E.J. Dionne and the Anti-Democratic Tendencies of "Progressives"

In a Washington Post editorial today, E.J. Dionne displays several of the maddening traits that continue to undermine the ability of liberals to gain permanent traction with the majority of voters in this country.

Perhaps first and foremost is the thinly-veiled hostility to democracy.

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid has been struggling to light a fire under members of his party. He needs moderates to understand they are part of a majority and progressives to figure out what they want in exchange for concessions to moderates who oppose a public option.

Liberals are absolutely right in their frustration with the Senate. It's become an absurd institution, perhaps the least democratic legislative body in any country calling itself a democracy. It makes no sense that four or five votes can trump 54 or 55 votes [emphasis mine]. But the Senate is what it is. For now, liberals have to live with this.

Where to begin in straightening out this tangled spool of nonsense? Moderate Democrats are part of a majority and…so, what, exactly, they should fall on their swords and vote for this extremely unpopular “health care” bill, thereby facing the distinct possibility of blowing their reelection chances as a result of angering constituents who neither expected nor wanted this level of government interference? The fact, of course, is that the Democrats are divided, and the Party has not yet become a solid slab of impenetrable leftist ideology for which the penalty for non-compliance is expulsion (and perhaps a trip to the basement to receive a shot in the nape of the neck).

And it isn’t “four or five votes” that are trumping 54 or 55 votes, unless Dionne is fully discounting the validity of Republican votes - which, of course, he may be doing, since Republicans are the minority and apparently their votes don’t count in Dionne’s winner-take-all fantasy of democratic government.

But what would mere hostility to practical, work-a-day democracy be without the big lie to make it all palatable? – or rather, a series of big lies?

The core issues of this debate have been settled. The Congressional Budget Office has swept away the major arguments that opponents of reform have been trying to make. The bill before the Senate would cut the deficit, not increase it, and would stabilize or reduce health care premiums for most people, not raise them. The proposal contains serious cost-control measures that can be built on over time. Passing health care reform is thus not only morally necessary, but also fiscally responsible.

This is pure E.J. in Wonderland, every point in that paragraph having been debunked or shown to be based on garbage-in, garbage-out analysis.

Dionne is engaged in political double-talk – and it’s so infantile in its assumption of ignorance on the part of the voters that one may legitimately refer to it as baby-talk, too. He seems to be unaware that people have channels of information that are completely outside the control of the Washington Post and partisan hacks like Harry Reid. Ever heard of the internet, E.J.? Fox News? The Wall Street Journal? The rising tide of popular revulsion against your statist pals? Or are these all “absurd” institutions, too, mere potholes in the road to serfdom?

H/T: Real Clear Politics