The media renewed their attacks on Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., this week following her opposition to President Biden‘s $3.5 trillion spending package and for reports of her holding a fundraiser with business lobbying groups who oppose the social policy and climate bill.
Biden and his Democratic supporters have parroted the talking point that the Build Back Better plan will cost “zero dollars.” But Sinema has raised concerns about the cost analysis of the reconciliation package.
Between her opposition and news of her reported fundraiser Tuesday, several media figures have suggested she’s not being guided by a moral code, but by greed and corruption.
Baltimore Sun columnist Dan Rodricks called Sinema a Trojan horse.
David Sirota, a Guardian columnist and founder of The Daily Poster, wrote a column suggesting Sinema and some of her moderate colleagues were corrupt and were voting based on the wants of their corporate donors.
“The fight over the reconciliation bill is not an honest ideological conflict — it is a clash between necessary policy and corporate greed,” Sirota said.
He later added: “One month later, all of that has proven to be true, and this conflict has now devolved into what most fights in Washington become: a clash between good policy and blatant corruption, and a deeper struggle between aspiration and lethargy.”
Sirota hit at “lawmakers who have their own financial interests in mind,” before offering Sinema as an example.
Left-wing radio host and frequent CNN contributor Dean Obeidallah joined the many critics who were praying for a primary challenge against the Arizona lawmaker.
MSNBC’s Joy Reid targeted Sinema and her fellow moderate, Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., last week amid news they were opposed to the spending package.
“Of course House progressives could easily say to Joe Manchin & Kyrsten Sinema: ‘fine. Good luck in your midterm elections with zero infrastructure bills to show because if the big bill dies, yours does too.’ Those House seats are likely safer than WV & AZ,” Reid tweeted.
Reid was mocked by social media users for appearing to forget that as U.S. senators elected to six-year terms in 2018, they won’t be up for reelection until 2024.
The media previously planted themselves on the opposite side of the ring with Sinema during the congressional fight over the filibuster. Sinema wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post explaining her opposition to eliminating the filibuster because doing so would result in “repeated radical reversals in federal policy.”
“Arizona, you up?” Reid tweeted after reading the op-ed.
“This is unbelievably weak,” New York Times opinion writer Jamelle Bouie said of Sinema’s take.
Manchin has fared just as poorly with the press. During the battle over eliminating the filibuster, multiple reporters hounded him on whether he’d change his mind, despite his repeated statements that he wouldn’t budge on keeping it.