And I hadn't even had my coffee yet.
As I woke up this morning and turned on the morning news to hear the weather, the first thing I saw on my local CBS affiliate was a story about the economic benefit of Tennessee State Parks - as well as the enjoyment we get from the parks. Lovely.
Then came the commercials.
First it was an ad from the National Republican Congressional Committee trying to lump Lincoln Davis in with Obama and Pelosi. Then it was an ad by multimillionaire Congressional candidate Diane Black about "Obamacare" and how awful Obama and Pelosi are. Then, it was an attack ad on (can you believe this?) a state senate candidate by the Tennessee Republican Party, again linking the candidate to the "radical Obama-Pelosi agenda".
What the hell is going on here?!
I'm writing this before I drink my coffee, so excuse me if it makes absolutely no sense. But it makes no sense to me why Republicans spend more time attacking Obama and Pelosi than actually talking about what they're going to do. There is absolutely no discussion of a positive, productive agenda. All they have is attacks.
Meanwhile, I am waking up to find out that Organizing for America met its goal of 1,000,000 voter contacts yesterday. The difference could not be more clear: one group running attack ads, the other group talking to voters. One group trying to fix what's broken, and the other trying to push the economy back into the ditch.
This article by Jonathan Cohn seems to be on the right track:
It was something else Pelosi said that really got my attention—and got me thinking. She pointed out, correctly, that this Congress has accomplished an enormous amount, from the stimulus to health care reform to financial regulation. But the record of the House, in particular, is even stronger. It’s easy to forget now, but the House did pass a climate change bill. It also passed a health care bill stronger than the final package, in the sense that it guaranteed more generous coverage and included a public option. The House wanted a bigger stimulus, too. But the House had to give ground on all of these because the Senate couldn’t, or wouldn’t, go along.
The House obviously has certain institutional advantages over the Senate: Membership more closely reflects public opinion, since small states aren’t over-represented, and there’s no filibuster to block majority rule. But it’s not as if corralling House Democrats has been easy easy. On climate change, in particular, Democrats were far from united. Members with ties to oil, gas, auto, and other carbon-producing industries had serious reservations. Blue Dogs and others representing conservative districts were nervous about the appearance of raising taxes. Passing a bill despite those divisions was no small feat. Pelosi deserves a lot of credit for that--just as she deserves a lot of credit for saving health care reform.
There are obviously a lot of people out there who really don’t like Nancy Pelosi and what she stands for. There are also a lot of people who are simply angry--about the economy, about the way Washington works--and to them Pelosi is a symbol of the status quo. Fine, fine. You expect these people to vote against her and her party. But, come November, it may be the disillusionment of progressives that keeps House Democrats from holding the majority and forces Pelosi out as Speaker. And that seems more than a little bit ironic.
The attack on Obama and Pelosi by the NRCC, RNC, Chamber of Commerce, TNGOP, and countless other anonymous outside groups works. It works because it forces Democrats to defend the national agenda rather than focusing on local kitchen-table issues where Democrats excel. Republicans accuse Democrats of marching in lockstep because Republicans march in lockstep. Republicans accuse Democrats of being unconcerned with local issues because Republicans care nothing about local communities.
Republicans get away with this because they have money to burn and they just don't care who gets hurt - as long as it's not them. Matt Taibbi lampooned Alaska Senate candidate Joe Miller for his hypocrisy on government aid, noting that Miller has been on Medicaid and received farm subsidies before turning into a vigorous opponent of government aid programs. Taibbi writes: "I can’t even tell you how many people I interviewed at Tea Party events who came up with one version or another of the Joe Miller defense. Yes, I’m on Medicare, but… I needed it! It’s those other people who don’t need it who are the problem!"
So, this is what we're up against. While Democrats continue to pursue energy independence, equality, sensible immigration reform, economic progress for all Americans, private-sector job growth, education reform, etc., Republicans just fling crap at the wall and hope that it sticks.
Time for the grown-ups to take over.
Time for my coffee.
The floor is yours.