’re on the other end. It just means you’ve been pandering to the inside the beltway conventional wisdom.
X marks the spot for Senator Claire McCaskill (D): a chart created from the National Journal‘s
liberal/conservative ranking of U.S. Senators by vote.
In our present environment a true moderate would be in the middle of their own party, not to the right of it.