Tag: GOP

On the one hand, Republicans have had a major role in shaping [the healthcare reform, financial regulation, and climate change bills]. On the other hand, they haven’t had to vote for these bills, and so they could cleanly campaign against legislation that a member of their party helped write. And as an added bonus, Democrats are stuck trying to defend a bill that their base doesn’t like very much and that’s thick with compromises that annoy political elites.

Ezra Klein on the Lone Republican strategy, which has put Snowe, Corker, and now Lindsey “Huckleberry” Graham alone in the room full of Democrats, at least until it mattered. Bill successfully shaped to GOP specifications, compromise time is over, Democrats pass unpopular, weakened bill (seemingly forgetting to dump the compromise portions every single time) and the GOP gets to campaign against it all, with emphasis on “back room deals” and “sweetheart provisions,” many or even most of which were made at their behest.
And, worst of all, The Democrat is shocked every single time.

…belief that government has little or no role to play in helping this nation meet our collective challenges. It’s an agenda that basically offers two answers to every problem we face: more tax breaks for the wealthy and fewer rules for corporations.

The last administration called this recycled idea “the Ownership Society.” But what it essentially means is that everyone is on their own. No matter how hard you work, if your paycheck isn’t enough to pay for college or health care or childcare, well, [go die in the streets]. If misfortune causes you to lose your job or your home, [go die in the streets]. And if you’re a Wall Street bank or an insurance company or an oil company, you pretty much get to play by your own rules, regardless of the consequences for everybody else [; anyone that gets in their way can kindly go die in the streets].

Barack Obama as heard by Lemkin.

Top 12

John Cole runs it down for us re: just what qualifications are required to be a serious person seeking a judicial appointment:

  1. Titillating David Brooks- no boring career oriented types need apply. Try to squeeze in some college era hijinks to liven up that vita- maybe a possession bust as an undergrad, some racy Facebook pictures, or a term paper supportive of Mao.

  2. Ed Whelan demands a valid driver’s license and there will be a proficiency test to demonstrate “mastery” of the subject.

  3. Paul Campos would like a dissertation on the history of curriculum theory (no slouching and skipping out on the role of hermeneutics and critical theory), a treatise on best pedagogical practices, a complete review of the collected works of John Dewey, and a positive evaluation from every lazy student you may have ever had.

  4. Andrew Sullivan would like proof one way or another of your sexual orientation. I suppose pictures will do, but the apparent gold standards are the assurances of Jeffrey Toobin and Eliot Spitzer.

  5. Somewhat related to #4, K-LO [Kathryn Jean Lopez] has decided that four out of over one hundred justices have been women, and this poses a grave threat to the white male, so no more va-jay-jays- women need not apply.

  6. David Bernstein is tired of Ivy Leaguers, so come on down, Heritage Law students!

  7. Republicans are requiring a history of judicial experience, which could be daunting, considering they will most likely block your appointment to the bench.

  8. Ed Whelan is also requiring that future justices not be residents (current or former) of New York City.

  9. Michael Steele is demanding that you not question the Constitutional Right to practice of slavery.

  10. Lynn Sweet would like a decent batting stance. And no, I’m not kidding. According to recent debates, proof of a good baseball stance could also serve as verification of your sexual status, as required by Sullivan in point number four.

  11. [Andrew] Sullivan is now demanding a record of taking risks and failing to prove a record of life experience.

  12. And Howard Kurtz requires a spouse and children

Mysterious Una(ni)mi(ty)

Bernie Sanders’ “Audit the Fed” amendment passed today:

The 96-0 vote came after Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) modified an earlier version of the audit legislation that was strongly opposed by the White House and Federal Reserve. They argued the amendment would compromise the independence of U.S. monetary policy.

By this margin, even noted fucktard Orrin Hatch can declare himself “satisfied” that it is “good for the country.”
Likewise Ben Nelson, who was irrevocably aboard way back at 70 votes. The era of partisan bickering must be over.

Just so we’re clear, in the 21st century, Republican gubernatorial candidates are attacked for accepting modern biology and being only a partial Biblical literalist.

Steve Benen. Why yes, Steve, yes they are. Nothing to see here.

Not a Mistake

southpol:

“Tell you what, motherfuckers, when dead people are left to rot in the sun because of the incompetence of the federal government, when corpses are floating in the streets, when the President passively ignores the pleas of the governors of Gulf Coast states, when entire neighborhoods have been physically destroyed, when the federal government strands tens of thousands of people without food or water, when the federal government starts to blame the local governments, when the President praises the work of a failed, incompetent bureaucrat while a major city rots, then you can say that this is Barack Obama’s “Katrina.” But until this happens, good, sweet conservative bags of fuck who need so desperately to drag this president down, the Gulf of Mexico oil leak is a corporate-created disaster..”

The Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Will Wreck Your Pathetic Ideology

(via ryking)

Also worth noting that the debacle of a Katrina “response” detailed in this quote was not a mistake. It was the logical extension of “Go Die in the Streets,” the mantra by which all GOP decisions were (and are) currently made.
It was only the palpable and forceful public revulsion at this reasoned choice that both mandated and resulted in the spasmodic, utterly demeaning to US self-image non-response that came after (heckuva job, Brownie). And it was only the torrent of fury to that response that finally, finally elicited something approaching competence and problem-solving from the administration.

Four Things

The way I see it, this graph boils down to four things:

  1. Perceived level of understanding is a dangerous thing. But then, we knew this.
  2. Self-identifying independents of 1993 were largely moderates. Today, they are (apparently) the far right that finds the GOP not-quite-lunatic-enough and (probably) some fraction of former GOPers who are horrified by that party today. A “voted-X in last election” cross-tab would’ve helped here. A lot.
  3. The epistemic loop seems entirely responsible for the shift in initial wrong-ness, and misperception among Democrats that also has to be corrected through painstakingly slow re-education and gradual convincing. Lots of Democrats were buying into the Death Panels horse-shit too, after all, they heard it on the news, so the news-givers must be making at least a casual effort at factual correctness instead of merely reporting what various “sides” said. Right? Right? It is a mortal lock that these Democrats are older, and came of age with Walter Cronkite. They implicitly trust what they hear on TV, even if it’s on FOXnews. You can (eventually) convince them otherwise, but only with a lot of work; and research shows they still marginally believe the wrong fact if it comes first, even when said people realize the initial fact is misinformation. This is why primacy in the race to inoculation in the messaging war matters so goddamned much, and yet the Democrat categorically refuses to use it.
    Nearly 80% of Republicans self-identifying as “not knowing much” about healthcare reform knew that there were going to be Death Panels. More than 80% who “knew a lot” thought that as well. This is FOXnews, Rush, Beck, and Drudge (aka the MSM’s assignment editor). No other explanation for it.
  4. The Facts Do Not Matter

Full report (PDF link) here.

The Talking Cure

NYT reports:

Senate Republicans ended three days of resistance on Wednesday and said they were ready to allow debate of legislation to overhaul regulation of the nation’s financial system. The Republicans, who were gathering to make their formal decision, appeared to back down after Democrats threatened to keep the Senate in session through the night to dramatize the the standoff.

It’s almost as though making them talk is a strateegery that might, you know, work.
But, of course, we’ll face the same exact obstructionist horse-shit whenever debate is declared “over” and a move to end it is taken. What then? Won’t somebody tell me what to do then?!?

Make them vote against the bill. No compromises, no walk-backs, no changes.
I’ll say it again, there are TWO CHOICES here. You vote for cloture or you talk about why you are not voting for cloture. Forever. Or until you vote for cloture. Your choice.
You then are rewarded with two similar choices: you vote for the bill or you vote against it. Period.
We have nothing else to do until November of 2010. We plan to make you eat shit every day until then either way. No breaks. Oh, Senator Bunning, you say you need to take a shit? Well, we’re pretty likely to move at that point too.

Of course, it must be noted that the prior paragraph has absolutely no meaning to the Democrat.

Just as conservative legislative politics isn’t really about free markets conservative judicial politics isn’t really about restraint. The rhetoric is just rhetoric, and the reality is that conservative politics is about conservatism—about entrenching the power and influence of the dominant economic and sociocultural groups.

Matt Yglesias, noting something that most people seem to have a hard time keeping inside their skulls