Via GOS, further signs that the apocalypse is upon us — or at least is descending on the GOP.
Yup, Alan Simpson, Catfood Commissionaire Extraordinaire, he of the milk cow with 310 million tits, has noticed that we might do with a bit more tax revenue just now, not to mention a Republican Party that actually, you know, cared about the country:
“The stuff that’s going on in my party, where the -– pettiness overcomes the patriotism -– it’s just disgusting to me,” he told ABC News. “Reagan raised taxes. We’ve never had less revenue to run this country since the Korean war.”
Also as noted in that DKos story, Bill O’Reilly — yup, that one — is calling for more revenue. Admittedly, and unsurprisingly, his is the worst possible idea, a truly regressive 1% national sales tax. Heaven forfend that he and his stratospheric income buddies should actually have to pay even proportionately in any tax plan, much less progressively. But still: BillO is saying we need to raise taxes — and in this as in so much else, there’s no such thing as being mostly virginal. If a sales tax is on the table, then so is an income tax rate change, hedge fund loophole closing and all the rest.
And back to the point: it’s getting to seem like the only ones who think that the GOP Congressional delegation could manage a rowboat, much less a country, is some falling fraction of that caucus itself.
I’d feel schandenfreude if I hadn’t sat with my college-bound nephew last night, reviewing yesterday’s events, and then feeling compelled to apologize to him for hideous mess we are preparing for him and his. I couldn’t even think what I might say to my eleven year old.
But here’s hoping that we might just be seeing the collapse of the Grand Old Party. There are lots of real arguments a true oppposition party could make that would matter. But not the GOP as it now. It’s tearing itself apart along lines long noted here and many other places. It couldn’t happen to a more deserving bunch…but for this:
The collateral damage. What we don’t know yet is whether the current Republican Party will merely collapse in self-destruction, or will manage to drag the rest of us down in what would amount to a murder-suicide.
Image: Éduoard Manet, The Suicide, 1877-1881.
zmulls
All celebrations are premature. We haven’t actually avoided this crisis yet, and there’s no proof that the GOP overreach will actually affect the party longterm.
I am also hoping that we get a tea-party Presidential candidate and head for a Goldwater-size blowout, followed by a long period of GOP self-reflection. And I think it’s possible. But I’m not counting on it yet.
Mark S.
Well, if it’s any consolation, I think future generations will be a lot more pissed off at us over global warming than this debt crisis thing.
nancydarling
Tom, I posted this on another thread a few days ago, but it bears repeating. My sister flew to her home state from D.C. last Sunday. Her former senator, a republican and respected on both sides of the aisle, was in the waiting area and they struck up a conversation. Without using the words bat shit crazy, he essentially said that the current GOP is bat shit crazy. The GOP created this monster by playing to the fringes starting with the Southern Strategy of Nixon. They couldn’t win elections without that lunatic fringe. It looks like soon they won’t be able to win elections with them.
The Dangerman
I hate to keep making this prediction in these virtual parts, but I see Lady Sarah was on the TV last night saying she will make her decision in August or September; she is so running and she will so get nominated (Governor GoodHair gets the VP nod). Romney is a joke and Bachmann will lose out after Palin beats her to the punch in calling Obama near.
Tom Levenson
@zmulls at 1: not celebrating at all, as I hope I made clear. I live in terror. To quote the beach reading I’m doing now, “Winter is coming.”
Han's Solo
As I pointed out in an earlier thread, Chait has a good piece up on what is really scotching the debt deal: Capital Gains.
jacy
@Mark S.:
If only because it will make it really hot in the caves they use to hide in to evade the mutants roaming the countryside. At least the part of the countryside that’s not under water.
Fox News Braintrust
If the poorest 2% pay NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX, it’s basic fairness that the richest 2% pay NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX.
And if the economy spirals into depression, the poor can eat their kids’ ponies the same as the rich.
God Bless America
coloradoblue
I’ve been saying for a year that if Palin runs, she truly is delusional, guess we’ll find out pretty soon. Would love to see the GOP self-destruct. But then what happens to the Dems, who are what a NE liberal Repub used to be? Do we end up with a new Dem party, but called something different? Only House Dems are worth a shit (with apologies to the few Senate Dems, plus Bernie, who actually vote with the people and not with the corporations). I had been a Dem since my first election in 1972 but Harry and Barry drove me out of the party. The Dems have moved so far to the center/right, what happens to we true liberals?
andy
I dunno- they’ve been due such a period ever since Watergate but somehow our “left wing media” hasn’t let the people know why it’s a good idea.
Citizen Alan
I have a niece (aged 9) and two nephews (one in high school, the other in college), and I almost weep for the future that’s in store for them. I don’t know what I’d do if I had actually brought children of my own into a world that’s as fubared as this one.
Han's Solo
I’d probably start with, “Don’t vote for Republicans, ever.”
There is a real opportunity here if Democrats are willing to take it. When the Republicans rebranded their most extreme element as “Tea Partiers” they gained short term political gain. But they also made it much easier to drive a wedge between their fringiest elements and the rest of the party.
If Obama and the Democrats were to, for instance, get the Republicans to agree to tax increases, or an increase in the debt ceiling without corresponding spending cuts, it really could alienate the rubes they rely on for votes. In and of itself it might not kill the party, but it would be a fairly good first step.
Culture of Truth
Maybe I’m just a dumb mf, but the reaction by folks such as Simpson, is at least encouraging – more than if he and the old guard were going “fuck yeah, burn it down!” The trouble for kids today is that his type will die soon, while Rubio appears to represent the next generation. So our two best options are that the GOP comes to its senses, or the American people reject them, or at least their most destructive tendencies.*
*I think both have to happen, since the people correctly assume we need at least 2 parties to keep each other in check.
Citizen Alan
Probably off topic, but in the last two days I’ve had two people knock on my door to give me campaign literature for Republicans running for state office. The first person was a boy who couldn’t be more than 14, and the second was an adorable little moppet who looked about 7. I like to think that Republicans are sending kids out to campaign because we’ll be less inclined to scream obscenities at them.
aimai
Tom, do you have the fifth book? I forgot it was coming out in all the real life sturm und drang.
I really hope that Sarah jumps in, I think that might enable the teabaggers in congress to pull back from the brink because they can suddenly discover that they don’t want to give their potential candidate a headache of such mammoth proportions or something. Basically, they are crazy but they also are incredibly arrogant and stupid and need some kind of face saving gesture to climb back down (just like they did from the earlier government shutdown debacle when Obama gave them all those fake cuts to send them home happy).
I’m pretty much in despair, myself.
aimai
Han's Solo
Also too, it should be noted that this morning Joe Scarborough said the following:
Dennis SGMM
While it’s nice to see people like Alan Simpson speaking out, it’s wise to understand that no one in the GOP is listening to them. At this point, Ronald Reagan could rise from the grave and give the Republicans a stern lecture on good governance and the answer would be “Hell No!” from the Teahadists.
America has become Balkinized. Deal with it.
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
It seems like every day my confidence takes one step forward and two steps back and I’m increasing finding myself wishing the assholes in this country get exactly what they want – because they fucking deserve it. But then I remember that I’m trying to save money and make a better life for me and my soon-to-be wife (and she wants a kid or two) and know that it would be just cutting off my nose to spite my face.
Everyday I tune into Stephanie Miller and she’s pretty much always up-beat and I come over here where it’s kind of positive but then I check out Eschaton and Hullabaloo and despair. Randi Rhodes helps perk me back up in the afternoon but I pretty much quit Matthews, O’Donnell and Maddow when I quit smoking because the talk shows make me want to smoke a whole pack of Camels at once. I don’t even watch Bill Maher anymore because the last thing I want on a Friday night is to catch one of his shows where the conservatards populate the entire panel.
Today I was feeling fairly positive but then I checked out Matt Taibbi’s RS page and he’s has down on Obama as Krugman and Digby.
There’s no way I’m not going to vote for Obama but I’m not going to send him any money (I got his birthday card mailer yesterday) but I just may sit down and write a “disappointed and exhausted” letter that I know will not make one iota of difference in his DLC-like triangulating mind.
Sometimes I think he really does have this under control and sometimes I think he’s chasing after “independents” who will never vote for him in a million years. You know the type, the “independents” that always vote Republican but are so very non-partisan and “independent”.
To top it off one of my Nvidia Geforce 8800 gts’ crapped out of my sli, my personal “herbalist” has gone missing, the White Sox can’t score (really, Adam Dunn, .160?) and they’re predicting 90+F this weekend and early next week.
Woe is me.
Halteclere
IF the GOP were to implode, I don’t see it’s form of political conservativism disappearing – the anti-Democrat party that emerges would carry on much of the same politics, but maybe without the same lock-step following of (or pandering to) their subgroups.
IF the GOP were to implode, what would the new anti-Democrat party’s platform be that a) pulls together most of the same old GOP people, and b) pulls away enough Democrat people so that this new party has a path to regain power? It isn’t like this country is designed for many different political parties that curtail to specific ideas and political theory, but instead is designed for two main parties to attempt to out “big tent” each other. What would be underneath the “big tent” of the new anti-Democrat party?
eemom
I’m pretty confident that armageddon will be averted, because money always wins.
As for the long term impact on the republicans, much less sanguine, again because money always wins. Money and a plentiful supply of stupid suckers who vote.
Roger Moore
@Han’s Solo:
I’m sure that Obama understands that; has been in Washington for a while and is not a complete nincompoop. He’s just following his standard practice of trying to look like the most reasonable person in the room. The plan is to keep firm on the things the Republicans really want and concede on things they don’t care as much about. The more stuff he gives away in negotiations while the Republicans refuse to concede anything, the more he looks like the responsible adult and them the spoiled children.
DonkeyKong
Obama could take the McConnell plan and raise the deficit without cuts. Instead he wants a 4 trillion dollar cut that will go past discretionary funding in into entitlements.
He thinks independents will “reward” him and the democrats for that. No jobs bill, repeating the “families need to tighten belts” and “confidence fairy” bullshit. 9% unemployment. And lets all cross our fingers that the banks don’t blow up in the next 5 years.
How the hell is that GOP suicide?
RalfW
Gov. Dayton here in Minnesota is being reported as capitulating to the GOP in the shutdown. But he has placed these conditions, and I’m wondering if the GOP can even accept these. Will they learn from the aprobation in DC, or are they cut from the same freshman Teahadist cloth
Conditions:
Remove policy issues
Drop 15 percent across the board in reductions to state employees in all agencies
Pass $500 million bonding bill
Read more: Dayton Agrees to Republican Budget to End Minnesota Shutdown
Dennis SGMM
@eemom
Exactly. A loss for the Republicans doesn’t automatically translate into a win for Democrats. Those states that currently elect Republicans will simply elect other Republicans – they won’t suddenly elect Democrats.
Berial
The Republicans are NOT going quietly into that good night. No they fully intend to take all of us with them when they go. They will believe until their dieing day, that they are right. They CANNOT see the world in any other way than the way the want to see it. There is no place in their world view for reflection or questions. If they did either honestly they already wouldn’t be voting republican.
Canadian Shoggoth
An unkindness of cravens
joes527
eemom
In the war between money and stupid … I’m not sure that I’d put my money on money.
Culture of Truth
Han's Solo
@J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford: I feel your pain, but please, before you decide not to contribute your time and money let’s see how this thing plays out.
I have a strong suspicion that all of us on the left (and I don’t include PUMAs in that) will be happily surprised at the outcome.
Stay strong. Have the courage of your convictions. Remember that things look a lot different from where we are sitting than they do from where Obama is sitting. In the end, all we can do is find a candidate who is smart, decent and as honest as a politician can be and support them. I don’t see anybody in contemporary American politics that is both electable and as capable as Obama, and I doubt you do either.
Linda Featheringill
han #15
morning joe
Jesus! Really? Wow.
Uncle Clarence Thomas
.
.
OMG, did you hear what that Jane Hamsher said about the President Obama BJ Syndicate today? She said, and I quote –
Can you believe that? Everybody knows Republicans are the dumbest motherfuckers in the world, while balloonbaggers are only the second dumbest motherfuckers in the world. Someone gag this bitch and shut her up! She has no right to speak or have dishonest opinions like this!
.
.
joes527
DonkeyKong
Who, besides Mitch, is _offering_ the McConnell plan?
At this point it looks like the McConnell plan was a bad trip on Mitch’s part, and nothing else.
Dennis SGMM
@Culture of Truth
It went away for eight years. Once the goobers and the gomers see that the “right kind of person” is in the White House it will be back to “deficits don’t matter”.
Southern Beale
I’ve never seen that Manet painting before.
Jennifer
@6 Han’s Solo: I heard David Stockman being interviewed the other day, and as he noted, there is no rationale for capital gains taxes being as low as they are. Sure, the GOP has been pretending for years now that if you tax investment more, people won’t invest, but of course with thinking folks that dog won’t hunt. What are billionaires and multimillionaires going to do with their billions and millions if they don’t invest it? Spend it? On what? Hide it under the mattress? Bury it in the backyard? Of course they’re gonna invest it, even if they pay a higher tax on their returns from investment.
The original rationale for lowering the capital gains rate was double-digit inflation, and under that circumstance, a lower rate makes sense: when most of the return on investment that you’re getting is the result of inflation, it’s not fair to tax it as though it’s windfall profit, because clearly it isn’t. But when is the last time we had double-digit inflation? Haven’t seen it 30 years now.
This reminds me in a way of the phony GOP arguments against raising income taxes. I mean, of course the arguments are dumber now than they were back when the top rate was 50%, 70%, or 91%, because is ANY rational person, even one who has billions and doesn’t need any more money, going to forego another $10,000 or $100,000 in income just because 3% more of it will go to taxes? Not on this planet. Now, that might be true if 50% more would go to taxes, but even then, in the GOP scenario, what that results in is “less investment & fewer jobs”, which is not even clever bullshit, for several reasons. The first is that just because Dr. Richie Rich decides it’s not worth earning another $100K because so much will go to taxes, it doesn’t mean that NO ONE will be attracted to the idea of earning more. So Dr. Rich decides to stop accepting new patients because half of what he makes from seeing them will go to taxes and it’s just not worth it to him to give up his time for a diminished return on it. Does that mean those patients are SOL and aren’t going to see ANY doctor? Fuck no. What it means is that Dr. Not-As-Rich who isn’t in that top bracket will grow his practice – wealth will become less concentrated as money that would have gone to Dr. Rich goes to Dr. Not-As-Rich instead. Which as we’ve all noticed, is not a bad thing. And the same goes for all professions, businesses, innovations, etc. Economies abhor a vacuum. If there is a demand, and the wealthy can’t be arsed to get off of theirs to meet it because they won’t get to keep enough of the returns to make it worth their valuable time, it just creates an opportunity for the less-wealthy to step in and fill the gap and increase their own wealth. In a healthy capitalist system, this should be a goal. The fact that it isn’t the goal in ours tells you all you need to know about its health.
So much of the bullshit that passes for “common sense” in Republican circles doesn’t stand up to even a cursory examination of veracity.
Linda Featheringill
donkey #21
As I understand it, Obama wants a 4 trillion dollar reduction in the deficit, achieved by some combination of reduced spending and increased revenue. He isn’t talking about paring down existing programs by 4 tril.
Tom Levenson
@Aimai
Nope — don’t have the fifth book. I’m still reading number 3 on my Kindle.
Disagree w. those who see this as another Lord of the Rings. Lots of plot, but no theme, and thin characters. Which means it works great on those afternoons at Singing Beach.
Lawnguylander
@Dennis SGMM
There are states and districts that go back and forth between electing Republicans and Democrats. Nothing all that sudden about it if it happens again.
Jim C.
Murder-suicide?
An inflammatory but, unfortunately, very apt choice of words. I agree that the jury is still out on whether or not the GOP has enough people who are simply cynical/evil and don’t believe the crap they tell the rubes they use to get elected to pull us back from the brink or have fundamentally blundered by letting TOO many of the true-believing crazies in.
It still staggers me that I find myself having to root for people like Boehner and McConnell. There isn’t enough alcohol in the world to soothe the disgust my soul feels at this moment.
“Go cynical and evil people! We need you back in control of the GOP! Please hurry up and put the merely ignorant, crazy and stupid parts of your party back in their designated place!”
Han's Solo
@Linda Featheringill:
That’s what I thought!
eemom
@ Uncle
In other “day ending with y” news, you’re a tedious fucking idiot.
Linda Featheringill
jaf #17
Congratulations on your upcoming marriage. Many years of happiness and joy.
The current crisis will work out somehow.
Question: If you are angry/anxious now, what will you be like when the crunch from peak oil descends on us? It will definitely affect you and your bride and all the little Shackelfords.
Han's Solo
@Jennifer:
Exactly. But it is worse than that. The GOP also claims that raising taxes on unearned income will hurt ordinary people, not just the rich. But that is mostly crap. The vast majority of people do most of their investing through their IRAs and/or their retirement accounts. Raising the capital gain tax rate has ZERO effect on investments held in IRAs. ZERO. The same is true for dividends.
MBunge
“Today I was feeling fairly positive but then I checked out Matt Taibbi’s RS page and he’s has down on Obama as Krugman and Digby.”
I think we should all remember as the Tea Party pushes us into disaster that the skids are being greased by liberals who care more about fluffing their own self-righteousness than anything else.
Mike
Dennis SGMM
@Jim C.
To me, one of the things that’s changed is that, in the House at least, many of the Republican freshman really do believe the crap that they’re spouting. That Boehner can’t get those freshmen to vote in lockstep IAW Republican norms is an interesting development.
Han's Solo
@Tom Levenson: Tyrion Lanister and Jon Snow are not “thin” characters! Neither are Arya and the Hound.
As to the theme, I’d say it is something along the lines of, “Politics is not bean bag, and it never was.”
DonkeyKong
The 4 trillion cut is 1/3rd tax increases and 2/3 cuts to entitlement programs. If the economy continues to slow down the need for entitlement programs goes up and tax revenue goes down.
Don’t break out your foam fingers for Barack “General George McClellan” Obama just yet.
“Someday this wars gonna end….”
scav
A Swallow of Whine? It certainly takes more than one to make a summer. I like the second as it is only am hoping vainishly for its sudden transformation to a Totter of Fluffers.
DonkeyKong
Can someone tell me, I seem to have forgot, what states the powerful senators Taibbi, Digby and Krugman are from and what their roles are in DC?
It’s as if they are co-presidents.
Tom Levenson
https://balloon-juice.com/2011/07/14/what-do-you-call-it-when-a-herd-of-pigs-takes-flight-a-wallow-of-swine-a-flutter-of-trotters/#comment-2671203. Tyrion is interesting, and Arya’s coming along. I’m only in Book 3, but the Hound hasn’t impressed me as that deep; and Jon is still figuring out that being a bastard is not, necessarily, a justification for every emotion.
They’re not bad — much better than the common run of summer fun books. But none so far have shown anything like the consequences of character that affected about a dozen figures in LOTR.
Jennifer
@46 – sez who?
Are you the only one who saw the list of agreed-upon cuts in the $4 trillion package? Because what the rest of us saw contained no specifics – none, zip, nada. Which makes your claim that 2/3 of it was “cuts to entitlement programs” look more like something pulled out of your nether end rather than what we would typically call a “fact.”
handsmile
Tom Levenson:
Already coined and apposite: A drift of Hogs. A singular of Boars. A rout of Wolves. A knot of Toads.
And on that blessed day when the Greedy Old Party comes to its final reward, it will be greeted by “an exaltation of Larks.”
(All the above taken from James Lipton’s delightful book on terms of venery.)
Canadian Shoggoth (#25): Points for creativity!
JPL
Dennis @ 44
Terrorists have taken over the republican party.
Dennis SGMM
@MBunge
How, exactly, are liberals greasing the skids? You could save yourself some keystrokes by simply writing “HIPPY PUNCH!” and dropping the last “e” from your nick.
Origuy
Why would anyone who calls him or herself a progressive or a liberal believe Eric Cantor’s version of a meeting over Barack Obama’s?
Martin
People should go back and watch the question time session he had with Republicans and see if they still agree.
What Obama can say and what Obama believes, just like what Republicans can say and what Republicans believe, are unfortunately entirely different things.
I don’t doubt that Cantor and Ryan are fully bugfuck insane on the revenue and tax issue, along with most of the teatards, but the reason why talks like this are held behind closed doors isn’t so much how to debate what combination of revenues and spending are needed – I think everyone is broadly in agreement on that, but how much they can deliver and politically afford. I have no doubt that behind those doors, Bohner and McConnell will freely admit (not so much with Cantor around, perhaps) we need to raise taxes. But they can’t deliver votes on that, and the Dems know it. They either need to find a way to hide the revenue gains or to deliver something that is symbolically more valuable. “Yes, we’re giving up ground on the capital gains rate, but we defunded NPR, which is what we really cared about”. That kind of bullshit.
That’s why they want Cantor out of the room, because he’s a true believer. He will strap the fiscal suicide vest on and walk down to Wall Street and set it off, and that scares the hell out of everyone – including guys like Boehner.
Almost everyone (except for the tea party) knows the political game, and everyone plays it, because Dems have exactly the same problem as the GOP. What Obama needs to do is find things that accomplish the goal of raising revenue (which the serious GOP almost certainly now seems to agree needs to happen) but hide it in such a way that the 27%ers don’t punish them for doing it. And Obama needs to ask for spending cuts that do the same thing on the left – actually cut spending, but hide that from us.
handsmile
scav (#47):
Oh that’s very nice indeed. A doff of the chapeau. (It appeared while I was typing my previous comment.)
Davis X. Machina
@Jennifer:
You can’t refute a theology. In the old days, they used a stake, and a lot of brushwood, and a medieval box of medieval kitchen matches, and even that didn’t always work. We of course don’t roll that way now.
Han's Solo
@Tom Levenson: Each to their own. I actually like the series more than LOTR. My problem with the series is that the lag between books is so long I feel I need to go reread the last couple of books before I start the fifth book.
Just wait, the Hound and Arya get better. You’ll see.
Also too, if you like the genre, might I suggest Patrick Rothfuss’ “The Name of the Wind.” It isn’t the same Epic Fantasy kind of tale, but it does entertain in a big way.
...now I try to be amused
@eemom:
Money prefers a stable and predictable economy; money did pretty damn well during the Clinton administration. If the Tea Partiers are agents of chaos, then why doesn’t the money migrate to the Democrats while the GOP implodes?
Admiral_Komack
WARNING: OFF-TOPIC:
*I’m shocked, SHOCKED, I tell you!
Posted at 11:19 AM ET, 07/14/2011
Mistrial declared in Roger Clemens case
By Del Quentin Wilber
The judge overseeing the perjury trial of famed former pitcher Roger Clemens declared a mistrial Thursday after prosecutors played a portion of a video that the judge deemed prejudicial.
U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton said prosecutors erred in playing video of Congressional testimony referencing statements made by the wife of a “critical” witness in the case.
“I am very troubled by this,” said U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton said before declaring a mistrial.
The declaration came on just the second day of testimony and after it took a week to pick a jury.
Walton said he would hear arguments in coming weeks about whether prosecutors can re-try Clemens without violating his constitutional right against double jeopardy.
The request for a mistrial came from Clemens’ lawyers after prosecutors mistakenly played a portion of Congressional testimony that referenced the wife of former pitcher Andy Pettitte, a friend and former teammate of Clemens.
Pettitte told Congressional investigators Clemens had confided in him in 1999 or 2000 that he had taken a performance-enhancing substance. Pettitte also told Congressional investigators that he told his wife about that conversation when it took place. She provided an affidavit to Congress backing her husband’s claims.
Walton ruled that prosecutors could not raise Laurie Pettitte’s statements before the jury because he didn’t think it would be fair to Clemens.
On Thursday morning, prosecutors played Congressional testimony of Rep. Elijah Cummings asking Clemens questions about his alleged use of steroids and Human Growth Hormone. Cummings then quoted Laurie Pettitte’s affidavit to Congress and talked about how Pettitte seemed like a reliable witness.
Before defense lawyers could object, Walton ordered a halt to the proceedings, dismissed the jury and then excoriated prosecutors for violating his order preventing any mention of what Pettitte may have told his wife.
The judge called Pettitte a “critical witness” and said such information may unfairly bolster his credibility with jurors. He sharply criticized prosecutors, accusing them of making a mistake he would not expect from a novice attorney.
“A first-year law student would know you can’t bolster the credibility of one witness with clearly inadmissible evidence,” Walton said.
Irritated with prosecutors, Walton stopped the proceedings. He said he was worried that the information on the video would unfairly bolster Pettitte’s credibility with jurors.
“I don’t see how I can unring the bell,” he added, before leaving the bench to discuss the matter with a “colleague.”
Federal prosecutors barely got a chance to defend themselves before Walton left the courtroom. They had been admonished during opening statements for violating another order by Walton precluding them from introducing testimony from other ball players about their use of HGH.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Steven Durham said he had given the tapes to the defense lawyers and they hadn’t objected to them. He also noted that the comments about Laurie Pettitte were in the context of a broader discussion with Clemens about his own denials about HGH and steroid use.
Clemens said at the Congressional hearing that Pettitte had misheard or misremembered their conversation and he asserted that he had never admitted to Pettitte that he had taken HGH.
A clearly chagrined Durham also told Walton that “we are not evading any responsibility” shortly before Walton left the bench.
[This post has been updated.]
By Del Quentin Wilber | 11:19 AM ET, 07/14/2011
http://www.washingtonpost.com/del-quentin-wilber/2011/03/01/ABugesM_page.html
gelfling545
1. Should Palin or Bachmann (or any of the other GOP carnival acts) actually win 2012 I will take that as proof that a. there is a god; and b. it hates humanity.
2. In discussions with acquaintances I have found that the republicans I know are no less alarmed that the democrats & are also really confused about just what “their” party is up to. These are mostly elderly people who for most of their lives chose between candidates here in WNY where one wasn’t all that much different from the other and so went by brand. Now they are waking up to a stark difference with “their” brand poised to do them significant harm. I do wonder what this will mean going forward but I suspect that, unless the GOP can moderate its positions at least to some extent, these folks will either avoid the polls entirely or go with the democrats.
Jennifer
If the Tea Partiers are agents of chaos, then why doesn’t the money migrate to the Democrats while the GOP implodes?
Because money doesn’t want to recognize that it’s reached the end of the line vis-a-vis ever-lower taxes and continued accumulation of wealth, and it can’t get policies as favorable for those goals from the Dems as it can from the Clown Car party.
joes527
Han’s Solo
So, I’m still in the first book, but I have a fundamental question about the TV series.
At the end of season 1 they killed off the actor that was carrying the whole thing. this isn’t issue in the novels because minor characters can always step up and become more interesting. Actors, however, can’t suddenly become better.
Now don’t get me wrong, I’ve enjoyed a number of actors in the series. But I just don’t see any of them stepping up to be the show.
At the start of book two is there a new character that can be cast to make a season 2 interesting? Or will it be fundamentally the same ensemble w/o the dead ones? Does Richard Madden become the key character? (I don’t see that ending well)
DBrown
How about ‘A swindle of swine’ That seems to cover thugs well.
Linda Featheringill : Yeah, peak oil (appears to be here) is a bitch and will bite harder every time the economy starts to improve, dragging it back down. Then AGW will get nastier and also bite harder. The future will not be pretty for most the world; we are in a far better position.
As for jaf #17
when you say ‘your future wife wants a child …’ that is not a good attitude for a good marriage. You have an issue with having a child? Better talk that one out before heading there. Children are still our best hope.
Linda Featheringill
jennifer #62
money migrating to the Dems
Democrats are harder to control than the Republicans. We can be won over and we can be faithful with a passion. But it’s very difficult to control us.
Just ask Obama. :-)
Martin
Tell that to Boehner.
Chris
“Common sense is what tells us the Earth is flat.”
– can’t remember who, but he had a point.
Han's Solo
@joes527: Honestly, I read the books years ago and most of my favorite bits happen after the first book.
Ned Stark’s death is really the beginning of the tale. I was a tad surprised the show gave him such prominence.
But it really is, in many ways, a story about politics and families. You have the Starks, a group of pragmatic people who just want what is best (Democrats) and the Lannisters, greedy swine without morals (Republicans.)
Personally, my favorite characthers are Jon Snow, Arya Stark and Tyrion Lannister.
MBunge
“How, exactly, are liberals greasing the skids? You could save yourself some keystrokes by simply writing “HIPPY PUNCH!” and dropping the last “e” from your nick.”
The list could go on and on and on, but let’s just stick with two things.
1. A constant stream of commentary that is as willfully in-fucking-different to political reality as the most far gone “Keep the government out of my Medicare” Teabagger.
2. Bill Clinton never got 50% of the American public to vote for him. Bill Clinton not only led the Democratic Party to its worst electoral defeat in two generations, he left office with Democrats in exponentially worst shape on almost every level than when he was elected. Bill Clinton also spent most of his Presidency fucking the liberal and progressive agenda as hard and as long as he could, producing many of the very political realities over which Obama gets reamed out on an hourly basis. Yet the same liberals who went to the mat and beyond to defend Bill Clinton from a scandal entirely of his own making and continue to refer to him with affectionate nicknames like “the Big Dog”, can’t give two shits to defend a President who is probably more liberal and, from a progressive policy perspective, defintely more successful than Bill Clinton ever was.
Mike
JGabriel
Tom Levenson:
I’ve always hated the idea of a national sales tax for its regressiveness too, Tom, but lately Krugman is beginning to make me think there’s some merit to VAT:
I’m not thrilled with the idea of a VAT tax, but it’s probably a
bettermore pragmatic solution than lining all the wealthy conservatives against a wall and machine-gunning them down..
Davis X. Machina
@JGabriel: It is, in some ways, the revenue-side version of not means-testing a social provision, lest a program become a program for the poor, becoming in turn a poor program.
Tonal Crow
Mark S.:
You got that right. If anything like this study’s projections occur, there will be no civilization by 2100, if not earlier.
...now I try to be amused
@Linda Featheringill #65:
That’s been true in the past, but if the Tea Party caucus means it when they say they will vote against raising the debt ceiling, then there is a significant portion of the GOP that money does not control.
In Monty Python terms, the Democratic Party is now the Sensible Party and the GOP is the Silly Party with a Very Silly wing. If I was filthy rich I’d be thinking the GOP might have outlived its usefulness to me.
mr. whipple
There’s a whole niche for people who crave despair in the LW blogosphere. You know which blogs provide it.
If you don’t need that in your life, don’t go there. It’s pretty simple, really.
dedc79
Dostoevsky’s The Possessed (aka The Demons) starts with an epigraph from the Book of Luke. Here’s his description of why he chose that particular quote, that I think is applicable to today’s tea party nutjobs:
The disease that had gripped civilised Russians was much stronger than we ourselves had imagined…..and at that point there occurred what the apostle Luke testifies to: there were devils sitting in a man and their name was Legion, and they asked Jesus: “Command us to enter into the swine”, and he permitted them to. So the devils entered into a herd of swine, and the whole herd threw itself into the sea from a high place, and they all drowned. And when the local people came running to see what had happened, they saw the formerly possessed man in his right mind and sitting at the feet of Jesus, and those who had witnessed it, told how a man possessed had been been healed….. That’s exactly the way it happened with us. The devils went out of the Russian man and entered a herd of swine – that is the Nechaevs and so on……That’s exactly how it had to be. Russia has vomited up the garbage she was fed on and there’s nothing Russian left in these vomited-up scoundrels……….. If you want to know, that’s exactly the theme of my novel: it’s called The Possessed, and it’s a description of how those devils entered a herd of swine………..
Dennis SGMM
@MBunge
The error that you and many in the “blame the liberals” cadre make is that of inconsistency. Either the liberals are a bunch of one-issue, unreliable assholes who make up such a small part of the Democratic party that the administration can safely ignore them or, that with their liberal super powers they can throw elections to the Repubs, bend steel in their bare hands and leap over tall buildings. They are either an influential constituency or they are not. The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our liberals, but in ourselves, that we are underlings.
As for Clinton, I have no love and little respect for the man. My disdain for the Clintons is so strong that I’d have voted for a ham on rye before I’d have voted for his wife.
bkny
morning joe
Jesus! Really? Wow.
That’s what I thought!
i saw that and it was surprising how deliberate joescar was; he even repeated it. and esp the this isn’t obama’s debt. and, yet, they repeatedly let gop representatives on that show spout these lies without correction.
Montysano
@Jennifer:
I am not an economist, although I was a math major. I’ve spent a considerable amount of time trying to wrap my head around the current global
Ponzi schemeeconomy. I can come to no other conclusion than: it’s gonna blow. The meters are pegged in the red zone. The exponential curves are all shooting straight north.I’d be thrilled for someone to tell me that I’m mistaken.
NonyNony
@MBunge
Don’t work yourself up too much about it – most liberals hated Clinton in the 90s and it was only the concerted effort of the Republicans to impeach him for something trivial and stupid that led to his redemption in the eyes of liberals. That and the fact that he was replaced by W and in retrospect looks good.
Don’t worry about it. Liberals hated Carter too – he was a great betrayer who sold everyone out in his time. Kennedy would have reached those heights as well had he lived long enough.
It’s what a portion of the liberal bloc of this country tends to do. It’s full of idealists, and when reality conflicts with idealism they get mad at the people they’ve projected their ideals onto. And then later in retrospect – when compared to a reality like Reagan or W or Nixon – they get wistful and think “things really weren’t so bad off back then.”
If you spend time being angry at them for being angry, you’re just going to waste your time. Two or three presidents down the road the same liberal bloc will be bitching about whatever Democrat is president and wistfully remembered the days when a “real progressive like Obama” was in office.
NR
Obama supporters have no room whatsoever to talk about political reality when their guy is pushing austerity in the middle of a recession. This is from Ezra Klien, who has been a cheerleader for this administration from the beginning:
The White House is ignoring the reality that austerity hurts the economy, and the economy is what voters will care about in 2012–not whether Obama looks “reasonable” or “bipartisan.”
Maude
@MBunge:
This.
Martin
Well, the left already has a version of this argument, which is ‘don’t turn SS into a welfare program’, which is a fine argument when they talk about opposing means-testing, but is a hypocritical argument when they then embrace raising the payroll cap, which is simply a different variety of means-testing. But SS is the model Krug is talking about.
The other version of the argument which both left and right seem to oppose comes from the deficit commission which everyone hates. Their vision of the tax structure was to say ‘Eliminate the wide disparity in tax brackets, make it somewhat flatter, but also take away the unlimited deductions.’. The left hates that idea because they seem to want their pound of flesh with a high marginal rate, ignoring the fact that nobody actually pays that rate because they route around it, and the right hates that idea because they see individuals gaming the tax code as some kind of proof that rich people are more evolved than poor people.
I’d like to see more of an argument from the left to reform the tax code to extract higher revenues rather than the reflexive ‘raise the top marginal rate’ response. Frankly, it’s stupid and counterproductive.
Dennis SGMM
@Montysano
I’d be even more thrilled if you told me that you were mistaken. I’m an Old Guy so use the “Hey, you kids! Get off my lawn!” filter on the following.
It looks to me as though we’re reaching the limits of pissing away, or being robbed of, the work of generations of our forebears. When two-thirds of the economy is based on selling each other shit that was made elsewhere then sooner or later then we’re not generating wealth, we’re just passing around whatever’s left. That isn’t, to me anyway, a recipe for long term economic strength and I’d say that the increasingly flat recoveries from the increasing number of economic downturns bears out my contention. Any number of people who are way more savvy about the economy than I am have proposed various solutions. We don’t seem to be headed toward any of them.
Han's Solo
@NR: Ezra Klein also says this:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/the-white-houses-case-for-a-big-deficit-deal/2011/07/14/gIQAdj4AEI_blog.html?wprss=ezra-klein
Bobby Thomson
There are actually several themes. None of them is particularly insightful, but there are themes. Some of the characters are deeper than others, but then, Legolas and Gimli weren’t exactly deep, and Aragorn is actually a fairly dull character when you get down to it.
1. All men die.
2. Good times never last. When someone has had a string of good luck, expect it to change.
3. The king is an asshole.
4. The king has only as much power as people give him.
5. People see what they want to see.
Just for starters.
Book Five has a lot of repetition of tropes and tricks, but goes quickly. I liked all the unresolved story lines, but at least one of the cliff hangers can be seen coming from 10000 leagues away.
goblue72
Shut up Martin! Stop making sense. The reality is that a bunch of old white guys on the Internet (your average blog commenter) just KNOW that the President is a naive fool and not – you know – an real flesh and blood politician. Because, you know, he never really learned anything during all those years in the Illinois state house, plus time in the Senate and now 3 in the White House, and all the elections he had to win to get there.
Oh, and Mitt Romney is going to be the GOP nominee. The bug-eyed tea party loons like Bachmann or Palin or whoever will get their moment in the sun and then implode spectacularly. Unless the GOP offers up some other centrist-y candidate that can navigate the primaries, Romney is their man. They aren’t putting up some lunatic who will drag the rest of the party down with her or him.
Romney is Obama’s biggest threat and both the GOP and Team Obama know it. The hard red states would vote “R” for a serial killer. The big swingers like Ohio, PA, Florida, Colorado – and as we saw in 2008, North Carolina – are the ones Obama is worried about. A lot of those states would generally prefer to vote for a Republican, but the Obama wave combined with 8 years of Bush idiocy (and an incompetent McCain campaign) pushed most of those states in the Blue column. But a crappy economy combined with a bland, I’m-not-bugfuck-insane, candidate like Romney is DANGEROUS.
I watched what he did in Massachusetts. It was not pretty. All the Boston suburbs which had high “independent” voter registrations all swung for the Mittster. They bought his BS hook, line and sinker.
Odie Hugh Manatee
Oh the butthurt I am reading on the left that Obama had dared to talk about spending cuts to entitlements, the ‘woe is me’ crowd is going at it full tilt. Obama played a card in his hand and that’s it, and that card just might help him win the round. As Lawrence O’Donnell said, until something is written and signed into law, it’s only talk. Talk is just that; talk. It has no force of law, nothing binding. It’s just talk. Obama could have said anything outrageous and it would be taken as seriously as the next suggestion in the budget talks. Yet this talking of his has the manic progressive left up in arms.
Manic progressives wear blinders that limit their thinking and actions. While I may agree with many of their goals, they lose me with their tactics. A bunch of noise and fury, signifying little. It’s sad but they have willfully put themselves in positions that make them look that way.
Bill O'Reilly
I got nothin.
What do you call a group of Republicans trying to govern?
A Scrotum of Teabaggers.
JPL
What about turnout. I don’t see a lot of evangelicals rushing to polls to support him.
Also, too there is this ad from Political Wire
gocart mozart
Damn, forgot to change my nym back.
Martin
Austerity *in entitlement programs* generally does not, however. Mainly because real changes to entitlement programs are almost always realized far in the future. In terms of achieving near term deficit gains, there’s only two ways to do that:
1) increase the revenues coming into those programs (raise payroll, etc.) since those happen now, and don’t need to be grandfathered in.
2) decrease spending without decreasing benefits – pay less for Medicare procedures, for example.
But because they are realized far in the future, you can’t claim that they would have a meaningful economic impact now. And in fact, part of the grand bargain may be as straightforward as “Ok, we’ll spread out some pain over the next 50 years in order to get the safety net and jobs secured over the next 2 years”. That’s not such a horrible deal. In fact, it’s so not horrible that we have an institutionalized version of it: the national debt.
And as for this:
That’s $120B per year. And all defense is discretionary. Iraq/Afghanistan is budgeted for $118B this year. That ‘massive attack’ could be as horrible as getting out of Iraq/Afghanistan and wiping it out of the budget along with a weapons program or two. Why is everyone wetting their pants over this?
Montysano
@Dennis SGMM: I got no help for you. Debt ceiling deal or no debt ceiling deal, the math is still pretty much the same.
Martin
Right now, Minnesota.
Andrew
It wasn’t just Carter or Clinton. LBJ – after basically creating the American welfare state – was hounded out of office (rightfully, IMO) over Vietnam. And going even further back, look up what liberal opinion-makers – pundits, columnists, activist leaders – used to say about not only Truman but FDR himself. FDR was routinely pilloried as a crypto-conservative, as a sellout, etc. The New Deal was derided as a watered-down inadequate response to the Depression.
Now, I’m not comparing FDR to Obama. My point is just that – as you said – it is the nature of liberals to be idealists and to be dissatisfied or feel “betryaal” at the compromises made by their political leaders. It happens like clockwork with pretty much every single Democratic president.
Bobby Thomson
Peter Dinklage and Maisie Williams FTW.
Madden does need to step it up, though.
The Moar You Know
Tonal Crow: Hooray! Our own Arrakis!
By 2100 I, just like the Fremen of the novel, can wade around the dunes in a gussied-up garbage bag full of my own sweat, urine and feces, “recycling” the water of my own body.
Oh brave new world, that has such odors in it!
liberal
Martin blithered,
Right. I’m sure no one on the left is wise enough to understand this simple fact about taxes, O Wise One. /snark
Lawnguylander
@Martin
I’m no expert on such issues but I’m sure such proposals are out there. I just wouldn’t put much hope in it coming from the louder voices out there. The kind that think that, when the deficit commission was announced, their responsibility ended with coming up with the term catfood commission and then using it. Once you’ve done that there’s no need or possibility of working the various refs to try to influence the commission’s work or promote the good part of their kind-of-a report once it was issued. They’re never going to try to kick the ball through the uprights because they mistake political opportunities for Lucy every time they’re in front of them.*
ETA: *Such, passive, defeatist behavior is called “preemptive surrender.”
catclub
Montysano @ 78 “I’d be thrilled for someone to tell me that I’m mistaken.”
Well, that depends. Do you consider what happened in 2008 as blowing up the same as what is coming? I would agree that THAT is quite possible. Markets went down by 45-50% and then recovered. Unemployment went up (and stayed up) but not at the 47% range.
Why 47% – it was the level in Germany when the government threw up their hands and said, “Ok, Adolf, you try to fix it.”
Or is the coming blow-up going to be worse than 47% unemployment? I do not see that. These problems are fixable by comparison.
gocart mozart
DBrown @ 64 “A Swindle of Swine”
FTW!
liberal
Andrew wrote,
That’s pretty funny, given that it’s been pretty conclusively demostrated that the New Deal was, in fact, an inadequate response to the GD. The “adequate” response wasn’t the ND, but rather American entry into WWII.
Do you O-bots have any self-awareness when you post this kind of stupidity?
Maude
@Dennis SGMM:
China’s labor costs are rising and US companies are starting to consider bringing back the work to the US. Heard this on Bloomberg radio this a.m.
It may be that manufacturing will increase here and it is already doing better than other areas of the economy. This isn’t your mother’s manufacturing, but tech type.
The head of GE was out giving a speech to big bidness about this and he wasn’t booed.
liberal
@NonyNony wrote,
Given that the historical record shows that a lot of “Reaganism” started with Carter (e.g. massive military buildup), a pretty good case can be made against Carter.
But that wouldn’t fit your narrative, so…
liberal
@34 Jennifer wrote,
I’ve never understood that either. Though I’m sure some
whoreeconomist would tell you that the elasticities are such that…Montysano
@catclub:
Our fiat currency system, i.e. money loaned into creation, is inherently exponential. As a mathematician, I know that an exponential curve, through careful management of variables, can stay relatively flat. We have not, of course, been judicious, and have reached the point where the curve has turned due north, where no amount of cutting or taxing or deck chair rearranging will bring it back into control.
Again: I’d be thrilled to be wrong.
RP
IMO, the theme of Game of Thrones is pretty similar to the theme of the Sopranos and Philip Larkin’s This Be the Verse:
They fuck you up, your mum and dad.
They may not mean to, but they do.
They fill you with the faults they had
And add some extra, just for you.
But they were fucked up in their turn
By fools in old-style hats and coats,
Who half the time were soppy-stern
And half at one another’s throats.
Man hands on misery to man.
It deepens like a coastal shelf.
Get out as early as you can,
And don’t have any kids yourself.
RP
You’re just proving his point that the far left can never be grateful for what democrats actually accomplish, and instead will always complain about what they did not.
bemused
Andrew@94
The New Deal was a watered down, inadequate response to the Depression? That will come as a huge surprise to my in-laws who are 92 and 88. They as teenagers had jobs funded by the government that gave them training in a skill and allowed them to bring money home to their families that was badly needed. Their paychecks kept their families from going hungry and barely surviving and it was the same for so many other families in the area.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
It goes back even further; circa 1902 TR was routinely castigated by the progressive press of his era for the same litany of deadly sins. And don’t even get started on what Lincoln had to put up with from his own side. Different party, same dynamic.
Having said that, I think there is some purpose to having wild eyed idealists on one’s own side. They push the limits of what is thinkable and make the pragmatic moderates look, well, moderate and pragmatic by comparison. The trick is to not have it look as if they are taking over the party which can scare the low-info voters, and to keep them from shooting their own wounded at the worst possible time. It is possible to be both an idealist and to think tactically, it just takes more work than most people are willing or able to put in.
liberal
17. J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford wrote,
Yeah, that’s what I’m planning to do.
liberal
@109. ThatLeftTurnInABQ wrote,
Hmm…sounds like the Overton Window…I thought the OW was considered heretical here at BJ?
Probably the wisest observation made on this blog ever (no snark).
scav
bemused @ 108 but those weren’t real jobs unlike the jobs provided by the equally-government-funded-but-magically-enhanced-by-live-ammunition-fired-in-anger jobs provided by a massive war effort. Presumably the food they brought home wasn’t real either and so none of the subsequent generations actually exist.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
Funny how an unprovoked surprise attack on the country precipitating our direct involvment in the largest and most industrialized global war in human history changes the fundamental political economy of a nation, isn’t it?
If that is all it takes, what is Obama waiting for, anyway?
Ruckus
Chris
If “common sense” was so common, more people would have some of it.
Ruckus
Montysano
I’d be thrilled for someone to tell me that I’m mistaken.
You want us to lie to you?
bemused
scav
Of course, what was I thinking? I just can’t get the hang of Real American speak.
As Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer of MN reminded 99% of we Minnesotans, we don’t really work. Gov Dayton’s proposal to raise taxes on 7,700 who make over a million a year revenue wouldn’t be revenue, it would be “a tax increase on those who’ve actually worked”.
catclub
Montysano @ 105 “Our fiat currency system, i.e. money loaned into creation, is inherently exponential.”
Indeed. Of course Weimar 1923 and and Zimbabwe printed paper money. But _so far_ they are anomalies, not the norm.
This appears to be a slippery slope argument. The fact that the government could do something extremely unpopular and destructive means we should allow the governmnet no power at all.
Actually, it means governments tend NOT to do extremely unpopular and destructive things, because they are unpopular. I know this is not a guarantee, but is the best I can come up with.
...now I try to be amused
@ThatLeftTurnInABQ #113:
Another way Bush fucked up the War on Terra. He couldn’t even get an economic boom out of it.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
@liberal #111:
First off, thanks for the compliment.
My take is that the Overton Window is not at all a heretical concept here at the Juice. What is very controversial is: what is the most effective way to push on the OW to move it leftwards? I think this comes down to whether you think issues or personalities are a more important factor in reaching the average low-info and/or independent voter. There seem to be two different theories at work here.
(A) The issue centric approach, which is favored by most of the netroots. Pick the right policy issues, push them hard, and voters will favor the party and politicians who do so, because what voters want from their leaders is beneficial policy. The policy benefits the politician, not the other way around.
This viewpoint is based on an assumption that the bulk of the voters pay attention to policy more so than personalities.
in contrast we have:
(B) The personality centric approach, which is favored by the Obots on this blog. In this approach the goal is to build up the popularity of the major leaders of the party (starting with the POTUS for obvious reasons) who are sympbolic surrogates for the policy ideas favored by our side. If the party leadership is popular with the public at large, then the policy ideas which are associated with them will gain in popularity as well, thus pushing the OW in that direction. The policy benefits from association with the politician, not the other way around.
This viewpoint is based on an assumption that the bulk of the voters pay attention to personalities more so than policy.
These are endpoints, obviously you can have some mix of both of these factors. But the problem is, when you go to pick tactics, these two approaches are working against each other, particularly with regard to intra-party (or if you prefer intra-ideological faction) criticism, or what LBJ used to call “pissing inside the tent”. Pissing inside the tent is a positive tactic advancing the cause in case A but is a negative tactic hurting the cause in case B, despite the fact that in both cases “the cause” is moving the Overton Window.
Now from my point of view, I think case B is a better fit for our recent political history (c.f. the Reagan administration for example) than is case A, and also a better fit for our current dysfunctional mass media environment, which is focused on personalties to the almost total exclusion of policy. So I’m inclined to the notion that building up Obama’s popularity with the public by showing our support for him (even when we don’t always agree in detail with his policy choices on an issue by issue basis) will help move the Overton Window leftwards more effectively than trying the shoot him down at every available opportunity. YMMV.
joes527
Bobby Thomson
I’m a big fan of Peter Dinklage. He is really interesting in the series, but his character is a bit too much comic relief to be central. If the character shifts to be a bit deeper, then I could see this.
Maisie Williams is really good for her age. But she isn’t ready to carry a show.
Andrew
O noes, “O-Bot”!
All I am doing is describing the fact that liberal discontent is an eternal phenomenon when it comes to Democratic presidents. I didn’t say anything about whether it was justified or not. (Often, yes, it is.)
In any event, you’re right that the New Deal was inadequate from a Keynesian perspective, but I was actually referring to broader contours, not just the size and scale. Many lefty commentators – some of whom were real socialists and communists, but many of whom were more mainstream liberals/progressives – wanted FDR to nationalize the U.S. banking industry, seize large estates, etc. The New Deal was fairly radical, but for many on the left it wasn’t enough. It wasn’t just Socialists or Huey Long supporters, but many proto-Great Society liberals who were often frustrated with FDR over not imposing a more comprehensive welfare state. The New Deal, after all, was less about that and more about make-work programs and new regulations. Social Security was the big exception, but wider efforts to cover health care, education, and housing all awaited the ’60s.
Berial
What would the differences be between the affects a powerful ‘far left progressive party’ would have on the Democrats and the affect the ‘tea party’ is having on the Republicans?
Both have their own way of looking at things. Both think those more in the middle are ‘sell outs’ and should be voted out or at least not supported. Neither wants to compromise on what they know is right.
The host party of both are at least sympathetic to their views if not downright supportive.
If the far left progressives were as in control of the Democrats and the far right tea partiers would they have as corrosive an effect on political debate and Governmental function?
Andrew
@bemused (108)
I don’t doubt it. The New Deal was a godsend more millions of people. But even after the New Deal’s make-work programs, unemployment remained fairly high (15% or so), higher when you consider that that rate excluded agricultural workers (a much larger proportion of the population) and women. That was certainly way down from its peak (25%), but it obviously left many people very, very frustrated.
The key difference between FDR’s political support and Obama’s is that FDR maintained much more outward affection from most of his voters. Partly that was because it was a less cynical age, but in large part it was because though things remained bad, there had been very noticeable improvement compared to where things were in 1932.
That said, among the commentariat of his day – the columnists, activists, opinion-makers – there was throughout his presidency, substantial opposition to FDR from the left and an awful lot of frustration.
There was a good diary at GOS about this last fall, which covered some of these. If you ever get a chance, look at old back issues of The New Republic (a real liberal publication at the time) or The Nation, and look at how they wrote about FDR. It really didn’t bear much resemblance to how he was spoken about afterwards.
FlipYrWhig
Absolutely not. “Far left progressives” want kick-ass things, and a far-left progressive government would be awesome.
The problem is that “far left progressives” are VERY VERY FAR from comprising a majority of the Democratic party, let alone commanding the sympathy and/or support of a majority of American voters. And the way certain people who _purport_ to be far left progressives handle that reality is that they curse everyone else for being ball-less sellouts. It’s like Homer Simpson banging the TV cabinet and saying “Stupid TV, be more funny!” Stupid government, be more progressive! Just do it, it’s obviously right, fuckin’ A already! Stop letting them get away with the bullshit! But it’s not going to work that way. That’s why you need a _movement_ rather than simple self-righteousness.
Bobby Thomson
Prepare to enjoy the next season, if the show remains true to the books.
Berial
FlipYrWhig
I agree with most of what you said, I was just curious what people think would happen if the Democrats had a far left as powerful as the Republicans have a ‘far right’.
Would the adherence to ideology and refusal to compromise be as destructive and damaging to the Democrats?
Hell, is the adherence to ideology and refusal to compromise as destructive to the Republicans as I think it is? I’m in MS and it’s just maddening to hear the general support they get here.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
@Andrew #125:
A good summary which jibes with my reading on the era.
A comment on this:
There were some other salient factors at work as well. The Great Depression was already in its 3rd full year and counting when FDR was innagurated in March of 1933 (making it unambiguously the fault of the other party in a way that would haunt the GOP through the rest of the decade), and shortly before he was sworn in the G.D. had apparently metastasized into a full-on banking panic (i.e. an accelerating collapse of the banks in one state after another as a result of depositor withdrawls), not merely an reduction in GDP and increase in unemployment.
The 1930s equivalent of today’s Villagers were in some cases openly calling for FDR to be given dictatorial powers and/or speculating on whether democracy itself had failed in the US. The first bill passed into law under FDR (the bank holiday bill) was voted on by Congress before most members had even seen the text of the bill (there wasn’t time for the Govt. Printing Office to set the type and print it before they voted); essentially they voted in “what he (the Treasury Secty) said”.
Additionally, FDR had the advantage of leading a still very southern party into ideological territory favored by numerous voters in the north and midwest, which meant he could sweep the nation winning all regions in ways that our candidates for POTUS can only dream about today.
To those folks who wish Obama was more like FDR, my response is that the times help make the man, and be careful what you wish for because you may get it. Personally I think comparisons with TR are more apt in terms of the current political climate. TR inherited a divided GOP with a strong conservative wing and a strong progressive movement, and spent much of his time in the WH bridging that gap to that satisfaction of neither side (except when compared with the alternative).
scav
I like how some threads reserve the really interesting discussions into much later after the moving wave has passed on (others turn into cesspools at the same position but oh well). Thanks all.
geg6
What 4 trillion cut are you talking about? The one Obama used as his bluff? WTF is wrong with you? Have you never played poker?
You also, apparently, don’t follow the news closely. That 4 trillion trial balloon was days ago. We are waaaaaaay beyond that now. Maybe if you’d read something other than FDL, you’d prevent yourself from looking stupid.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_07/give_more_or_expect_less030855.php
Judas Escargot
@goblue72:
Yep, this.
Old Yankee Wisdom: You can be as mean and cruel as you like, as long as you serve it chilled (with a side of decorum).