Month: October 2013

Give them something real to hate

by digby

I think this is an important insight:

The problem Republicans are having right now is an outgrowth of a longer-term issue they’ve had ever since the 2008 elections: the GOP does not really have much of a policy agenda. For the past five years, the party has been defined almost entirely by everything it is against. Mostly, it is against Barack Obama and whatever he is for. And here, Mr Obama’s tendency to play the reasonable moderate sometimes becomes a problem. It’s a deep-seated element of Mr Obama’s character to step back from disputes, to take things to a meta level, to describe the arguments on both sides and then present his own solution as a compromise, or simply to plead for reasoned debate and a sense of common purpose. There are times when this approach does no one any good.

When Mr Obama stops speaking as a partisan advocate of ambitious liberal goals, adopts his mature school-principal voice, and demands simply that political players adhere to reasonable norms of democratic governance, Republicans are left with nothing to oppose except the reasonable norms of democratic governance.

And it would be especially useful if he stopped doing it as we careen toward a default with the likely result of making the Republicans more likely to back themselves even further into their corner. Just a few minutes ago he once again laid out all the reasons why a default is terrible and then said that he is more than willing to talk about entitlements, admits that sequestration is rough but he gets that Democrats have to go along, brags that he’s adopted many Republican ideas and then winds up with the usual promise to sit down and make even more deals after the debt ceiling is lifted.

As this piece points out, he’s making it harder for the Republicans to capitulate by insisting on being the grown-up in the room. They have to move even further right because the only thing these haters can do to feel like they’ve won anything is to oppose the already compromised position the president inhabits and move everything further right. It’s a problem.

.

Default denialism

by digby

Salon asked the dimmest Senator an important question:

Q: So if we come to…October 16th and the debt ceiling has not been raised, should the markets be concerned at that point?

Ron Johnson: Not if you had a responsible administration. There would be no cause for concern. We have more than enough revenue flowing to the federal government, if the spending was properly prioritized, there’s no reason whatsoever to default on any of the debt.
And I, I utterly reject the administration’s claim that this isn’t about new spending, that we’re just paying off old bills. Well, well the reason you have to increase the debt ceiling is because of new deficit spending. If we weren’t running deficits, if we weren’t spending more than we were taking in, there would be no reason whatsoever toincrease the debt ceiling. So if you manage things properly – and listen, I’m a business guy, I’ve got to prioritize spending in all my business career to prevent my business from going bankrupt. The federal government has got to start doing that eventually as well.

Ok. But then we all know that Ron Johnson isn’t the sharpest tool in the shed. he must be along, right? Well….

Dave Weigel decided to ask some other Senators their views on the possibility of default:

Senator Richard Burr:

“You gotta take Jack Lew at his word, but from the standpoint of [whether] that puts us in default, technically, no. The federal government still has about 85 percent of the revenues we spend coming in, and all they have to do is prioritize that they’re gonna pay debt service first. And that leaves some prioritization for federal programs. I’m not as concerned as the president is on the debt ceiling, because the only people buying our bonds right now is the Federal Reserve. So it’s like scaring ourselves.”

Senator Orrin Hatch:

“I think the administration could work on who gets paid and who doesn’t in a way that would pull us through. I don’t think the markets have been spooked so far, and I personally believe that if they realized there was a legitimate attempt to make the government work, they would be less likely [to be spooked].”

USA Today had this:

“I would dispel the rumor that is going around that you hear on every newscast, that if we don’t raise the debt ceiling, we will default on our debt,” said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., Monday on CBS This Morning. “We won’t. We’ll continue to pay our interest.”

This one remains the winner:

And Rep. Ted Yoho, R-Fla., even argues that reaching the debt limit could help the economy, by showing the world the U.S. is serious about its debt problem. “I think, personally, it would bring stability to the world markets,” he told The Washington Post Monday.

I just don’t know what to say. But if they believe what they are saying, they are all cracked. As Krugman says:

You knew this would happen, didn’t you? As we close in on the debt limit, with Obama insistent that he will not give in to hostage-taking, there is a growing chorus of voices on the right insisting that the whole debt limit thing is scare tactics from the administration, and that hitting the limit will be no big deal.

And the truth is that there is some real uncertainty about exactly what happens if we hit the ceiling. I think the administration has made a tactical error by putting all the weight of its warnings on the financial consequences; we might have a Lehman-type event, but we might not, and if it turns out not, the administration will have hurt its credibility. What sane people should be emphasizing is that in addition to the risk of financial disruption, there’s the certainty of huge pain from spending cuts and a crippling hit to economic growth.

So, who are the default deniers? Actually, they come in three varieties.

The lower denial says that it’s all a conspiracy — that any pain Americans feel will be because Obama wants them to feel pain. Dave Weigel has a good rundown on this attitude.

The higher denial involves asserting that the government can prioritize, so as to avoid a default on interest payments, that this would avoid damage to the financial system, and that this means that everything will be OK. This is what you’re hearing, for example, from erstwhile respectable Republican economists, who have (surprise!) mostly fallen in line as the crisis looms. The crucial point here is that even if they’re right about interest payments — which is unclear — the government will (a) still go into default on obligations to vendors, Social Security recipients, and so on (b) be forced into spending cuts so large as to guarantee a recession if the standoff lasts any length of time.

Finally, there’s the special form of default denial coming from the deficit scolds. I noted yesterday that they cheered on the 2011 debt confrontation; they’re not quite so rah-rah this time, but as Matthew Yglesias notes, they’re still endorsing hostage tactics. From Fix the Debt:

Instead of engaging in dangerous and self-destructive political brinksmanship, our elected leaders should use this moment as an opportunity take steps to improve our fiscal condition. We urge lawmakers to stop focusing on issues unrelated to bringing down our dangerously high debt levels and instead pursue a fiscally responsible agenda that avoids default and puts in place a plan to bring down the debt as a share of the economy.

Yep, they’re still fantasizing about a grand bargain, and are endorsing hostage tactics over the debt ceiling because they believe it can make their fantasy reality. It’s kind of awesome. Everyone else is, I think, aware that Democrats will never accept a grand bargain without revenues and Republicans will never accept one with revenues; this latter point comes, in turn, from the reality that Republicans don’t care about the debt and never did, they only pretended to as an excuse to slash social insurance programs. Yet the folks at Fix the Debt imagine that somehow the debt crisis — the crisis many Republicans are insisting is no big deal — can push everyone into the sacred Grand Bargain. Oh, and that all this can happen in the next 10 days or so.

Given all the forms of debt denial, I really wonder about the confidence many people still have that there will be an 11th-hour resolution.

.

One Week From Today– Crucial Massachusetts Election

by Howie Klein
(cross-posted from Down with Tyranny)

There are no teabaggers we have to worry about in the race to replace Ed Markey in the deep blue Massachusetts House seat that will be decided a week from today. Most of the candidates are garden variety Democrats looking to advance their careers. True to form, EMILY’s List has backed the most conservative woman running, Katherine Clark, best known for her efforts to pass domestic spying legislation in Massachusetts– yes a bill that allows people to be spied on without a warrant. Another badly flawed candidate, Will Brownsberger, backs Citizens United and the Keystone XL Pipeline.

It’s no wonder that a wide coalition of progressive groups have been working hard to elect state Rep. Carl Sciortino and it’s no wonder that he’s been endorsed by Congressmen Alan Grayson (D-FL), Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), Keith Ellison (D-MN), Mark Takano (D-CA) and Jared Polis (D-CO). ALl of them have met with Carl and understand why he would be much, much more than just someone who votes right. Carl is a natural progressive leader who has proven himself in the state legislature.

It’s why Blue America endorsed him 8 months ago.

See that ad up top? Every time it gets played, Carl’s ranking goes up. It’s essential we keep it up on very expensive broadcast TV. Can you chip in? If the ad runs all week, Carl will win.If you want to help out, you can do it at this link.

Carl’s been working tirelessly 7 days a week for this– though he did take off one day last week, Saturday… to get married! Forget the wedding gift… let’s just help him keep that ad running. Along with fighting for an economy that works for everyone, not giving up on an assault weapons ban, and protecting a woman’s right to choose, Carl will never stop fighting for everyone’s right to share the moment he had with his family and friends this weekend– no matter who you love, and no matter what state you live in.

UPDATE: Not Too Late

I asked Erin Hill, who runs ActBlue, if it’s too late to get money that will be used effectively to Carl today. It certainly isn’t too late and that’s part of the genius of ActBlue. “The Sciortino campaign,” she told me, “uses ActBlue for all their online fundraising, specifically to take advantage of our wiring program. Because of our large economy of scale, ActBlue is able to clear credit cards ‘overnight’ and wire the funds to the Sciortino campaign the next day. So, every contribution they get into ActBlue by midnight tonight, the Sciortino campaign can spend as cash tomorrow.”

Once again, you can do it here.

Losing control of the dragon

by David Atkins

Representative Paul Broun (R-GA):

“America is going to be destroyed by Obamacare, so whatever deal is put together must at least reschedule the implementation of Obamacare,” he says. “This law is going to destroy America and everything in America, and we need to stop it.”

First off, I would love it if someone in the press would identify a federally elected Democrat who said anything remotely similar even about such far reaching laws as the Patriot Act or the Iraq War, much less anodyne efforts to expand the reach of private sector health insurance. There’s no “both sides do it” equivalent for this.

2) What do you suppose the consequences to be of this sort of rhetoric? What if you were the sort of person who actually believed that your elected representative was telling you the truth? If a President your pastor suggested might be the Anti-Christ bringing on the end of days refused to budge on killing a law your Congressman said would literally “destroy America and everything in America,” what sort of action would you be forced to take? And what if the sort of people who generally elected such politicians were armed to the teeth?

The Tea Partiers in Congress aren’t just playing with political fire. They’re playing with civil war. Just as the big money Chamber of Commerce boys let loose a Tea Party dragon they’ve already lost control of, so too may these Pied Piper Tea Party boys lose control of the people who follow them.

It won’t get that ugly just yet. But wait until their demographic winter becomes fully apparent and all three branches of government revert to Democratic control. Do you suppose all these people will just lie down quietly and accept the dictates of democracy?

.
.

Your moment of Rapture

by digby

Bachman rejoices:

“President Obama waived a ban on arming terrorists in order to allow weapons to go to the Syrian opposition. Your listeners, US taxpayers, are now paying to give arms to terrorists including Al Qaeda…This happened and as of today the United States is willingly, knowingly, intentionally sending arms to terrorists, now what this says to me, I’m a believer in Jesus Christ, as I look at the End Times scripture, this says to me that the leaf is on the fig tree and we are to understand the signs of the times, which is your ministry, we are to understand where we are in God’s end times history.”

And that’s good news:

“Rather than seeing this as a negative, we need to rejoice, Maranatha Come Lord Jesus, His day is at hand. When we see up is down and right is called wrong, when this is happening, we were told this; these days would be as the days of Noah.”

*The whole thing about al Qaeda is nonsense, of course.  But who wants to rain on Michele’s joyous End Times parade?

A revolutionary change of revolutionaries

by digby

There is a lot of the usual Democratic loose talk about Republicans finally being vanquished for all time and so let’s stage a celebration right this very minute. Seems to be a defining feature of American liberalism to assume victory before it is secure. However, that does not mean that things never change or that the other side is incapable of failure. And it certainly does not mean that the over arching themes of our politics never change.

Krugman nailed one the other day that I think could be a keeper:

Ever since Reagan, the Beltway has treated Republicans as the natural party of government. Sunday talk shows would feature a preponderance of Republicans even if Democrats held the White House and one or both houses of Congress. John McCain was featured on those shows so often you would think he won in 2008.

And there was a general presumption of Republican competence. It’s hard to believe now, but Bush was treated as a highly effective leader who knew what he was doing right up to Katrina, while Clinton — now viewed with such respect — was treated as a bungling interloper for much of his presidency. Even in the last few years there was a rush to canonize Paul Ryan as a superwonk, when it was quite obvious if you looked that politics aside, he was just incompetent at number-crunching.

But I think the last two years have finally killed that presumption. It wasn’t just that Romney lost — his shock, the obvious degree to which his campaign was deluded, was an eye-opener. And now the antics of the Boehner bumblers.

Suddenly the old Will Rogers line — I’m not a member of any organized political party, I’m a Democrat — has lost its sting; the upper hand is on the other foot. And that’s going to color narratives and shape campaigns for a long time.

From his lips …

Whatever happens with the current shutdown and various hostage negotiations, that fundamental definition of the Republicans as being the defacto competent party — the proverbial grow-ups — has probably finally been shattered. It’s hard to believe it could have lasted through that depraved spectacle of a presidential impeachment and the subsequent stolen election for the puerile bumbler Junior Bush, but it did. Throughout all of that, some outdated image of Democrats as the hippies who destroyed the 72 convention held fast, long after said hippies had traded their long hair for bald pates and three piece suits.

If nothing else, that tired old framework may have finally been tossed on the garbage pile. It’s only about 25 years too late, but better late than never.

.

Nothing less than Fort Sumter will do

by David Atkins

Robert Costa generally knows more about what’s going on in Republican land than anyone else. Here’s what he knows today:

Speaker John Boehner may be trying to finalize a plan to raise the debt limit, but House conservatives are already skeptical of his efforts. In interviews, several of them tell me they’re unlikely to support any deal that may emerge.

“They may try to throw the kitchen sink at the debt limit, but I don’t think our conference will be amenable for settling for a collection of things after we’ve fought so hard,” says Representative Scott Garrett (R., N.J.). “If it doesn’t have a full delay or defund of Obamacare, I know I and many others will not be able to support whatever the leadership proposes. If it’s just a repeal of the medical-device tax, or chained CPI, that won’t be enough.”

Representative Paul Broun (R., Ga.) agrees, and says Boehner risks an internal rebellion if he decides to broker a compromise. “America is going to be destroyed by Obamacare, so whatever deal is put together must at least reschedule the implementation of Obamacare,” he says. “This law is going to destroy America and everything in America, and we need to stop it.”

“Stay the course, don’t give in on it, that’s what the people in my district are saying,” says Representative Ted Yoho (R., Fla.). “We did a town hall the other day, and 74 percent of people said, ‘don’t raise the debt ceiling.’”

“I think you’d see at least 50 to 60 Republicans break with Boehner if he went for something small,” predicts a House GOP aide who works closely with conservative members. “They’re also reluctant to even give Boehner a short-term debt-limit extension unless he gets something big in return. But that’s the one area where Boehner may have room to maneuver. He could tell them, ‘I’m with you fighting, but let’s just extend the fight a few weeks.’”

If you think this is insane–and it is–keep in mind that it’s only going to get worse from here.

Until Republicans are removed from control of all branches of government, the brinksmanship is going to get worse, and the demands are going to become more severe. The lunatics are running the asylum now, the revanchist movement is in full swing, and the Lost Cause is the name of the game.

Not even sequestration-level spending plus cutting Medicare and Social Security will do for these people–and that’s after losing an election. Try to picture where the Republican party was 30 years ago. Then 20 years ago. Then 10 years. Then today. Now picture 10 years from now. Anyone who thinks there’s going to be a retreat from the precipice is deluding themselves. If they lose in 2014, it will be because they didn’t hold firm against Obamacare. If they lose to Hillary in 2016, it will be because they didn’t shout loud enough about Benghazi.

Nothing less than a full-on attack on Fort Sumter will do.

.

Jellyfish and Tea

by digby

Love this piece from Josh Barro which correctly calls out the GOP jellyfish (also known as the Eunuch Caucus) who are as much to blame for what’s happening as the hard partying teabaggers:

The Most Irresponsible Officials In Washington DC Are The ‘Moderate’ Republicans 

The most dangerous group in Congress is moderate Republicans, many from the northeast, who could reopen the government and break extremists’ grip on their caucus’ agenda, but choose not to.

According to the Washinton Post, 21 House Republicans say they are prepared to vote for a “clean” continuing resolution to reopen the government. Together with Democrats, this is enough votes to pass the bill that has already passed the Senate, reopen the government, and stop the madness.

Yet these Republicans who publicly say they favor a clean CR have repeatedly voted with their extremist colleagues to prevent it from coming to a vote.

If moderate House Republicans don’t want a government shutdown and favor a clean CR, why have they passed up on ways to end the shutdown?

Here are the three things they could do if they wanted to: read on

Why don’t they do something? Because they are being true to their nature, that’s why. They love to strut around taking credit for being the “grown-ups” in the GOP but never quite find it in themselves to actually go against the miscreants that make up the rest of their party.

Democrats have a mirror image in their party as well, except their “moderates” are more than happy to flex their muscles against the grassroots and the progressives in their party, even on the smallest issues. This imbalance is a big part of why the so-called “center” keeps shifting to the right.

.

Friendly Reminder: rooms full of money edition

by digby

In this morning’s New York Times story on the GOP’s operation chaos campaign, it was mentioned in passing that the Koch brothers had spent upwards of 200 million dollars on it so far.  That’s a whole lot of money and it’s just one little piece of their political activities.  It occurred to me that it’s probably time to revisit this little illustration to show how such expenditures impact their bottom line.  This was written a year and a half ago about Sheldon Adelson who was throwing millions around in the GOP primary. He was reportedly worth 25 billion dollars at the time.

The following illustration compares an human being against a stack of $100 currency note bundles. A bundle of $100 notes is equivalent to $10,000 and that can easily fit in your pocket. 1 million dollars will probably fit inside a standard shopping bag while a billion dollars would occupy a small room of your house:

Adelson has 25 of those rooms full of money. Even if he does spend a full hundred million, as he’s been reported to be planning, it is the equivalent of a modest week-end getaway for you and me. He really is that rich.

We have never before had so much money concentrated at the top. These are vast fortunes beyond our imaginations. It makes perfect sense that some of these oligarchs would spend tens of millions to buy elections. It’s not that much money to them. 

The Koch brothers are up from their reported combined 50 billion dollar fortune of last year.  This year Forbes has them at 72 billion.  They can afford to spend a whole lot more on these projects and call it a rounding error.

Our problems will never be fixed until we do something about the fact that so much money is now flowing to the very top.

.

Polls, polls, polls


by digby

So, there are lots of polls coming out today, mostly showing that GOP losing public favor more than the President. The Pew Poll, which had the same basic results,  presented it in a fuller way, however, and I think it is probably more insightful:

The national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted Oct. 3-6 among 1,000 adults, finds 44% say Republican leaders should give ground on their demand that any budget deal include cuts or delays to the 2010 health care law. Nearly as many (42%) say it is Obama who should give ground, by agreeing to changes in the health care law.

Even when asked if the only way to end the shutdown soon is for their side to give ground on the health care issue, most are unwilling to back down. A majority of Democrats (58%) say it would be unacceptable for Obama to agree to cuts or delays in the Affordable Care Act, even if this is the only way to resolve the shutdown soon. Roughly the same share of Republicans (54%) say it would be unacceptable for GOP leaders to agree to any deal that does not include cuts or delays to Obamacare.

Notably, Tea Party Republicans overwhelmingly oppose Republican leaders making concessions to resolve the impasse. Nearly nine-in-ten Republicans and Republican leaners who agree with the Tea Party (88%) say Obama should agree to cuts or delays in the health care law and 72% think it would be unacceptable for GOP leaders to agree to a deal that does not include those changes, even if it is the only way to quickly end the shutdown. Among non-Tea Party Republicans, 63% say Obama should agree to changes in the health care law, but only 39% feel it would be unacceptable for GOP leaders to drop their demand for health care changes.

And in case you were wondering, the “mainstream” of the GOP doesn’t really have a problem with the Tea Party:

[C]oncern within the GOP that the Tea Party has too much influence remains limited: even among Republicans and Republican leaners who do not agree with the Tea Party movement, more than half say either that the GOP is paying the right amount of attention (34%) to the ideas of the Tea Party or too little (21%). Just 22% of non-Tea Party Republicans say the movement receives too much attention from the Republican Party.

Anyway, both sides think they should not compromise. Shocker, I know.

But this is the problem for the Democrats, at least to the extent that living in reality is a problem:

Partisan differences over raising the debt limit are similar to two years ago: 62% of Democrats think it is absolutely essential to increase the debt limit, compared with 45% of independents and 36% of Republicans. Republicans and GOP leaners who do not agree with the Tea Party (40%) are much more likely than Tea Party Republicans (23%) to view a debt limit hike as absolutely essential.

Setting aside the brutal reality that failing to raise the debt ceiling is insane, who has the political incentive to make a deal?

It sure as hell isn’t Ted Yoho (R-Pluto):

“I think we need to have that moment where we realize [we’re] going broke. If the debt ceiling isn’t raised, that will sure as heck be a moment. I think, personally, it would bring stability to the world markets.”

.