THE FEEL-GOOD BUZZWORD: AFFORDABILITY

This morning, I reluctantly flipped on MSNOW (formerly MSNBC), bracing myself for what was coming. Sure enough, it was the usual parade of Democratic Party talking points. But today, one word kept popping up over and over again: affordability. Apparently, that’s the new magic word. Commentator after commentator praised it, arguing that a renewed focus on affordability is the key to winning back political power.

On the surface, it sounds great. Who doesn’t want things to be more affordable? But once you sit with it for more than a minute, the whole idea starts to ring hollow. “Affordability” quickly reveals itself as a feel-good slogan, pleasant to hear, but light on substance. It’s nothing more than a platitude standing in for real solutions.

Yes, this message seems to be working for now. Democrats have notched some impressive wins in recent off-year elections, and they deserve credit for that. Still, I worry the momentum won’t last if the party keeps leaning on the same recycled rhetoric. If Democrats genuinely want to energize working-class voters, they need to offer something bolder with policies that people can actually feel in their everyday lives. Minor adjustments to the status quo, such as expanded tax credits, modest drug price negotiations, or incremental housing initiatives, often come across as window dressing to people who are struggling to get by.

What many voters are really craving, IMHO, is something far more straightforward, which is, for lack of a better term, populism. People want substantive change. And I believe the path forward is clear. Run on big, unmistakable ideas, such as Medicare for All, a massive expansion of public service jobs to stop endless layoffs, and bold investments in infrastructure. That’s how the Democrats can become a true opposition party to the elites who currently run this country.

THE WHITEWASHING OF LIZ CHENEY

What is with this preoccupation from the so-called ‘liberal’ media with Liz Cheney? Lately it seems, cable news channels MSNBC and CNN are lavishing endless hours of coverage to the rift between Cheney, a Republican congresswoman from Wyoming and daughter to former Vice President Dick Cheney, and the current GOP House leadership that’s loyal to Donald Trump.

Cheney had the audacity to vote for the former president’s impeachment due to his role in instigating the U.S. Capitol insurrection earlier this year. In retaliation, Trumpian House leaders seek to strip Cheney of her powerful committee assignments.

As a result of all this insider politics, Liz Cheney has been elevated as the new courageous hero for the ‘resistance’ by becoming the emblem for the GOP they falsely assert it once was, fact-based and rational. While Liz Cheney appears willing to sacrifice her House career by calling out Trump’s lies, lest we forget, she continues to support her father’s lies that led to untold amounts of death, bloodshed, and torture in the disastrous Iraq War. Liz Cheney is about as right wing as they come. She’s a warmonger who’s never met a war or bloated defense budget she didn’t love as she’s to the right of Trump on foreign policy. She’s vigorously opposed both COVID-19 relief acts calling the first one “a real tragedy”, and has attacked even the mildest responses to gun violence as an assault on the Second Amendment.

Amnesia seems to have gripped much of the mainstream liberal media these days as pundits continue to revise the legacy of the Bush-Cheney crowd, including the former vice president’s daughter, in a sympathetic, yet erroneous, recollection. Frankly, I won’t lose any sleep if Liz Cheney loses her clout in Congress.

A True Equivalency

With the federal government shutdown now entering its fifth day, much of the mainstream media continue to frame the impasse in a false equivalency setting. This inaccurate portrayal appears in media reports complaining about "a failure of leadership", "partisan gridlock", or similar memes. John Darkow's political cartoon that ran in a recent edition of the Columbia (Mo.) Daily Tribune illustrates this widespread view quite nicely.

Fortunately, not all journalists are buying into this misguided effort to play the middle ground. MSNBC's Rachel Maddow reveals in her blog the absurdity of this false equivalency by creating a fictional situation where a true equivalency occurs.

Let's say President Obama, feeling good after winning re-election fairly easily, adopted an overly confident posture with lawmakers. He started boasting about the fact that his approval rating is four times higher than Congress' approval rating; his policy agenda enjoys broader public support than Republicans' policy agenda; and he decided it's time they start rewarding him before he considered engaging in basic governance.

"Sure," Obama said to Republicans in this imaginary scenario, "I'll sign the spending measures to prevent a government shutdown, but first you have to raise taxes on the wealthy. And end the sequestration policy. And pass comprehensive immigration reform. And approve universal background checks. The American people are with me, so I expect you to compromise and negotiate with me on these matters."

The president then said to GOP lawmakers, "And sure, I'll sign a bill to raise the debt limit, paying the bills you already piled up, but I'm not ready to sign a 'clean' bill. Instead, I also expect Congress to pass a cap-and-trade bill, a public option for the health care system, universal pre-K, and billions in infrastructure investments. If you refuse, I'll have no choice but to tell the public you refuse to compromise and negotiate."

-Rachel Maddow, The Maddow Blog

Maddow says reports claiming that Obama refuses to compromise or negotiate as if it were a legitimate debate point aren't just misleading, but "demonstrably silly". I agree. This isn't normal give and take. It's extortion. Part of the minority party is strong-arming the majority to get everything they want. To report otherwise is a failure of journalism.