What's The Difference?

Wisconsin Senate Republicans find an obscure, possibly unconstitutional means to pass a bill that strips unions of their collective bargaining rights, and the people on the left lose their minds. Most of the media reports this as a blow to the middle class.

U.S. Congressional Democrats find a number of obscure, possibly unconstitutional means to pass a bill that completely overhauls the nation's health care policies, and the people on the right lost their minds. Most of the media reports this as a victory for the middle class.

I'll be specific. Rachel Maddow spent the first 30 minutes of her show tonight denouncing the tactics used in Wisconsin as an unpopular (as some, definitely not all, polls show) move to destroy unions, and by extension the middle class worker, in Wisconsin. She detailed how numerous other states controlled by Republicans are pushing forward legislation that is designed to limit or end union collective bargaining power.

But whatever... that's not really my point.

What I would like to know is where was Ms. Maddow when the Democrats were pissing on the Constitution in 2010 by doing everything they could to undermine any opposition to the health care bill? I'm talking about reconciliation. I'm talking about the vote buying. The shady dealmaking. I'm talking about the Cornhusker Kickback and the Louisiana Purchase. And why weren't the numerous polls which showed how unpopular that bill was (and continues to be) highlighted by any of the left-leaning pundits? Why weren't the Tea Party protests portrayed as hard working Americans standing up for what they believed in? Instead they were shown to be racists. Why was anyone who opposed that bill scorned and ridiculed? Why couldn't they at least honestly report both sides of the story? Why won't they do that now?

Out of disgust over how dishonest Democrats handled the debate over health care last year, I designed this as the new logo for the Democratic Party.

   
Politics is disgusting, yes it is true. Both sides. But in 2009, after Obama was inaugurated, he told Republican Congressional leaders that "we won" in order to make it clear that he was pushing forward with his agenda. Media pundits on the left agreed and said the GOP should just get out of the way. But now, with a sweeping and historic victory in the 2010 midterms, the shoe is on the other foot. The attitude is a bit different. In fact, it's 180° different. By Obama's standards, Dems should just step aside for the Republican agenda, because they won.

My biggest issue here is with the lack of balance in the reporting on this. After the health care debacle, the left would report this in terms of, "this could hurt the Democrats in November" and such. This, despite most polling showing that Americans were largely against their version of health care reform. And what happened? They predicted flurries and got an avalanche. Now, they're saying, rather dishonestly I feel, that support is against the republicans over this union matter based on polling. (here's a great article from Scott Rasmussen
illustrating how deceiving poll results can be) Of course, they're predicting that public support for unions will energize the liberal base, and come 2012 Obama will be reelected and the Dems will sweep back into power.

I think they've got it backwards.

Back in 1993, when President Clinton took office, the late actor Ron Silver, who attended the inauguration stated that he was appalled at the use of fighter jets during the ceremony, feeling that they appeared too hawkish. He had a change of heart when, in his words, “but then it came to me, hey, those planes are ours now. Those are our planes!”

And though years later, Mr. Silver would become a Bush 43 supporter, I never forgot how angry I felt at his divisive statement back in 1993.

Oddly enough, here in 2011, I completely understand the sentiment.