What A "Party Of No" Really Looks Like

Ross Douthat shares his thoughts on the various responses to President Obama's commission to address our serious budget deficits.  My reading on the right pretty well mirrors his observations that the most vocal conservative critics were single issue advocates, and entertainers.  Otherwise, the criticism has been minimal and usually tempered with an acknowledgment of the difficulties involved along with the need for compromise.

Last week’s media coverage sometimes made it sound as if Bowles and Simpson were taking the same amount of fire from left and right. But the reaction from Republican lawmakers and the conservative intelligentsia was muted, respectful and often favorable; the right-wing griping mostly came from single-issue activists and know-nothing television entertainers.

Leaders on the left simply said "no".

The liberal attacks, on the other hand, came fast and furious, from pundits and leading Democratic politicians alike — starting with the speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, who pronounced the recommendations “simply unacceptable” almost immediately after their release.


...


Needless to say, none of the liberal lawmakers attacking the Simpson-Bowles proposals offered alternative blueprints for restoring America’s solvency. The Democratic Party has plans for many things, but a balanced budget isn’t one of them.

One of the most frustrating habits of the media, leftish leaders, and leftish commentators,.....but I repeat myself....over the last two years has been their mantra that describes anyone to the right of Joe Lieberman as being part of the "Party of No".  This mis-characterization is intended to suggest that non-Democrats are simply unwilling to compromise on any issue.

Yet from my perspective, the right was very willing to compromise on any number of issues...including health care reform...in order to bring about productive change in our country.  What they were unwilling to do was to compromise where the proposed reforms would have been counter productive to the cause of advancing our nation.

The only rational response to a "progressive" agenda that does not create progress is the absolute refusal of cooperation.  Had the leftish leadership opted for a less leftist/"progressive" agenda over the last two years, I have no doubts that the right would have cooperated to some extent.  Extremists would not have been happy....in either party.

In a word, the leftish leadership committed the political sin of "over-reach" and those on the right were quite reasonable in their opposition to changes that [are] e'en now wracking and wrecking our nation.

Now we know exactly what a "Party of No" looks like.  It is the absolute refusal to evaluate the merits of much needed budgetary reforms that seek to balance those reforms, strengthen our economy, and generally address the many perspectives that exist.

Perhaps the leadership on the left will next engage in bouts of holding their breath until the adults give in to their petulant refusal to compromise.