Tuesday Open Thread [11.18.14]

Filed in National by on November 18, 2014

David Roberts, a writer for Grist, has succinctly encapsulates what has been and is wrong with our politics over the last thirty years. And to be clear, it is something that is wrong with our current brand of post-modern conservatives, and not something that is wrong with anyone else.

You must read them all:

First, some 1990’s culture reference. Moops. I can hear you all say, what is that? For context on what a Moops is, read this Seinfeld episode summary on Wikipedia. It will provide you the context. The most important part is this:

The Trivial Pursuit game ends prematurely when George disputes the answer to the question: “Who invaded Spain in the 8th century?” Donald answers “the Moors”, but—due to a misprint—the question card says that the answer is “the Moops”. George refuses to give Donald credit, and Donald attacks him.

Roberts is using the Moops reference to highlight the Halbig v. Brunnell Supreme Court case that seeks to cripple Obamacare. For you see, the case is based entirely on a Moops incident. The right, and those bringing the case, are arguing that some legislative language means that subsidies from the federal government to purchase healthcare are to be prohibited to states that do not set up their own health insurance exchange. The problem with that is that is the opposite of what the law is supposed to do, and what the legislative intent is and was.

It used to be that the establishment media slammed this down and acted as the arbiter of what is and what is not accepted versus what is radical departures from political norms. Not anymore. Booman:

The media are going to discover in short order that nothing ever really changes with the Republicans, unless it is that their behavior grows worse. But there’s one thing in the following that I have to strongly dispute:

Republican anger is however masking a serious problem the party has yet to resolve : how to hit back at what it sees a presidential power grab. Other than warning that Obama would “poison the well” for future cooperation, GOP leaders won’t say whether they will use pending federal funding bills as leverage. That route led to a damaging government shutdown for which the GOP paid a heavy political price last year.

Tell me, please, exactly how the GOP paid “a heavy political price” for shutting down the government and hurting our credit rating. They just had a huge victory in the Senate elections, the exact kind of statewide elections where politicians are supposed to be punished for pandering to the worst extremists in their party. They paid no political price and were, in fact, richly rewarded for their irresponsible behavior.

And if there is one single dominant reason for why the GOP got away with acting like five year-old bullies, it is because the media never mentioned their behavior in the 60 days leading up to the elections. If a tree falls in the forest and the only sound heard is about the Ebola virus and ISIS, then no one knows that a tree fell in the forest.

If the media had actually had a discussion about how a Republican-led Congress was likely to behave, then what’s coming wouldn’t be such a surprise to people.

The media has abdicated its Fourth Estate Role in favor of profit and ratings.

About the Author ()

Comments (5)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Jason330 says:
    November 18, 2014 at 11:59 am

    That David Roberts essay lays my head on a veracity anvil and hits it with a truth hammer.

    It now all literally comes down to whether John Roberts is a conservative politician or a judge. If he is a conservative politician it is game over for the American experiment in democracy. Oh, we’ll limp forward and look like the old America holding elections and such for a while, but for all intents and purposes – say goodnight Gracie.

  2. Unintended Consequences says:
    November 19, 2014 at 7:31 am

    No, the ACA language is plain. The intent is backed up by the Gruber videos. When you argue “error” in front of the SC, it’s too late.

  3. Jason330 says:
    November 19, 2014 at 7:54 am

    I guess you didn’t read this post. Anyway, what you, Fox News, or the Heritage Foundation has to say on it is not relevant. The only relevant question is whether John Roberts is a conservative politician or a judge?

    I think we all know the answer to that question.

  4. Dave says:
    November 19, 2014 at 8:26 am

    “That David Roberts essay…”

    You’re calling it an essay? Really? 140 character numbered sentences separated by little boxes that offer you the ability to retweet, mark, or reply to each individual sentence?! An essay?!

    He may be making monumental, valid points, but I’m not reading an “essay” in 140 character tweet bites. I’ve been out of school for a long time. Would such an “essay” be an acceptable submission by our children, in schools today?

  5. jason330 says:
    November 19, 2014 at 8:33 am

    He calls it a tweet essay. The points, as you note, are valid.

«
»