If wishes had wings…

The problems facing the Affordable Care Act's website have given the law's critics no shortage of ammunition to take potshots at President Obama's signature legislative accomplishment. But to hear those critics tell it, the ACA's problems are a growing catastrophe in which Democrats are poised to jump ship – and the law is just a second away from repeal. Repeal of the ACA is and always has been a fantasy. And right now this fantasy is being enabled by members of the mainstream press for whom the ACA's problems somehow merit embellishment. Apparently, they have nothing else over which to cry that the sky is falling – and they have to be able to scream about something that is devastatingly world changing to justify their existence.

Tea Party congressmen and conservative pundits have been keeping the repeal fantasy alive ever since the law was signed back in 2010. The backlash from the government shutdown, which was inspired by Tea Party efforts to gut the ACA, did nothing to dull enthusiasm for the "repeal Obamacare" crowd. "Obamacare will be repealed well in advance of the 2014 elections," conservative writer Steven Hayward wrote in Forbes on November 11. "There is a chance Obamacare could be repealed in a bipartisan vote," wrote Ed Rogers in the Washington Post. Peggy Noonan  wrote in the Wall Street Journal that Congress "could try to vote now, under new conditions and with the American people behind them, to repeal the whole thing… And who knows, they just might." 

No… they will not. 

This is nothing but empty wishing. Even if Republicans in the Senate did somehow manage to pass a bill ‘over Harry Reid's dead body’ repealing the ACA, it would absolutely be vetoed by President Obama. Congress does not have the two-thirds votes in both houses to override the President’s veto.

But this is what pundits and activists do: shape and spin stories to conform to their preferred outcome. The National Journal's Josh Kraushaar, rather than tamping down this irrational enthusiasm among the law's opponents, is giving it a big push. "There's a growing likelihood that over time enough Democrats may join Republicans to decide to start over and scrap the whole complex health care enterprise," Kraushaar writes in his November 18 column. He argued to the point of being meaningless – he is saying there is an increased chance of something possibly happening over an indeterminate time period if everything lines up perfectly – but Kraushaar nonetheless wants us to think that the threat of repeal is real:

"Consider [this],” wrote Kraushaar, “Despite the White House's protestations, 62.4 percent of the House voted for Michigan GOP Rep. Fred Upton's legislation (261-157) was just shy of the two-thirds necessary to override a veto." 

Kraushaar is comparing apples to oranges. Upton's bill was not about full repeal of the law. Upton's bill, which would permit health insurers to continue selling plans that don't meet the ACA's minimum standards, reflected Democratic frustration with the website. The vote itself was essentially symbolic. The bill will not be taken up by the Senate – Harry Reid will never bring it to the floor – and it would never survive an Obama veto. Those Democrats went into the vote knowing that it would not have any impact on policy.  They did it for cover back home. So you cannot extrapolate from that symbolic expression of frustration a desire to scrap the whole law. 

Kraushaar arrived at the notion that repeal is visible on the horizon by sketching out immense political shifts and alignments of the planets and stars that must occur in order to arrive at veto-proof majorities.  In doing so, Kraushaar unwittingly demonstrated exactly how the repeal fantasy will never come true.
 
Republicans are all wishing and dreaming. “If wishes had wings…” my grandmother used to say.

Rush gives the President a gift

The ultra conservatives are not merely the Republican "base," they've become practically the entire party. So, when CPAC met for their big gathering last week, it was to show America the foundation from which they will attempt to rebuild after getting crushed in the last two national elections and losing the White House.

With the nation's economy in freefall and two wars being fought, how did the conservatives at CPAC show their substance and depth? Their keynote speaker was Rush Limbaugh, a rightwing radio host; "Joe the Plumber" headed a discussion panel; and they had a 13-year-old child deliver a policy address.

If there is any doubt that Rush Limbaugh is now firmly in command of the Republican Party consider this: after Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele called Rush Limbaugh a mere "entertainer" with an "incendiary" talk show, the next day on his radio show, Limbaugh returned fire and told Steele that he was not a “pundit” and should concentrate on building the GOP. Within a few hours, Steele apologized and acknowledged the radio commentator as a "national conservative leader." He is not the first conservative leader who has had to crawl to Rush with apologies after incurring the wrath of Limbaugh fans.

If you still doubt that Limbaugh is the de facto leader of the Republicans, the news coverage of Limbaugh's rant (speech at CPAC) this past weekend should dispel the notion. CNN, like FOX, gave Rush the kind of uninterrupted live coverage usually reserved for Presidents, followed by a panel of analysts to weigh and consider how important the speech was to our country! Although there were other GOP mouthpieces on the CPAC stage, including Karl Rove, only Limbaugh's hour-long speech was given news status.

In his CPAC speech, Rush once again said he wants the President of the United States to fail and makes no apologies for saying so. He told the Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC) that he views the future of Americans like the Super Bowl, but their "team" is not the American people. Their team consists of conservative ideologues. Rush called upon his team to tell the American people they are "wrong." Evidently, conservatives have a very low opinion of the American people who want such non-conservative “rights” as a minimum wage and health care.

CPAC gave Rush an award for defending the Constitution – regardless of the fact that he said in his speech that the Preamble to the Constitution says: "we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." (Not so – this is a quote from the Declaration of Independence.) This was not an error on Rush Limbaugh’s part. His misstatements are deliberate and purposeful. To his followers, the fact that Rush quoted the beginning of the Declaration as the Preamble to the Constitution and that the Declaration has no force of law in the United States is just a technicality.

Although they do not yet realize it, these ultra rightwing CPAC Republicans now have a major dilemma: in making the case against government action during the economic downturn they insisted on a literal interpretation of the Constitution. But this could fly back into their faces because a completely literal interpretation of the Constitution would permanently remove religion from the public square. There is an absence of any mention of God or the Bible in the Constitution. To those concerned about little things like logic, this would seem to be a dilemma. But Limbaugh’s followers combine the Declaration and Constitution into a category of "founding documents" and, in Rush's case, use the Declaration of Independence as the preamble to the Constitution.

Another problem for the right wing in using a literal interpretation of the Constitution is that the actual preamble to the Constitution, as written, clearly states the powers, rights, and processes that the rest of the Constitution describes. The preamble states the intents of the Founders such as establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for a common defense, promote the general welfare, and ensure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. BUT conservative movement dogma only picks up on the “liberty” and the “common defense” part and chooses to ignore the remainder: justice and the general welfare. In believing this, the conservative movement rejects the Founders' vision and mission for the country.

Limbaugh, with his ultra fundamentalist conservatism, who all too often makes statements not based in fact, is leading a Republican Party suffering from a disappearing moderate wing. Several extremely conservative southern governors who have an eye on running for president in 2012 must follow Limbaugh’s lead. They are grandstanding by refusing part of Federal stimulus funds for their own communities.

Limbaugh is taking full advantage of the leaderless Republicans to seize power, shouting obstinate, often illogical, opposition toward an overwhelmingly popular new President. In publicly rooting for Barack Obama's failure, Limbaugh is leading gullible Republicans over a cliff. This is a Limbaugh lemming movement based in refusal to admit the nation's rejection of failed Republican policies. In their minds there is no need to recalibrate their principles to account for new realities such as the current economic crisis. They think they just need to find a better way to frame their message for the same old failed ideas.

In making Rush Limbaugh the de facto leader of the Republican Party, and following his edicts, they have given a political gift to the Obama Administration: instead of a principled point-by-point discussion and willingness to compromise at the bargaining table, President Obama is blessed with Republican belligerence and rejectionism. A large majority of Americans view Rush Limbaugh as a vitriolic loudmouth and the Republicans as the “Party of No.”

Obama knows he holds the winning hand for now.