I think we should retain the same [filibuster] policies that we have instead of lowering it…. I think it has been working.
Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii)
Better Democrats™ please.
Better Democrats™ please.
Tag: democrats
The Republicans are thinking, why don’t they just sell some of their stock? If they’re in really dire straits maybe they can take some of their art collection and send it to the auctioneer. And if they’re in deep deep trouble maybe the unemployed can sell one of their yachts. That’s what the Republicans are thinking right now. But that’s not the life of ordinary people…I will say to the Republicans who have blocked this bill for months, to those who have kept food out of the mouths of children, I will say to them now, may God have mercy on your souls
Alan Grayson on the unemployment insurance extension
What, me worry?
In which Krugman and I disagree:
Republicans, by the way, seem less susceptible to this delusion. Since Mr. Obama took office, they have engaged in relentless obstruction, obviously unworried about how their actions would look or be reported. And it’s working: by blocking Democratic efforts to alleviate the economy’s woes, the G.O.P. is helping its chances of a big victory in November.
I think Krugman is being too kind by half. The GOP is unworried because they know their actions will not be reported; they therefore needn’t worry about appearances at all. There is, outside the blogoshpere, precisely zero coverage of across-the-board GOP obstruction. And, why should there be? The Democrat won’t mention it either. Obama is, even still, apparently heralding in a wonderful new day in which everyone works together.
And don’t for a second entertain the thought that, should the GOP capture the House in November, things will change because (why) they’ll have to start taking positions on policy. They certainly will take positions, but it will all be:
- The Tax elimination act of 2011
- The forced birth bill of 2011
- The immigration cessation bill of 2011
- The drill everywhere bill of 2011
- The Social Security “Personalization” and Welfare Elimination Act of 2011
And etc… That, of course, is ignoring (for now) all the weekly impeachment proceedings. Each of these will, of course, die a quick death in the do-nothing Senate. Well, except for that last one. Democrats will likely take it up in hopes of creating the appearance of bipartisanship. That and, we’ll see a high-minded compromise on #1; there we’ll raise taxes on the bottom 15% in exchange for deep cuts in social programs and an across the board tax decrease on the top 10% as well as elimination of capital gains and estate taxes. It’s win/win!
How do you stop it? Well, you know about it. You thus start talking about it. Now. Repeatedly. Every time a microphone is switched on and several times when one isn’t yet.
That, however, would be shrill.
Goldilocks Triangulation
Digby utterly nails it; do yourself a favor and read the whole thing:
[Obama’s political advisers] should have realized that a health care bill that nobody in their right minds would have designed from scratch, the worst aspects of which liberals will be asked to defend for years to come, would be met with dampened enthusiasm by those who watched the process devolve from a sense of progressive purpose to an exhausting farce. They are expected to be able to predict that financial reform without accountability for what’s gone before, combined with the administration’s unwillingness to confront the civil liberties abuse of the last administration – indeed expanding on them in some cases – would show a lack of fundamental concern for justice among those who care about such things.
Mr. Black
Today’s edition of What Atrios Says [numerology mine]:
I get that the realities of Congress blah blah blah means that maybe not everything passes, but would it be so hard to:
- Spend a couple of weeks making the case for a crucial piece of legislation.
- Publicize major votes on that issue.
- Have votes.
- If votes fail, continue to make noise about the vote.
Answer: Apparently so.
Unemployment extension: we cannot possibly afford such a deficit exploder; won’t you please think of the children?
Bush tax cuts: Why, we can’t afford not to extend those indefinitely. And no, we don’t need to pay for them in any way. In fact, it would be irresponsible to pay for them.
Ladies and gentlemen, your 2010 GOP. An opponent whose nut(s) The Democrat finds utterly impossible to crack.
(graph via Ezra Klein)
The other side said no.
They said no to laws that we passed to stop insurance companies from denying coverage to people with preexisting conditions. They said no to requiring women to get equal pay for equal work. They said no to extended unemployment insurance for folks who desperately needed help. They said no to holding oil companies accountable when they bring on catastrophe.
Barack Obama, speaking in Vegas.
This is all well and good, and I’m glad to (finally) hear it. But The Democrat needs to be out there, every day in front of every microphone that is switched on repeating this sort of mantra over and over again, day after day, week after week, year after year. Then and only then it might start to seep in.
They choose not to. They choose to ignore the glaring truth that the facts do not matter. They think they have the high ground of those facts which do not matter. They do not. The facts do not matter, and often don’t even enter into the calculus. This is why they fail.
This is all well and good, and I’m glad to (finally) hear it. But The Democrat needs to be out there, every day in front of every microphone that is switched on repeating this sort of mantra over and over again, day after day, week after week, year after year. Then and only then it might start to seep in.
They choose not to. They choose to ignore the glaring truth that the facts do not matter. They think they have the high ground of those facts which do not matter. They do not. The facts do not matter, and often don’t even enter into the calculus. This is why they fail.
I know at least 7 [GOP] senators, who I will not name, but were made to make a commitment under threat of losing their chairmanships, if they did not support the leadership on every procedural vote, every single thing we did, from the important to the not so important, required (for the first time in modern American history) […] required 60 votes. All the sudden a majority became 60 instead of 50
Joe Biden, reflecting on GOP obstructionism.
I’d argue in a similar vein as Yglesias: it’s not remarkable at all that the GOP extracted this kind of stern loyalty. What’s remarkable is that The Democrat did not. Not even on procedural votes can Democratic Leadership count on the caucus voting in lockstep (and then being free to vote their conscience on final passage).
Likewise, such fealty is also not required on keystone issues such as healthcare insurance reform, or more recently on FinReg. Say what you will about whether or not Feingold is in the right by withholding his vote for FinReg (in favor of some theoretically better but functionally nonexistent “other bill”), the fact of the matter is that in so doing, he’s empowered Code Brown to set the agenda for FinReg, and The Democrat has dutifully sent the bill to the American Taxpayer instead of the largest banking interests in the world. And now will get to take the blame for it. Because, rest assured, the GOP will run on that. And won’t be troubled in the least by the facts that they were directly responsible for that change and many, many others just like it. The facts do not matter.
I’d argue in a similar vein as Yglesias: it’s not remarkable at all that the GOP extracted this kind of stern loyalty. What’s remarkable is that The Democrat did not. Not even on procedural votes can Democratic Leadership count on the caucus voting in lockstep (and then being free to vote their conscience on final passage).
Likewise, such fealty is also not required on keystone issues such as healthcare insurance reform, or more recently on FinReg. Say what you will about whether or not Feingold is in the right by withholding his vote for FinReg (in favor of some theoretically better but functionally nonexistent “other bill”), the fact of the matter is that in so doing, he’s empowered Code Brown to set the agenda for FinReg, and The Democrat has dutifully sent the bill to the American Taxpayer instead of the largest banking interests in the world. And now will get to take the blame for it. Because, rest assured, the GOP will run on that. And won’t be troubled in the least by the facts that they were directly responsible for that change and many, many others just like it. The facts do not matter.
GOP Reaps No Outrage
Let me see if I have this straight: in the last few days members of the GOP have savagely screwed the unemployed, protected the bankstas, trashed Thurgood Marshall, implied rape and incest is part of God’s plan, defended BP, threatened to either end social security or screw over 20 million plus people who have paid into the system for at least 20 years by making them wait until age 70 to see their benefits, and screwed homeless veterans with children. That about it, or is there more?
You can rest assured that there’s more, it’s just not what you may have been expecting. The real outrage? That The Democrat has made an issue of no part of any of this. Not even slightly. Instead, they’ve acceded to the demands of the minority. Over and over and on every issue listed there. And, in so doing, directly contribute to the seeds of their own electoral destruction.
Oh how we’ve all grown tired of hearing the same rhyming statements that defenestrate the GOP on any one of these issues every time a microphone has been switched on. Right? Oh how we’ve grown tired of the GOP repeatedly being forced to vote against jobs, or bank reform, or Wall Street reform, or BP reform, or the notion that rape isn’t part of God’s plans, or any of the rest of it. Right?
This is why we fail. Every time.
Won’t Somebody Think of the Fatcats?
FinReg Conference Committee headed back to the table:
In an extraordinary move aimed at winning over reluctant Republican senators, the top Democratic negotiators on the Wall Street reform bill will reopen the conference committee Tuesday to swap out a controversial $19 billion tax on big banks, according to House and Senate aides.
Yes, you read that right. Fresh off nearly destroying the global economy, fresh off being bailed out to the tune of trillions of dollars, fresh off the entire affair being compared to “an ant” by Boehner, the GOP is again moving the goalposts (and being allowed to do so by Democrat asshat enablers, which on this occasion includes Russ Feingold (D-Wis.); thanks a lot, and I hope you enjoy your years in the minority).
The banksters just can’t be held accountable for any amount money, no matter how small, no matter how justified, no matter how directly related to their own future operations. Not even a relatively paltry $19 billion that’s intended to bail their sorry asses out in the not-too-distant future. Nope. That’s also coming out of your ass, American Taxpayer. Hope you enjoy it. The GOP got it just for you. Because you’re special. See you in 2010.
Lemkin 