Month: January 2011

High Lonesome Theology

Charlie Louvin remembers his brother:

When Ira was killed by a drunk driver in 1965, he died with a warrant out for his arrest on DUI charges and with three bullets buried near his spine-the work of his third wife, who had shot him five times in 1963, after Ira had tried to strangle her with a telephone cord.

For Ira, to be a man was to be a drunk, and he was by all accounts the kind of drunk whose sickness looks and feels like a kind of possession. “Today they call it an illness,” Charlie says. “In those days it was bein’ mean.” Ira’s meanness was legendary. When Ira drank, he fought, cheated compulsively on each of his four wives, and worst for his career, [and] killed a tour with young Elvis Presley, a devoted Louvins fan

The article as a whole is a fascinating remembrance of the duo. Charlie died today at 83.

High Lonesome Theology

Ryan warns that if we don’t deal with our fiscal problems, we’ll have to raise taxes and cut benefits for seniors. So what can we do to reduce the deficit? Well, government spending is dominated by the big 5: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, defense, and interest payments; you can’t make a significant dent in the deficit without either raising taxes or cutting those big 5. Defense is untouchable, says the GOP; so that leaves the entitlement programs. And 2.7 of the three entitlement programs are benefits to seniors (70 percent of Medicaid spending goes on seniors).

So let’s see: to avoid cuts in benefits to seniors, we must … cut benefits to seniors.

I’m reasonably sure that Ryan hasn’t thought any of this through.

Paul Krugman hedging like Lehman on that “reasonably.”

Random Thought #371

politicalprof:

It should be remembered that no one—and I mean no one, of any party—who advocates more tax cuts for Americans, whether businesses or individuals, is serious about solving the American national deficit. The only reasonable response to anyone who follows a statement about the need to reduce or cure the United States’ national debt with a statement about the importance of more tax cuts is to laugh at them until snot runs out of your nose.

That this isn’t already the widespread response and being ceaseless spread and solidified by Democratic operatives as politicians of all stripes take to the hustings come 2012 is precisely why the Democrats fail. Period.

Until they accomplish that one thing: lancing the festering boil that begins with the merely foolish Laffer Curve and ends now with the grade-A, unadulterated horseshit in which tax cuts never even need to be budgeted for, and then successfully turn all of that into a massive and truly, viscerally horrifying joke that all representatives of the Tea Klan and their GOP enablers must run, run from at each and every stop (see: “maximum acceleration on BullshitOne, Charlie, they’ve got the pitchforks out here too!”), well, until that day: we’ll get precisely nowhere in this country.

Beyond Medicare, the major drivers of the deficits are not talked about so much by the fat cats and demagogues because they were either responsible for them, or are reaping gargantuan benefits from them, or both. The country is drowning in a sea of debt because of the obscene Bush tax cuts for the rich, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that have never been paid for and the Great Recession.

Bob Herbert, saying what so many others seemingly find so very hard to face or admit. This is who we are, and it’s critical that we face it.
Yapping about Social Security and the necessity of cuts to same is just that: yapping. The money is in Medicare (as in: controlling the costs of) and the Bush tax cuts (as in: all of them, even those marginally aimed at the middle class). Solve those two and get employment rolling and everything else that today seems utterly intractable will simply melt away. Even better: the Bush tax cuts will solve themselves if we can just muster the will to let them.

Texas, Our Texas

Obviously very early, but signs say that it could go for Obama in 2012…under certain circumstances:

Texas ought to stay safely in the GOP column for 2012 but with a weak nominee Obama would have a chance and these numbers are further confirmation that you’re probably talking about 400+ electoral votes for the President next year if his opponent is [redacted].

But unsaid, and what ought to scare the pants off the GOP in Texas: that any potential candidate would poll as losing Texas to Obama right now is, shall we say: interesting.

Not KBH’s Senate seat, not the 2012 cycle, but soon and for a long time: Texas will be blue. The demographic tontine that is the core of the modern GOP will make it ever more so. I think I’ll even live to see it be a fairly reliable blue. And that will be a big, big deal.

Texas, Our Texas

Agin it afore I was fer it. Now agin it. Agin.

McCain, 1999: Ethanol subsidies should be phased out…we don’t need ethanol subsidies. It doesn’t help anybody.
McCain, 2003: Ethanol does nothing to reduce fuel consumption, nothing to increase our energy independence, nothing to improve air quality.
McCain, 2008: I support ethanol and I think it is a vital, a vital alternative energy source not only because of our dependency on foreign oil but its greenhouse gas reduction effects
McCain, 2011: Ethanol is a joke [and government programs promoting the corn-derived fuel are wasting money].

Getting to “Citizen”

MR. GREGORY: There’s been a lot of talk about discourse, about how you all can get along a little bit better and do it a little bit more civilly. And I wonder, this is the leadership moment here, OK? There are elements of this country who question the president’s citizenship, who think that it–his birth certificate is inauthentic. Will you call that what it is, which is crazy talk?

REP. CANTOR: David, you know, I mean, a lot of that has been an, an issue sort of generated by not only the media, but others in the country. Most Americans really are beyond that, and they want us to focus…

MR. GREGORY: Right. Is somebody brings that up just engaging in crazy talk?

REP. CANTOR: Well, David, I, I don’t think it’s, it’s nice to call anyone crazy, OK?

MR. GREGORY: All right. Is it a legitimate or an illegitimate issue?

REP. CANTOR: And–so I don’t think it’s an issue that we need to address at all. I think we need to focus on…

MR. GREGORY: All right. His citizenship should never be questioned, in your judgment. Is that what you’re saying?

REP. CANTOR: It is, it is not an issue that even needs to be on the policy-making table right now whatsoever.

MR. GREGORY: Right. Because it’s illegitimate? I mean, why won’t you just call it what it is?

REP. CANTOR: I–because, again…

MR. GREGORY: I mean, I feel like there’s a lot of Republican leaders who don’t want to go as far as to criticize those folks.

REP. CANTOR: No. I think the president’s a citizen of the United States.

MR. GREGORY: Period.

REP. CANTOR: So what–yes. Why, why is it that you want me to go and engage in name-calling?

MR. GREGORY: No, I’m just…

REP. CANTOR: I think he’s a citizen of the United States.

MR. GREGORY: Because, because I think a lot of people, Leader, would say that a leader’s job is to shut some of this down. You know as well as I do, there are some elements on the right who believe two things about this president: He actively is trying to undermine the American way and wants to deny individuals their freedom. Do you reject those beliefs?

REP. CANTOR: I…

MR. GREGORY: As a leader in our Congress.

REP. CANTOR: Let me tell you, David, I believe this president wants what’s best for this country. It’s just how he feels we should get there, that there are honest policy differences.

MR. GREGORY: Fair enough.
Lemkin: Well, that was easy…what, it only took about 1500 words worth of exchange to admit the simple and well proven empirical reality that Obama was born in the United States. All of next month on MTP, presented without commercial interruption: we go to work on gravity and evolution. Two “theories” and 672 hours of unrelenting follow-up questions to establish Mr. Cantor’s entirely straightforward, no-nonsense positions. Only on NBC.

They don’t want civility. They want silence from the Republicans. And the sitting together being kissy-kissy is just another way to try to silence Republicans, and also to show – to keep the American people from seeing how few of them there are in the U.S. House now. Then when people stand up to – what the Democrats are going to be doing when Barack Obama spews out all his venom, then, um, if they’re scattered throughout all the Republicans, then it won’t be as noticeable as if we’re sitting apart. So it is a ruse and I’m not in favor of it and I’m talking about it and I hope other members of the Republican conference in the House will not take the bait.

Paul Broun (R, GA), truly reveling in the new era of civility. Spewing venom is a good thing in Georgia, right? Jus some ole time plain folk talk.
To the dirty fucking hippies in the audience: Broun’s onto you! Hide your stash! It’s a trap!

And this is precisely why the Senate should have no other business until the debt ceiling vote. Alright, who wants to vote against the liver? Anyone against the liver? Next, the kidney. One or a pair? How about one lung, one kidney? Can we agree on that civilly?