• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on And now a word from High …
    Seagrl on And now a word from High …
    Seagrl on And now a word from High …
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on And now a word from High …
    Ga6thDem on John Dean is still right
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on John Dean is still right
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on John Dean is still right
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on John Dean is still right
    Propertius on John Dean is still right
    Catscatscats on John Dean is still right
    Kathleen A Wynne on John Dean is still right
    William on John Dean is still right
    riverdaughter on John Dean is still right
    William on John Dean is still right
    lililam on John Dean is still right
  • Categories


  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    December 2019
    S M T W T F S
    « Nov    
    1234567
    891011121314
    15161718192021
    22232425262728
    293031  
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • Killing Herd Animals
      One of the great crimes and tragedies of our world is how we treat the animals we eat (or whose milk or eggs or other products we eat and use.) Factory farming keeps them in tiny enclosures, feeds them monotonous foods, and then when they’re slaughtered it’s a terrible experience: they’re terrified and die in […]
  • Top Posts

Racism and Deadlines

So, the Obama whips are trying to get us back into line, supporting Obama for re-election next year.  Why else would we be treated to timely reminders of what racists we are?  It’s a strange phenomenon but I never think about Obama’s race until he or one of his lackeys brings it up and shoves it in my face again.  He is, according to them, as spotless and competent or incompetant as any other Democrat.  Like Clinton.  {{eyes rolling}}  (Joseph Cannon has a nice post on this as well).

Can I just dispel some myths and legends about Clinton because I witnessed it, having been old enough (and born) to vote for him in 1992?

When I voted for him, I thought he was a moderate liberal.  One thing was for damn sure, he was nowhere near as conservative as his Republican opponent.  Nosiree.  Plus, I really liked his wife.  She was smart and didn’t mind sticking up for working women even when the traditional women got on her case.

Anyway, what I remember about Clinton’s terms in office, more than any other thing that happened during those eight years, was the relentlessly negative coverage he got from the media and the endless investigations instigated by Republican troublemakers.  It started before he took office and it didn’t end even after his moving van was chased away from the White House by screeching hordes hellbent on denying the Clintons even one piece of personal china from their friends and supporters.  They were even accused of swiping the “W’s” off the keyboards.

Even the Supreme Court didn’t see the harm in letting him and his wife be subject to crazy, speculative lawsuits.  He’d just have to deal with them.  He did.  But that doesn’t mean his performance in office didn’t suffer.  I think it did.  He had to shelve a lot of things he wanted to do.  DADT was a compromise solution.  So was DOMA.  Without that middle ground, there was a good possibility that some very negative homophobic amendments would have been passed.  Lani Guinier didn’t have a chance.  His attorney general picks were harassed for having nanny problems (but Tim Geithner suffered no punishment for not paying his taxes.  *He* was confirmed anyway for an infraction that would have gotten him fired if he had been an IRS agent).  Even his military strategies were called into question.  Remember the accusations of “Wag the Dog” when he bombed bin Laden in Afghanistan in 1998?  His Republican detractors were convinced that he did it because he wanted to take everyone’s mind off Monica Lewinsky, not because bin Laden was a dangerous terrorist who had bombed two American embassies in Africa and a US Naval vessel.

Then there’s the stuff that progressives say they hate him for, like NAFTA.  If there was a free trade agreement that ever had a reason for being, it might be NAFTA.  We do a lot of business with Canada and Mexico.  NAFTA had the promise of eliminating a lot of bureaucracy, saving everyone a lot of time and money.  You know, smaller government is not such a bad thing when it’s done well.  The problem is that Republicans would not enforce labor standards.  Maybe Clinton should have abandoned it at that point.  But NAFTA is not the most significant thing plaguing the employment market right now.  I am not competing for a job against some dude in Guadalajara.  My competition is in Western Europe and Asia.  Europe because they actually protected their scientific infrastructure and Asia because there is a lot of cheap labor there.  Unions are key to both situations.  I will leave it to the political braintrusts to figure that out.

As for Welfare Reform?  I was all for it.  I think reducing generational poverty is a laudable endeavor and am genuinely surprised that other liberals aren’t in favor of it too.  It is much better to have a job than to have a measly government check that keeps you poor.  I supported programs that trained people, especially young mothers, to get decent jobs and education.  The more we educate women and get them to support themselves, the fewer children they will have and the better the quality of life for the children they do have.  (Well, that was the theory until Obama came along and bought into deficit reduction, but I digress) As I remember it, Clinton’s team wanted to support parents with child care subsidies and housing vouchers and additional Head Start while they were transitioning to a work environment.  And Republicans, as is their wont, were agin it.  I fail to see how asking people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps but denying them boots was actually going to work but our media punditry seem to remove the obligation to make sense from Republican proposals.  The Republicans passed a draconian welfare reform act which Clinton mitigated later.

The area where I think Clinton failed was in the regulation of derivatives and allowing the dismantling of the Glass-Steagal Act by Gramm-Bliley.  Brookesly Born was the legendary regulator who opposed Larry Summers about the regulation of derivatives.  She was right, they were wrong.  Some of the guys who were Clinton appointees who joined with Summers to gang up on Born, now regret that they didn’t take her advice because she was absolutely right.  But note which candidate appointed Summers to his economics team.  That’s right, Barack Obama.  Gramm-Bliley was another matter.  We can’t leave Clinton totally off the hook but I think that he counted on Gore to win in 2000 and keep an eye on how that was going.  So, yeah, Clinton had a hand in this, probably by appointing Robert Rubin and letting the finance industry have a little too much freedom.  That was regrettable.  But the bulk of the responsibility for what happened in 2008 is George Bush’s.  There were plenty of warning signs in 2006 that the markets were going seriously off the rails and his regulators were either complicit or incompetent.  And then Paulson and Geithner failed to prevent the collapse of Lehman Brothers.  That was the disaster that triggered all the rest.  And who does Obama appoint as his Treasury Secretary? Tim Geithner.

The biggest differences that I can see between the Clinton years and the Obama years is that when the Republicans amped up the crazy starting in 1992, no one had ever seen anything like it before.  It wasn’t like Watergate when Nixon really did something criminal and both parties took him out.  No, this was a political media Dresden that seemed determined to wipe Clinton off the map.  He and Hillary didn’t always navigate the firestorm very well.  They were the first that had to go through it.  No other president in my lifetime has had every crevice of their personal and political lives examined in such humiliating detail.  And what did the millions of dollars of investigations turn up?  A blow job.  That was it.  It wasn’t even “paradise by the dashboard light” homerun intercourse.  Other than that, they were clean.  I doubt that any other political family in Washington could have come out of that looking like the dedicated public servants they turned out to be.

But they learned while they were in office what the limits were to what they could accomplish of their agenda.  And, by golly, they got a lot done.  The Republicans were constantly thwarted in what they wanted to do.  Progressives call it “triangulation”; I call it “pol-i-tics”. Gingrich shut down government and got in big trouble for it.  Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy against the Republicans wishes.  They tried to impeach Clinton and the public supported him anyway.  They wanted to pass an amendment to the constitution defining marriage only between a man and a woman and all they got was DOMA.  With another, less experienced, less apt student in the Oval Office, the Republicans would have gotten away with murder.

When Hillary ran in 2008, she was an even quicker learner than Bill.  She took the media on and beat it.  It wasn’t Fox News that took Hillary down.  It was her own party.

And now we are asked to support the guy who “beat” her in the primary.  A guy who runs a sexist White House.  A guy who CEO’s on Wall Street say is even more right of center than they thought.  A guy who was a deficit hawk during a recession.  A guy who didn’t think there was anything he could or wanted to do about unemployment.  A guy who is disgracefully allowing the dismantling of the US R&D industry without lifting a finger to help.  A guy who gave Bankers a pass.  A guy who crafted one of the most inept forms of healthcare insurance reform imaginable that will do absolutely nothing to lower costs but passes almost all of them onto the backs of already stretched consumers.  A guy who hurt struggling homeowners with HAMP.  A guy who gave away the store to Republicans when they took the US and global economies hostage by vowing not to raise the debt ceiling until they got what they wanted.  A guy who wants to make a Grand Bargain with Social Security and Medicare, virtually all that anyone my age will have left after we’ve lost everything else due to prolonged bouts of unnecessary unemployment.  And it’s not like Barack Obama is facing an economic situation that the entire world’s economists and history had no prior knowledge of.  There’s plenty of examples out there that demonstrate exactly what needs to be done from The Great Depression to the bad example of the Japanese lost decade to the Swedish crisis.  He’s supposed to be brilliant.  All he needs to do to put the economy back on track is to support policies that are known to have helped in the past.  But he won’t do them.  Why???

In short, the Obama loyalists say we have nothing to complain about.  The only reason we don’t want Obama is because we are racists.  It’s all in the color of his skin.  If not for that, we would be content with our dwindling middle class lives and diminished expectations.  We would gladly endure the beatings if we could just get over the fact that he is a few shades too dark because the Democratic party says that it has no one else who is more representative of its values or more competent in execution than Barack Obama.

And what would be the point of making your base feel like they have some reason to feel guilty and that the Clintons were not all they were cracked up to be?

I have no idea but somewhere yesterday I read that the deadline for filing for the upcoming primaries is fast approaching.  It’s the end of October.  If I didn’t know better, I think we saw the Democrats blink.  After all, they have been telling us for months now that it is a fantasy and crazy for us to believe that there will be a primary challenge to Obama in 2012.  Even Hillary has sought to dispel the notion that she will take him on.  So, if that’s the case, why the over the top denialism of the Clinton years and the persistent accusations of racism?  I mean, if she has already said she’s not taking him on and there’s no one else to challenge him, what’s the problem?  It sounds like Obama lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Unless the base is getting restless and the deadline isn’t coming soon enough…

Stormy Monday?

More work, work, work! Make it stoooopppp! Send positive thots so I can finish up some outstanding items and get back to the blog. In the meantime, here’s some links to chew on ala breakfast granola:

  • Talkingpointsmemo jumps the shark. Ok, many of you probably thought this happened months (or even years) ago. I have to say that I am sincerely appalled by Josh Marhall’s complete abandonment of any sort of rationality. I can deal with the fact that he’s pro-Obama. There are plenty of those types of bloggers around. But unlike Big Tent Democrat at TalkLeft, for example, Josh seems to think his pro-Obama advocacy must also mean viciously savaging Clinton over nothing. Jeez, Josh, if you’re going to go after her, could you do it based on something actually real and not something speculative?
    So she says there is no evidence that Obama is a Muslim as far a she knows. That little “as far as I know” is an admission of her guilt? Wha? Josh, this is just absurd. And what’s with Obama throwing Muslim Americans under a bus anyway? Like I’ve said before, here in NJ, they are all over the place. It’s really important to not get all freaked out every time you see a woman in chador and hijab shopping for shoes with her husband. Unfortunately, Obama’s attitude is exacerbating the fear of Muslims. Personally, I wish he’d knock it off. (For a first hand account of what has happened to Muslim Americans since 9/11, try this piece from This American Life called “Shouting Across the Divide”. It’s really not pretty.) And, really, Josh, this is just beneath you. Hillary was very clear about what she said. There is no reason to read meaning into something that isn’t there.
  • Here’s another outrage from our own side that BTD is pointing to today. I’m in agreement with BTD. Dick Durbin and John Kerry should just STFU. I voted for Hillary and so did half the primary voters so far. If I’m mistaken, she’s ahead in the popular vote. Where do these two get off telling the rest of us to just suck it up and go away? Presumably, Obama is going to need us before the end. Or would they prefer that we do as anonymous is suggesting in the Nader youtube: “expect us to not lift a finger to help you”. Jerks.
  • Paul Krugman once again shouts into the hurricane. Sorry, Paul. People who are voting for Obama aren’t thinking with their heads. Obama is very much about an appeal to emotion. It doesn’t much matter whether he will adopt high-Broderism tactics or not. Obama is all about “the triumph of hope over experience”. He really hasn’t been in Congress long enough if he doesn’t realize that the Republican minority revels in its ability to keep the rest of the government and country hostage to its whims. As long as they can filibuster, Obama’s hopes might well be ether. That goes for Clinton too, but unlike Obama, she has no illusions about what lies before her. Her knowledge base of all of the pressure points in government is bigger than his. As much as I appreciate Krugman’s appeal to reason, unlike Josh Marshall cited above, the power of personal politics says that you can’t argue rationally with a person in the midst of an internal emotional whirlwind. The Republicans are very good at stirring up emotions in the public mind and this year, the Democrats have latched onto the technique, with the media’s help. As the saying goes, “when your heart’s on fire, smoke gets in your eyes”. Let’s hope that SNL’s recent attempts to pull back the curtain on the absurdity of the media’s Obamaphilia will blow some of that smoke away. We still have to deal with the misogynism this campaign has revealed in the “progressive” blogosphere. But one thing at a time. Let’s get through Tuesday, then we can pound on the “He-Man Wimin Hater’s Club”.
  • Taylor Marsh has a bit more on the NAFTA kerfuffle with Goolsbee, who our own Ronk profiled several weeks ago. No matter how you slice it, it appears that much of Obama’s posturing on NAFTA is so much political theater and he’s not in favor of doing much more than cosmetic changes to it. Not that it matters much. It looks like no one is paying much attention to the NAFTA issue. It’s just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to globalization and the export of American jobs elsewhere. I’m more worried about the export of chemical and biological expertise to China and India. When we start to lose our creative class, then we’re in big trouble. And yes, it is happening at an accelerating pace. I’d be very surprised if I end up retiring from my present career. We research professionals are like sitting ducks, watching in dumbfounded shock at the number of layoffs going on around us as our jobs are shipped off to Hyderabad. (Funny how the Marketing guys never face this prospect. Hmmm…)
  • What is the first thing that comes to your mind when you see this headline? Gun Incident Near President Bush’s Ranch. Yeah, mine too. Gotta stop inviting Dick to barbeques.
  • Finally, this youtube deserves a reprise just before tomorrow’s primary in Texas. Let’s hear it for the girls. We’re counting on all of you Texas Bluebonnets and San Antonio Roses (and you Sensitive New Age Guys) to take the kids out for a night at the caucuses. Yee-haa!