It's hard not to have some sympathy for the little devils. There's such a gulf between what thoughtful progressives want and Congressional Democrats do, we among the former know just how traditional conservatives must feel about their ideologically apostate representatives. The latter were the biggest spenders in history, wallowing in borrowed cash and throwing it about with abandon, while their rank and file grew increasingly disillusioned -- and very, very pissed, as Rudy would undoubtedly overemphasize the sentiment.
Having been battered and bruised at the polls, however, the conservative party now feels chastened. Its leadership is promising to never behave that way again. But its present and chosen battle -- its Custer-like, last-stand determination against the expansion of children's health care -- couldn't be more of a case study in epic stupidity and hypocrisy.
To try to imagine a more politically indefensible position is a hopeless exercise. Reports the Times: "Democrats believe they have Republicans ... on the run over the legislation, the State Children’s Health Insurance Program" -- and for once these Democrats have something right. The Republican Party is hemorrhaging both brains and guts; its own rank and file sees the folly of fighting a pro-child bill, while its leadership works at electoral cross-purposes.
Republicans say they eventually can turn the issue to their advantage by making the case that Democrats are spending too much, taking a first step toward national health care and devoting tax money to coverage for some families who can afford insurance. They contend their stance could have special resonance with conservatives [brace for understatement] unhappy with the recent Republican [brace for understatement] reluctance to [brace for understatement] resist popular spending programs.
Taking objection by objection, it's just as hard to mute one's explosion of laughter. Too much spending? This from a party that insists on showering hundreds of borrowed billions on an unpopular war against -- well, we're not sure whom we're fighting. This from a party that has taken us to celestial levels -- $9 trillion -- of national debt. And it decides to shave that figure by shaving healthcare funds from uncovered children?
As for S-chip being "a first step toward national health care," not only is that vastly and historically inaccurate, it also, upon ignoring the inaccuracies, receives a big thumbs up from the electorate. Good, bring it on, is the average voter's sentiment -- and throw some my way while you're at it.
But it's the hemorrhaging of brains that Republican leaders are best at, and they're doing their preposterous best on S-chip. Said, for instance, Roy Blunt, the House Minority Whip: "If this was [sic: one child left behind] October of next year, I’d be really worried. But this is October of this year and the beginning of us getting our credibility back by showing that we are willing to take principled stands on spending."
Picture -- and you probably already have -- one of those "You want it when?" cartoons, and you then have in mind the average reader's reaction to that Bluntian drivel. He's willing to take a principled stand, but only, by his own admission, because it's not an unprincipled election year. Not the best start to regaining credibility, but hey, sometimes pols let slip something honest.
Yet the very, very best of the leadership's vulgar hypocrisy lies in its consecrated objection to "devoting tax money to coverage for some families who can afford insurance."
That would be families earning upward of 60 grand. Yet members of Congress, earning $165,200 a year, and their leaders, earning $183,500 a year, happily ask taxpayers to shell out three-fourths of their monthly healthcare premiums, which come out of the four-fourths of their taxpayer-financed salaries. Should these geese choose to forego their golden healthcare eggs, perhaps the ganders would be a bit more sympathetic to their "principled stands." But there ain't much danger of that.
Nor is there much danger of my working up any more sympathy than what lies before you -- you, among the conservative rank and file. You think you got problems?