Former Bush Speechwriter Michael Gerson has a column in the Washington Post in which he dissects the liberal's attempt to excuse Obama's failing policies by blaming the Republicans. Nothing new you say? Except that Dems are now suggesting GOP leaders would sabotage policies that work for political purposes.
I wonder where Dems got that idea? Could it when Harry Reid said of the Iraq war "this war is lost" or when then Senator Obama said the surge wouldn't work, Dems were prepared to sacrifice our nation in war to smear the Bush Administration with defeat? Now they are trying to paint the GOP with that same vile brush?
Here's an excerpt from Gerson's column:
Matt Yglesias warns the White House to be prepared for "deliberate economic sabotage" from the GOP -- as though Chamber of Commerce SWAT teams, no doubt funded by foreigners, are preparing attacks on the electrical grid. Paul Krugman contends "Republicans want the economy to stay weak as long as there's a Democrat in the White House." Steve Benen explains, "We're talking about a major political party ... possibly undermining the strength of the country -- on purpose, in public, without apology or shame -- for no other reason than to give themselves a campaign advantage in 2012." Benen's posting was titled, "None Dare Call it Sabotage."
So what is the proof of this charge? It seems to have something to do with Republicans criticizing quantitative easing by the Federal Reserve. And opposing federal spending. And, according to Benen, creating "massive economic uncertainty by vowing to gut the national health care system."
One is tempted to respond that it is a trillion dollars in new debt, the prospect of higher taxes and a complicated, disruptive health reform law that have created "massive economic uncertainty." For the purposes of this argument, however, it is sufficient to say that all these economic policy debates have two sides.
Yet this is precisely what the sabotage theorists must deny. They must assert that the case for liberal policies is so self-evident that all opposition is malevolent. But given the recent record of liberal economics, policies that seem self-evident to them now seem questionable to many. Objective conditions call for alternatives. And Republicans are advocating the conservative alternatives -- monetary restraint, lower spending, lower taxes -- they have embraced for 30 years.
The counterargument to such lunacy is that many consider what the Democrats are doing is not only reckless and dangerous. Some even think Democrats are trying to sabotage the economy according to the Alinsky communist model so that a complete left wing takeover is possible.
Either way, one thing is clear: Dems who adhere to this sabotage theory (some of whom may have been involved in those earlier efforts to sabotage Bush's Iraq policy) have negated any intellectual integrity they might once have possessed and have no real place in an honest discussion of ideas. Their inability to accept that in a democratic process, there are at least two legitimate points of view, means they can play no useful role as we move forward.