There has been plenty of bandwidth wasted to the effect that both sides are to blame for the current failure to pass a continuing resolution. It is being suggested that the Democratic party bears as much blame as the opposition party for allowing the government to shut down - that their refusal to negotiate is in some way the work of leftist extremists, bent on imposing the Affordable Care Act on the unwilling American populace.
That got me thinking. Regularly, extremist elements within the Republican lunatic fringe insist that leftist, Communist extremists are trying to impose their world view on the rest of us. They shriek that they are being oppressed, that a well-financed cabal of Leninists are trying to destroy their way of life. Trying to take their guns away, or trying to discriminate against Christians, or some other kind of Reichstag Fire drivel.
Frequently, however, the obverse is closer to true. Meanwhile, the suggestion that reasonable people in the center and on the left are actually extremists goes unaddressed. Maybe it's time to call their bluff.
Frustrated that Senate Democrats refused to negotiate on a list of demands from hijackers, House tea party Republicans are again trying to frame the debate in terms of self-defense. The argument is that radicals on the left want the Affordable Care Act, and that they are being reasonable, even heroic, by opposing it at every turn, at any expense.
It may be time to fight fire with fire. Reasonable people have been trying, with some success, to play a reasonable game of dodgeball against a team that, on occasion, kicks the ball onto the roof of the school when they're losing. If the reactionary right wants to see extremists behind every bush, maybe they should be shown what leftist extremists really look like.
If the Democrats were really leftist extremists, they would not refuse to negotiate, but would instead offer an extreme counter-proposal. They could return the bill to the House with the Obamacare language crossed out, and write in an amendment calling for 100% taxpayer-funded, socialized healthcare. They could insist that the whole thing be funded by a tax on financial transactions. They could demand a national firearm registry. If they really wanted to appear to be equally as unhinged as the other side, they could write it in purple crayon.
The difference is, no one expects to see socialized healthcare. But, if your opening proposal in a negotiation is what you're really trying to achieve, you start negotiating from a position of weakness because you have nowhere to go. A proposal of socialized healthcare would level the playing field, by showing that yes, there is an argument that could be made by factions to the left of the mainstream. And if it got any serious attention, Republicans would be begging for the Affordable Care Act.
It's nice to be the party of reason. But trying to reason with terrorists is naive.