Month: September 2012

Gepetto Politics: The Republicans’ secret weapon

by digby

Ok, the lying is just pathological at this point:

Republicans debuted a new ad Thursday in which a frustrated former Obama supporter expresses her disappointment with the president. The only problem: The woman in the video is actually an RNC staffer.

The new ad features Republican National Committee Director of Hispanic Outreach Bettina Inclan, who in the ad purports to be an average woman voter who supported Obama in 2008. She describes her disillusionment with the president in the ad as a romantic relationship gone awry.

“You’re just not he person I thought you were,” Inclan says in the ad, addressing a cardboard cutout of Obama. Inclan lists out-of-control spending and Obama’s penchant for hanging out with Hollywood celebrities as reasons for the break-up. “It’s not me, it’s you. I think we should just be friends.”
[…]
The RNC says its ad, which first appeared on television Thursday is not dishonest.

“It’s a lighthearted ad to show how millions of Americans feel about President Obama — he’s not the person we thought he was and it’s time to break up with him,” an RNC official told TPM. “But let’s be clear, it is an ad.”

Inclan began her current RNC post in January 2012, and has worked in Republican politics since well before Obama’s 2008 election. She did Hispanic outreach for Rick Scott’s 2010 Florida gubernatorial race worked on Capitol Hill for Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-FL), Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI) and as national executive director of the Republican National Hispanic Assembly.

Even ads for consumer products that feature testimonials always give a disclaimer if the person is an actor. Doing otherwise is called “false advertising.”

Surely they could have found another young Hispanic woman who wasn’t an RNC staffer to do the spot. Why, it’s almost as if they want to get caught lying.

We do know that one thing that really motivates the right wing troops is the idea that they are victims of the liberal media. So, maybe the “we won’t let our campaign be dictated to by fact-checkers” line works well in focus groups. Never underestimate the wingnut persecution complex.

.

Tax collectors for the austerity state

by digby

President Clinton’s biggest dud of an applause line last night was when he mentioned Simpson-Bowles. It was stone cold silent in the room. I hope the President noticed and has adjusted this accordingly:

Stephanie Cutter, appearing on CNN’s Starting Point on Thursday, said, “I think you will hear the president layout his plan of balanced deficit reduction where everybody pays their fair share and we cut what we don’t need and that includes entitlement reform.”

This won’t win any votes outside the Village. (And I don’t care what he says about this, the 1%ers are not going to come flocking back. He called them fat cats and they’re not going to ever forgive such an insult. I’m guessing it’s the fat part that really burns.)

This is such an unpopular and dangerous proposition that the Republicans issued Luntzian talking points on it:

It only took two hours after the Paul Ryan vice presidential announcement for Republican congressional candidates to get their talking points on how to spin the Ryan budget and Medicare attacks.

“Do not say: ‘entitlement reform,’ ‘privatization,’ ‘every option is on the table,’” the National Republican Congressional Committee said in an email memo. “Do say: ‘strengthen,’ ‘secure,’ ‘save,’ ‘preserve, ‘protect.’”

The email read like a warning shot, alerting Republicans that they would soon face a barrage of Medicare-themed attacks and telling them they needed to be ready for the scrutiny that was to come. The internal email, obtained by POLITICO, was a clear and immediate sign that Republicans knew Ryan could create trouble down ballot for GOP candidates in tight congressional races.

“Predictably,” the NRCC wrote, Democrats are “already blasting Mitt Romney’s selection of Congressman Paul Ryan as his vice presidential running mate. Expect your boss to get questions from reporters on how this selection of a fellow House member impacts your race.”

The memo — the first of at least a half-dozen the NRCC has sent out to campaigns since the Ryan pick was made public that have been obtained by POLITICO — sheds light on the lengths Republicans have gone to coach their members and candidates to navigate Democratic efforts to tie them to Ryan and his controversial plan to rewrite entitlement laws.

If they are running from this, I’m really not sure why anyone thinks it benefits the President to embrace it. It makes that Chris Hayes quip sickeningly true: the Democrats really are the tax collecters for the austerity state.

I don’t know why he can’t use the same talking points about strengthening, preserving and securing the safety net — and, unlike them, mean it. Nobody wants “entitlement reform” as a part of deficit reduction. They don’t want the poor and disabled to be squeezed either — they know that anything could happen. They want the programs to be there for them, period, and if any reforms are to be done, they don’t want it to involve cutting benefits. If anything, they want them to be more generous. (And, by the way, cutting benefits to fix the deficit isn’t necessary.)

I hope he doesn’t do this. I think it’s a mistake in every possible way.

.

The seductive referee

by digby

Greg Sargent explains why the Democrats wanted Clinton to speak at the convention:

Here’s the key to understanding the barn burner of a speech Bill Clinton just delivered. Senior Dems believe Clinton has taken on a unique role in American politics: They think he is seen by genuine undecided and swing voters as a kind of “referee” figure — someone they can trust to tell them what to think about politics and the economy. These voters, Dems believe, think he understands better than any other major figure exactly the kind of economy they want.

I can see that. The Clinton go-go years for those old enough to remember were very prosperous for many Americans. In fact, it was the last time I think middle class people felt particularly prosperous. And he’s obviously associated with that, although is direct responsibility for it is overstated. But hey, all presidents get credit or blame for the conditions of the country during their tenure. And there is no denying that for many people (not all, by any means) the 90s were good times financially. The only people who are still enjoying that kind of ride are plutocrats and Masters of the Universe. (They finally figured out how to keep it all for themselves.)

But what’s really made him that “referee” figure is the fact that the right wingers have rehabilitated him as a way to show contrast with Obama. It’s been hilarious to watch them fawn over a man they impeached and then sit in stunned disbelief when he once again comes out on top. It’s been the pattern with him from the beginning and it’s what drives them nuts. He seduces them too.

And, I confess, I have a soft spot for him for that reason. He provokes them so much and yet they can’t help but fall under his spell. Watching Fox News pundits have apoplexy last night after they spent the past week cynically building Clinton up was undeniably enjoyable.

.

You say you want to help progressives? Here’s how:

by David Atkins

Sitting in the arena for Bill Clinton’s speech (and six seats away from the amazing, powerful and beautiful Sandra Fluke, who was tremendous at the podium herself) was nothing short of electrifying. The man was simply masterful. I don’t know how it came across on television, but in person it was dramatic and triumphant politicking.

Sure, there are many progressive critiques that could be made of Clinton’s speech, from welfare reform to compromise worship to Simpson-Bowles. But Digby, I and others have made similar critiques of the mainstream Democratic position on these fronts many times before. It would do a disservice to Clinton’s incredible accomplishment last night to rehash them. Few politicians can capture the emotional essence of a narrative as well as Clinton can, and turn policy wonkery into engaging fireside storytelling. Clinton actually spoke to voters like intelligent adults without being boring. And he effortlessly eviscerated conservative ideology and current conservative lies without seeming nasty and mean.

More importantly, whatever one might say against Clintonism from a progressive perspective (and there is much), the fact is that what Clinton said last night about compromise, about welfare and about deficits is where the majority of American people are right now. Yes, we need leaders and rhetoricians who can change that, but that’s not where we are right now, a brief month before the first mail-in ballots go out in this election. Bill Clinton’s positive polling is through the roof, and he may have won this election with a single speech tonight. Attacking him isn’t going to do anyone but Republicans any good.

But for those uncomfortable with the hold of Clintonism over Democratic ideology, there is one central task: get Elizabeth Warren elected. Her speech was a powerhouse for progressives:

Make no mistake: this woman is a serious threat not only to Republicans, but to the neoliberal establishment as well. And if wins, she’s a serious potential presidential contender as well.

But in the context of progressive influence within the Democratic Party, it will make no difference whether the President is re-elected if Elizabeth Warren loses. If Warren loses it will be seen as a rejection of progressivism itself, regardless of Barack Obama’s fate. That cannot be allowed to happen.

If you aren’t helping anyone else this cycle, if you are upset with neoliberalism, and if you truly believe in the progressive cause, you will help Elizabeth Warren. There just isn’t any progressive excuse not to.

.

Bubba speaks

In case you missed it, here’s the whole thing:

Plus this:

Bill Clinton’s Top 10 Best Ad Libs From His D.N.C. Speech

Those of you familiar with social media might have heard tell that former president Bill Clinton’s 48-minute-long speech was about fifteen percent ad lib. For media members with copies of the prepared remarks, the address was something epic fight between the former president and the TelePrompTer, which, per design, stop rolling text whenever Clinton went off script. The machine simply refused to cede any ground to Clinton. Would it skip over paragraphs? Would it replace all his text with a frowning emoticon? The suspense was exhilarating! Below are man’s top ten triumphs over machine: Clinton’s most daring ad libs—phrases he inserted completely out of the blue.

10. “Are you listening Ohio and Michigan?”
9. “This Republican narrative, this alternate universe. . .”
8. “It passes the arithmetic test and more important, it passes the values test.”
7. “We gotta deal with this before it deals with us.”
6. “Democracy does not have to be a blood sport.”
5. “The old economy is not coming back.”
4. “Now you’re having a good time but this is getting serious and I want you to listen.”
3. “This is personal to me.”
2. George Washington was accused of being a “surveyor with a bad set of wooden false teeth.”
1. “You got to admit, it takes some brass to attack a guy for what you did.”

That’s vintage Clinton. Also vintage was the pissing and moaning among the Villagers that he talked to long and didn’t hug Obama warmly enough. Groundhog day.

The best thing about the speech wasn’t the content, although much of that (with some exceptions) was good, it was the fact that he showed America once again that you can talk about policy specifics in a political speech in a way that’s not condescending but is easy to understand. Nobody thinks it’s possible, but he does it. More politicians should try.

The bully pulpit may be bullshit, but educating citizens isn’t.

.

Authoritarians R Us

by digby

Oh my:

I have a feeling Ayn Rand would not approve.

On the other hand, it should not be all that surprising.

Why isn’t Ayn Rand mentioned in the GOP platform?

by digby

Lyin’ Ryan is either fibbing again or he’s been brainwashed by looney tunes Christian conservative historians like David Barton:

Paul Ryan wants the Obama administration to explain why the Democratic platform doesn’t include the word “God” in it.

“I think it’s rather peculiar,” the GOP vice presidential hopeful said during a Fox News appearance on Wednesday morning (via Politico). “It’s not in keeping with our founding documents, our founding vision. I’d guess you’d have to ask the Obama administration why they purged all this language from their platform. There sure is a lot of mention of government. I guess I would just put the onus and the burden on them to explain why they did all this, these purges of God.”

As John Dean tweeted a bit ago, why doesn’t Ryan explain why the Constitution doesn’t mention God? (Other than the “year of our Lord, which is so stupid I just lost 10 IQ points just writing it down.)

Which founding documents is he talking about? “Endowed by our creator?” Pretty vague for a Christian, don’tcha think? But considering that it came from a Deist, it makes some sense. Where else? What’s he going on about?

And anyway, what’s God got to do with it? Once again, here’s Lyin’ Ryan talking about his true north:

I grew up reading Ayn Rand and it taught me quite a bit about who I am and what my value systems are, and what my beliefs are. It’s inspired me so much that it’s required reading in my office for all my interns and my staff. We start with Atlas Shrugged. People tell me I need to start with The Fountainhead then go to Atlas Shrugged [laughter]. There’s a big debate about that. We go to Fountainhead, but then we move on, and we require Mises and Hayek as well…

But the reason I got involved in public service, by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be Ayn Rand. And the fight we are in here, make no mistake about it, is a fight of individualism versus collectivism…

And so when you take a look at where we are today, ah, some would say we’re on offense, some would say we’re on defense, I’d say it’s a little bit of both. And when you look at the twentieth-century experiment with collectivism—that Ayn Rand, more than anybody else, did such a good job of articulating the pitfalls of statism and collectivism—you can’t find another thinker or writer who did a better job of describing and laying out the moral case for capitalism than Ayn Rand…

Is this an easy fight? Absolutely not…But if we’re going to actually win this we need to make sure that we’re solid on premises, that our principles are well-defended, and if we want to go and articulately defend these principles and what they mean to our society, what they mean for the trends that we set internationally, we have to go back to Ayn Rand. Because there is no better place to find the moral case for capitalism and individualism than through Ayn Rand’s writings and works.

Obviously, the bigger question is why the GOP platform doesn’t mention Ayn Rand. Judging by their policies, she is far more influential than God. Of course, she isn’t mentioned in the constitution either, so maybe we can call this one a draw.

Update: Never mind. The Democrats got all nervous as usual and put “God” in the platform today by a voice vote. No word on whether the GOP will give their one true God a similar tribute.

An explanation of how the Platform kerfuffle went down

by David Atkins

So apparently after a day and a half of Fox News whining about the absence of “God” and “Jerusalem” in the party platform approved by delegates, the powers that be decided to reinsert language to that effect with a platform revision today moved by Ted Strickland. I was in the media tent at the time, not on the floor, but here’s how it went down:

Note that the affirmative vote to approve the changes would have needed to be a two-thirds vote. And it’s fairly clear from the audio that the ayes didn’t even have a majority. And yet Chairman Villaraigosa ignored the will of the delegates and “in his opinion” gave it to the ayes. So how did this travesty happen?

Well, as a local county committee official I’ve had a few years’ crash course in parliamentary procedure. Here’s how it goes: Roberts Rules of Order gives the power of determining the outcome of a voice vote to the Chair. If the Chair cheats the outcome, the only recourse is an “Objection to the Ruling of the Chair.” And here’s that works:

Any ruling of the chair can be challenged, but such appeals must be made immediately after the ruling. If debate has progressed, a challenge is not in order. Although Robert’s Rules of Order allow debate under certain circumstances, the practice of some groups is to allow no debate.

The problem here, of course, is that such an objection is only possible if the Chair recognizes the objector from the floor before moving to other business. If the Chair isn’t playing fair, an immediate ruckus is required to prevent further business from occurring. But at a scripted convention, that’s almost impossible. And that, in turn, gives the Chair of a scripted convention near-dictatorial power to overrule the will of majority. And lo and behold, this also happened during the RNC convention during which Reince Priebus did pretty much the same thing.

Which means that while these scripted conventions have the pretense of democratic process, in reality there is none. All of these decisions are made behind the scenes, with no possibility for the majority of delegates to change them. And that in turn raises the question: who decided to kowtow to the theocratic whiners at Fox News?

That may have been the view in Washington as well. Emailed a Democratic source: “The President personally intervened to strengthen the language.”

We’ve got a long, long road ahead of us. One understands the political calculation (it’s almost certainly about Jewish voters in Florida), but that doesn’t excuse it.

None of which, by the way, is any excuse for not voting for the President in a contested state. Letting Romney win isn’t an option. This is a battle we have to fight internally after we stop the plutocratic cultists from attaining absolute power.

.

Howard Dean at the DNC takes on the assault on public education

by David Atkins

Howard Dean had a small meeting with a bloggers and activists at the PPL blogger building here in Charlotte, where I’m spending most of my time (the people and activities are usually more interesting here than on the convention floor.) The meeting was started with AFT President Randi Weingarten speaking about the need for engagement in public schools so that all kids, not just a select few in charter schools, reach their potential. She then compared that need for everyone to have an even playing field to the labor movement, which attempts to do for adults the same thing that even access to public education attempts to do for children. It was a powerful and evocative message, a parallel link between the two issues that isn’t readily apparent at first glance.

Howard Dean expressed his support for Randi as the most progressive union leader in the country, and expressed his anger at those who attack teachers without having any idea what is going on in public schools. Pre-K from 0-3 years old was a major focus of his early remarks: it’s hard to teach kids who are severely damaged in the first place. Dean also said that he worried about private for-profit charter schools because they end up the same way that private prisons do. Metrics were not a problem in and of themselves, but we have a long way to go before we have really good ways of evaluating the quality of a teacher. I think he’s right on all these fronts.

Weingarten mentioned that the AFT took a page from Howard Dean’s 50-state-strategy playbook to engage on the ground in local communities everywhere. It’s difficult because one in four children live in poverty, and many communities still don’t have broadband. Howard Dean also stepped up to say that while partisan Republicans in Washington are intransigent, Republicans at a local level can often be worked with to help improve communities. Only when communities are improved can the schools be improved. I’m not sure I share the governor’s optimism given my experience with local Republican legislators, but perhaps the mileage may vary in other local communities.

My brother Dante asked about the image development problem, in which the unions are seen as recalcitrant to “reform,” even as younger activists embrace the conservative “reform” agenda as a cool new approach. Here Weingarten’s response was less than encouraging, simply falling back on the idea that what matters isn’t so much the narrative as who is doing the work, and that we have to be “sacrosanct on the issues.” Unfortunately, that’s not going to work. Never has before, and it’s not going to now. Labor is going to get killed with that perspective. The narrative is of all-consuming importance.

I deal a lot with activists who think that it doesn’t matter how one manages relationships and perception as long as one pounds the pavement and works hard. Sadly, that’s not how the world works. Perception is everything in politics, and labor is unfortunately losing that battle.

One good line, though, was that recklessness isn’t reform. Governor Dean interjected that it’s about lousy public leadership with Republicans who don’t give a damn about their communities, and are happy to simply ignore and shunt away as hopeless huge groups of children in poorer communities. He’s absolutely right about that.

On the issue of firing bad teachers, Weingarten said that the “reformers” did raise a needed question of the protocols for firing inferior teachers. Dean noted that most people don’t like to fire people, but it’s also important to hold the administrators accountable for not stepping in quickly to take action when teachers aren’t doing their jobs.

On the subject of charter schools, Weingarten cautioned that it’s not even about charters anymore, but rather vouchers, similar to Medicare and other issues on which the Right is pushing similar systems. Dean said that charter schools shouldn’t be rejected out of hand, but tighten the rules so that they can’t cherrypick, and that the public system should learn about the innovations coming from them. Dean brought up the successful charter schools being run by AFT as an example of this phenomenon.

The room came to a consensus that the the biggest problem is for-profit charter schools, though it’s important to remember that supposed “non-profit” charters can be run by for-profit organizations.

Finally, I asked the Governor what steps we can take politically as progressive activists against the neoliberals who are supposedly on our side of these issues, but are not. His response was that, again, personal relationships are everything. There is no hope of building relationships with the likes of Scott Walker. But Dean said that even with the Deval Patricks and Corey Bookers of the world, it’s important for progressives and union leaders to hold person-to-person meetings to communicate our perspective, and that good progress had been made on those fronts where healthy relationships had been developed.

I’m not sure I fully buy that answer–but I will say that my own experience of politics has shown me that even in the rarefied air of major public policy and elected officials, high-school-style personal politics carry just as much weight as financial incentives and constituent groups. All of life is basically high school. All of it. And while personal relationships won’t solve our systemic corruption, obviously, they can go some way toward mitigating the damage if progressives can begin to establish them.

.

Overworked against their will

by digby

I wrote about how the governments and the bankers are planning to take away the Greek worker’s week-end and make them work long hours. Here’s a little tale of America today. The biggest problem with our economy today is that vast numbers of people are unemployed. But one of the side-effects is that others are being worked far more than they want to be:

Union workers at the Pittsburgh Glass Works in East Deer will vote Sept. 13 on the company’s latest contract proposal.

The 218 workers represented by the United Steel Workers of America heard details of the proposal Tuesday in meetings at the VFW Post on Fourth Avenue.

Brian Markiewicz, president of USW Local 126, said it is hard to tell if the proposal will be ratified or rejected as two others have been.

“People are sitting there thinking through it,” Markiewicz said. “I really couldn’t tell you which way it will go.”

“I think health care has been the biggest stumbling block, but I think we have that knocked over,“ Markiewicz said.

Rich Bordick, 55, of Kittanning, who has worked at the plant since 1978, discussed the proposal after emerging from a session late Tuesday afternoon. He sees forced overtime as a major issue.

“Just today, 14 people got forced to work 16 hours,” Bordick said angrily. “(Workers) are in there right now arguing with the international reps about it.”

He said it is a by-product of two other factors. One is the company’s reluctance to hire enough workers to operate the plant that manufactures glass for the auto industry. He said five crews are needed and right now there are three.

“They need five more people per crew now, and they’re talking about hiring a fourth crew,” he said. “They don’t have enough people now.”

He said so far this year, the only time off he has gotten is holidays such as Easter, July 4th and Memorial Day.

“I didn’t even get Father’s Day off,” Bordick said. “You can’t treat people like this.”

These are union workers. As someone who went through earlier recessions, I recall being forced to work exceedingly long hours in the wake of layoffs as I absorbed several jobs into my existing one. (The other jobs never came back, by the way.) In those jobs, there was no overtime, so we were much worse off than the union workers. But overtime or not, the fact is that in a job market like this nobody wants to take a chance on losing their job, so they do what they’re told. And often that means working themselves to death.

If the company is in real trouble, there’s always a sense that it might be for the greater good to suck it up for a while until things get better. But it’s not getting better for the workers this time. These companies are making huge profits, their stocks are soaring and the 1% who owns most of them are getting richer and richer. Meanwhile, these guys are working night and day. This is probably happening in workplaces all over the country, many of which are asking their workers to work more without more pay. (It happens all the time, believe me.)

If the politicians can be stopped from negotiating a series of Cameron-Osborne style agreements that push us back into recession, it’s possible that this situation will turn around soon. But it takes years to wring this mentality out of the system, both on the part of employee and employers. After this much time it’s become normal for some people to work far more than 40 hours a week, much of it unpaid, while others languish, desperate for a job. That’s a plutocrats dream.

.