Last night, on Chris Matthews' "Hardball," there appeared a Tea Partyer -- from Texas, I think, though I'm not sure, as during the segment's opening I was preparing my typical American-proletarian feast of generic Rice Krispies -- who was hustling the fiction that he and his little neanderthal band's "movement," if you will, is nonpartisan and non-ideological.
Matthews sat stupefied, if not amused, pursuing logic and history, which is always a wasteful mistake with these guys.
Where, asked Matthews, were you folks and your outrage when George W. Bush was busting the budget like a Mad King Ludwig and putting plutocrats on lavish government welfare? And what was Barack Obama to do, when he inherited this wreck of a nation, other than try to stimulate the economy? Was he to emulate Herbert Hoover? Is that what you wanted?
Well, Matthews' Tea Partying guest avowed historical ignorance of Hooverism -- strangely, I believed him -- but on the other hand he was expert on what followed; he was, that is, pretty darn sure that FDR's reversal of Hooverism was what deepened and prolonged the Great Depression. Matthews, once an econ major and still a vigorous reader of American history, was too befuddled and time-constrained to educate the idiot. Like that would have helped, anyway.
As to where the Tea Partyer and his roaming tribalists were during the Bush administration? -- you know, when all the destruction was actually going down? Oh, they were silently seething, he explained. Thinking. Swelling up with patriotic indignation.
It was just pure dumb circumstance and coincidence that by the time they took to the streets in protest, a biracial Democrat was in the White House.
That's the fiction being hustled, and not only by Tea Partyers who manage a little face-time with media voyeurs. It is, rather, the broader conservative narrative -- Matthews' guest was but parroting assigned talking points -- that could crush the Democrats in 2010.
The real exasperation of it all, however, is that while Democrats do in fact control their own destiny, they're not aggressively handling the reins. They are, instead, dithering and temporizing and compromising with the conservative ideology that got us into this monstrous disarray in the first place.
Voters, in 2008, in an unusual burst of attentiveness and disgust, affirmed their willingness to go Big. Act -- just do something, we're giving you the keys to the public treasury, they said; they didn't expect immediate results, but by God they did expect an unmistakable sense of urgency, vivid signs of action, and breathless determination.
And what did they get? First up, a diluted, shrunken stimulus package that endloaded most of its jobs creation. OK, OK, voters could understand and tolerate an unsteady launch. The pols in charge, they believed, were but getting their sea legs. And who knows? Maybe $800 billion would be enough. Voters were willing to give it some time.
And in the meantime, Congressional Dems would tackle American health care, a reformation of which had, after all, been on their urgent to-do list for about 70 years. So, ah, now, here was something the new guys could knock out of the park with little effort. Virtually everyone, other than health insurance companies, knew precisely what needed to be done and was determined to do it.
Right. That was centuries ago. What now prevails, health-carewise, in both Congress and across the republic, is an overwhelming sense of deliberate confusion and customary dispiritedness.
OK, so that's that. Real health-care reform can wait another 70 years. But at least -- at the very least -- Congress will do something historic about the financial-sector blackguards who thrust this nation into a 1929like panic and deep, prolonged recession. If there's ever been a political, or socioeconomic, or even friggin' anthropological no-brainer, that's it.
Yet this, as the NY Times noted editorially yesterday, is what voters are getting: "While the House Financial Services Committee passed a bill on Thursday to regulate trading in derivatives -- the opaque and complex financial instruments that played a pivotal role in the crisis [of 2008, 2009 and beyond] -- the financial industry has managed to carve out far too many exemptions. Under pressure from banks, businesses and their high-priced lobbyists, the House committee also approved a bill that would seriously weaken the oversight powers of a proposed new consumer financial protection agency."
All of which comes atop an announced $1.4 trillion deficit, which, given the passage of 10 months, is already a Democratic deficit.
Had Democrats used the deficit wisely -- $800 billion+ for jobs, jobs, jobs, and nothing but jobs -- and had they acted with sensible urgency on health care and had they sternly disciplined an incorrigible Wall Street, voters would be praising themselves right about now, deficit be damned.
Instead, what we'll likely witness over the coming months is the devious brooding of Chris Matthews' Tea Partying guest, in all its ramifications, taking electoral root.
Congressional Democrats had it all -- they indeed controlled their destiny, and that of the nation's. But rather than getting together and behaving like New Dealers, they splintered and behaved like ... Democrats.
Bill Maher said it best
The Tea Party crowd took a gay sex act and made it gross and disgusting.
We are getting what we deserve
As long as the sheeple of this country continue to vote for the Corporate Party (R or D wing) we will continue to get screwed and the top 1% will make out like the bandits that they are.
The leaders of the Republican and Democratic wings of the Corporate Party stand to loose billions if the sheeple of the USA finally grow a pair and throw ALL of them out of office. We are past the stage of reforming the band of theives that are running the country now. Attending party meetings and demanding change got us exactly what? The D's still defer to the R's, Obama left a huge majority of Bush's people in place, Goldman-Sachs and the other Wall Street banksters still have all of us by the short'n'curlys, corporations still write our laws and 99% of Congress would rather fall on a sword than disappoint a cash carrying lobbyist.
It's time to desert the Corporate Party so that we can start rebuilding the middle class the Corporate Party is trying to destroy.
Democrats should adopt to go it alone if need be
Stand up! Democrats, stand up for your Liberal & Progressive beliefs! Show us what can be done to benefit the majority, as The People voted for back in November. Now, show us examples of liberal policy! The bi-partisan hand extended to the Republicans was refused, and as a result we have wasted so much time. Unless The People are helped with good jobs to spur the economy, and concrete policies that exemplify what Democrats can do vs. what Republicans can do, we risk losing our majority. Let's get on with it!
Excuse me, but the emperor is butt naked.
"Had Democrats used the deficit wisely -- $800 billion+ for jobs, jobs, jobs, and nothing but jobs -- and had they acted with sensible urgency on health care and had they sternly disciplined an incorrigible Wall Street, voters would be praising themselves right about now, deficit be damned."
I certainly agree that the stimulus package should have been predominantly infrastructure and job oriented. But then the Obama administration was all too willing to compromise for the Republicans by eliminating job related funding, like the National Endowment for the Arts expansion and the upgrades on the National Mall, to bolster tax cuts. And then once again the Obama insistence on bipartisanship reigned over reason and national welfare with healthcare with bipartisanship equating to the approval of one Olympia Snowe with the Senate Healthcare Finance Bill. Along with the insistence of bipartisanship has been Obama's repeated statements on how healthcare reform must not add to the deficit. And administration spokespersons Rahm Emanuel and Sebilius, along with Obama, have hardly been stating the urgency of genuine healthcare reform. The administration appointed and continues to appoint the old guard of the incorrigible Wall Street -- Geithner, Summers, et al.
The failure to act with courage and conviction on behalf of the American people just isn't coming from the House and Senate Democrats as the article purports. Obama himself has said repeatedly and with questionable sincerity that the buck stops with him on multiple occasions. Ultimately, voters and history and will ascertain that.
Which Wing of the American Corporate Party Gets the $$$?
Obama & Rahm are in a battle for lobbyist money. The Dems & GOP-the two-wings of the ACP-are fighting over who gets the lobbyist money. There are a few politicians such as Bernie Sanders(I) who actually battles for us. Until we are willing to vote against the Blue Dogs(Yes, choosing the worst of two-evils), real Democrats will be dumped on by those wearing the plastic (D)'s.
You're Like Us! You're Really Like Us!
Welcome to the realm of awareness regarding how the Democrats have let the nation down!
While I note no attachment of blame to that half-White guy in the White House (thank you, Wanda Sykes!), at least you do recognize - NOW - that the party with the power chose instead to hide and cower. That is progress. But as Robert Parry of Consortiumnews.com emailed me in response to a comment I sent him regarding an unrelated topic, where do we go from here? How do we get to where we need to go?
Finger pointing has had its run. We KNOW who to blame for the failures of the Democrats. So let's change the discussion. We need to begin talking about how we get what relief we can in the time remaining before the Republicans grow strong enough to exercise their return to power. As the deficit grows, with little to show for great expenditure, the GOP arsenal becomes stronger. It has to be countered before there is no turning back, and there is only one group which can achieve this course change. It's up to us to see to it that it gets made.
I admit to not having any specific ideas at this time on how to achieve this, but I'm willing to discuss anyone else's. We need to focus on this NOW. So I issue that challenge here - any takers?
OT: HAVE YOU CONTRIBUTED TO BUZZFLASH YET?
Challenge 1 - Mass Mobilizations In Support Of Medicare For All
Why Medicare for all? Because polls show that the public's already for it. The start-up? Spreading the word on the Internet. Initial action? Displaying "I Support Medicare For All" bumper stickers (downloaded, say from BuzzFlash). Next action*? Daily protests (peaceful) outside the offices of every member of Congress who isn't supporting Medicare for all. Final action? A general strike*.
*Not to begin until the number of cars displaying bumper stickers reaches some critical mass, say, one in fifty."
Get real
"Had Democrats used the deficit wisely -- $800 billion+ for jobs, jobs, jobs, and nothing but jobs -- and had they acted with sensible urgency on health care and had they sternly disciplined an incorrigible Wall Street,...". And then you woke up. If the Democrats had tried any of this instead of paying the bankers off, making deals with Pharma, and letting up on Wall Street FOR NOW, those corporate oligarchs would have crashed the whole system before you could even steep a teabag in a cup of water. Jobs are indeed the key to recovery and prosperity, but when you're being held up at gunpoint, you have to save yourself to fight another day. Nobody but the players knows what's really going on in DC. That's where trust in a leader comes in. And does anyone think people are going to vote Republican after how they've shown themselves IN BOLD RELIEF to be the party of no ideas, no integrity, and no patriotism?
It's all about the money
The Dems have two constituencies, and the less important of them is the voters. The more important is corporate entrenched power. Your prescription for Democratic electoral success would be a no-brainer if it weren't for that fact. Not all, but enough Dems care more about their good standing with entrenched power than they do with a fickle electorate. They calculate that they will get the money they need from those that bought them to swamp challengers, and if they lose their seat, they always have a cush job waiting for them in the "private" sector.
Any analysis that does not take this fundamental dynamic into consideration is fundamentally distorted. It explains why Goldman Sachs is running treasury; it explains the deal the administration cut with Big Pharma, and it explains why the conservadems in the Senate won't vote with the rest of their party.
The conserva in conservadems has far more to do with being bought than it has to do with political principle or ideology. The Dems are split more than the Republicans not by some logic of liberal or conservative, but according to which constituency they care about. For the Republicans, there's no split, and in that lies their unity.
Irony Anyone?
Say, Carp, aren't you the guy who excoriates liberals day after day in this space because they haven't sufficiently prostated themselves before the Bluedogs and compromised their principles away? Do you have the memory of a fu*king hamster?
So this is delicious--democrats should begin acting like New Dealers--uh, except, you know, when they demand a public option.
Nothing like consistency.
The one thing you should know by now, Carp, is that the progressive caucus is the ONLY ENTITY IN CONGRESS THAT HASN'T BEEN BOUGHT OFF.
There aren't enough New Dealers left in the Left to combat conservative republicans and bluedogs when the president sides with the latter at every turn in order to curry favor with monied interests. But they can demand a seat at the table by doing what the bluedogs do--threaten to kill legislation if their needs aren't met.
Breathless waiting for tomorrow's column, where Carp laments the fact that Dems are insufficiently channeling Roosevelt while viciously blasting progressives for failing to cave to Bluedogs on the public option.
In the same paragraph.
It should be a real page turner.
Obama's "Job" Is To Give White Voters Somebody To Hate
MORE than they were growing to detest the Bushevik GOP.
I was reminded of the "job" of the President on another site earlier today, and I recalled that back when Bush was in office, I often disputed the claims by his critics that he was "incompetent." If, I thought, his "job" was properly understood, it could hardly be imagined that anyone had ever better succeeded. Becaquse, properly understood, Bush's "job"--what he was installed to do--was always to undermine and diminish, to the greatest extent possible, any and all the institutions and instruments by which the People could resist the appropriation of the "civil" State by global corpoRat interests.
Obama's job is to make the People forget just how successful Bushevism was at its assigned tasks, and to displace onto a "minority" (either race or gender would have worked)--and the Dims, the party of the "minorities"--the responsibility for the rage of the people at the success of the Pukes.
I thought it was a genius move by the Owners to put a "novelty" candidate in the White House, one which--for too many reasons to now recount--could not do anything but FAIL to rectify even the least controversial of the Bushevik clusterfux: the economy, which Bush torpedoed in October, 08; the wars, including "Obama's War," Palestine, and soon Iran; the climate crisis; health-care; the growing class divide, etc.
Neither Hillary--had she been selected--nor Obama had ANY chance to solve ANY of those problems. They are, in effect, insoluble under the current, dominant political relations and arrangements, and the nearly complete CorpoRatization of our politics, the destruction and privatization of our commons. Political speech has become completely meaningless.
It's working.
Either one would have served equally well to polarize 'popular opinion' (the inevitable consequence of the hypostatization of the Big Lie in the wonderfully hospitable environmrnt of the 24-hour news cycle).
White people are finding and mining their inner racist. Obama is REALLY hated by the cracker nation (which contributed 46% of all the votes cast last year), far more I judge than Bush ever was detested and abhorred by the Left, even by 2007.
I am pretty sure Obama and the Dims will lose 'majority' power next year, and will lose the government again in 2012.
Just the way "God" planned it...
So you understand the Teabagger?
Yes, _granted_ that the teabaggers see through a glass darkly, but, as you note, the Democrats _have_ been maintaining the Bush course on matters of fundamental importance. Why, then, is it any more illogical for the Teabaggers to blame Obana than it was for history to blame Lyin' Baines Johnson for Vietnam instead of Kennedy?
I've toyed with the half-truth that the teabagger has just figured out that he's been robbed after eight years (or should we say a quarter century of Reaganomics?). I've always thought of the Chicago Neocons as pseudo-intellectual thugs but if they realized from the University of Chicago's excellent sociology department that it would be eight years before the public would catch on that the country has been robbed of everything but the doormat, they'd be long gone by then, and the public would blame the next guy in line, there is some bold and informed evil genius in that.
Carp is right on the mark here.
Bush did just what the Repugs wanted, he wasted the 'so called' surplus, he made the Govt look and act with great incompetence, he lied us into Wars and made getting out of those Wars damn near impossible while bloating the expendatures of lives and money in those Wars so high that only a 'Victory' would be the only way out. Vicory as defined by what? "They voted, purple fingers on the high".
By deciding to not"Look Back" at how we got here, Obama opened the back door for the trash talkers to nip him in the ass. 2010 it is all Obama's--Wars, deficits, job looses, economic dclines--bush will walk off with his smerk, he escaped his AWOL/desertion, his coc and alcohol abuse/dui's/his failure to prevent 911 and his success in hiding the facts of 911 /failure of Katrina/econmic collapse and all the rest.
Not looking back is now nipping us all in the ass.
the Govt cannot be trusted, bush made it so and Obama has let him walk off. There is no representation for the millions who marched for 'no war', for the millions who voted out the Repugs in '06 and in '08 and who vote in Demos and Obama with a blank check to do the 'Hope and Change' thing. That check has been cashed, what did we buy for it?