US POLITICS SPRING 2011: Let's just call off this country.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/business/global/26bridge.html

we're #1! we're #1! lol

Washington Post is pushing the notion that Republicans will accept defense cuts as long as they get to keep tax breaks for rich oil companies and get to maintain the Bush tax cuts for the rich.

Lets do both. Why can't Obama say "Reagan raised taxes. Republicans who are are you with-- Reagan or Norquist." Yes, Reagan cut taxes initially but then he later raised them a number of times.

By do both I mean--cut defense spending AND get rid of tax breaks and rich folks Bush tax cuts.

Obama just keeps saying "we need revenue" which I guess sounds better politically even if it will not educate anyone on the real facts.

Yglesias re Cuomo's leadership versus Obama and the differences:

if the US Senate operated on a 50 vote rule, then both the Affordable Care Act and the Dodd-Frank bill would have gone further in advancing progressive priorities, there would have been more economic stimulus in the 111th Congress, the DREAM Act would have passed, and it’s conceivable that some kind of nationwide carbon pricing scheme would be in place.

Which is just to say that political institutions matter, a lot. Getting concurrent majorities in two legislative houses, as Cuomo did, is very hard. Getting a 60 percent supermajority is harder.

Although nate Silver may have meant that Obama needs to try harder to get 60 and needs to get more involved in the sausage-making details

well exactly - i seem to recall obama possessing a filibuster-proof senate and then being one vote short (just as cuomo is), and a house that would do just about anything

obama's presidency is pretty much over as far as progressive legislative accomplishments go, unless dems make an unforseen move in one of the next two elections, which seems unlikely - what we've got is what we've got

all moves are 'unforseen' we have no idea how the economy or congress is gonna look 4 years from now

As cynical as it is, we really kinda deserve it. America is a pretty right country and it's getting less 'liberal' with each election. As in whatever passes for 'scary liberal agenda' in the public mind is in US political reality some mythical creature on the far side of an ever-widening chasm.

Take another look at our foreign policy and domestic policy will make much more sense.

i mean the "difference" btw obama and cuomo is partly about the senate and its dumb rules, but its also partly that cuomo had the help of some seriously rich donors and lobbyists. rich people get what they want! and its nice that they wanted gay marriage in this case.

The country isn't moving right – the left hasn't acted like The Left since the early seventies. Confronted by a party that's wishy-washy and aspires to absorb the most risible elements of the GOP, it's no wonder that voters prefer the GOP's straight lines.

its also partly that cuomo had the help of some seriously rich donors and lobbyists

really can't be said enough, which is why the Obama vs. Cuomo debates I've seen this weekend were fruitless.

x-post to Iatee
But we have a general idea based on what seats are up for election in the next go-round, and the Dems are just trying to hold onto the Senate, no one is talking about them pushing up over 60, and no one is predicting they will suddenly have 60 some senators who are not bought off by Wall Street no matter how liberal they may be on some other issues

The people have been told (by the media-government complex) that what used to be "left" is not in the discussion, so what're they supposed to do? Make politics the center of the lives, which they don't have time for while/if they're working for a living.

and the right's selective amnesia is a sight to behold. mitch mcconnell:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/06/27/mcconnell.debt.spending/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

"Since the day the stimulus was signed, Washington has added $3.5 trillion to the national debt and roughly 2 million Americans have lost their jobs. More recently, a slew of troubling economic indicators and dire warnings from credit agencies about the dangers of our debt show that the time for serious action is now.

"We have seen the consequences of giving Washington a blank check -- and we think it's time Washington make some of the hard choices that the average American has made over the past two and a half years."

you'd almost think the recession started under obama and the gop didn't add like $5.0 trillion to the national debt when mcconnell was senate majority leader

by "blank check" I assume he's talking about the fiscal stimulus plan that saved the world's largest economy from completely tanking? he'd prefer that didn't happen?

I wonder what he thinks unemployment would have looked like in the absence of that blank check

yes because then it would make the GOP taking back the WH easier

xp

People born in the USA after 1930 have never seen or experienced the sort of cascading liquidation of assets that would have happened in the absence of the sorts of actions taken by the Fed and the stimulus bill. They are clueless and the dark abyss of their ignorance has yet to be fully disclosed. I would hate to govern such petulant children and would be tempted to treat them with the same contempt the Republicans so clearly feel toward them.

while this is obviously awesome and huge it's pretty great insurance against crtitism from the left over the rest of his record this session

a couple people on my facebook linked that nyt article about the plutocrats who in their wisdom deigned to give us a victory, w/ a note along the lines of "heartening evidence that it IS possible to effect progressive change in washington!" and then a comments thread full of obligatory non sequitur michelle bachmann disses

The NYT picks up on Obama's transparency problems.

Wall Street re Obama: "Obama hasn’t been too bad to banks. He could have been worse."

Also:

But this election cycle, Wall Street’s Washington hands say it will be unlikely for any of the top bank C.E.O.’s to back one candidate over another publicly — at least this early — because the role of government has become so integral to these big firms.

While it may appear that a Republican candidate like Mitt Romney — a former private equity executive — would be a natural for Wall Street to support, there are still worries that he may not become the nominee. Many of the other Republican candidates — like Michele Bachmann — are not taken seriously or are too socially conservative for Wall Street.

The conventional wisdom, of course, is that Wall Street has turned its back on Mr. Obama out of frustration with his so-called antibusiness rhetoric and “fat cat” comments about bankers.

But Wall Street’s absence may be more about optics — the way things appear— than reality. Behind the scenes, it seems that many bankers are not running away from the president as quickly as some might suspect.

While many of the biggest name financiers feel that they can’t publicly support Mr. Obama through campaign contributions the way they did in 2008 — “it would be bad for business,” one brand-name chief executive of a major bank acknowledged — some still plan to vote for him. And some begrudgingly acknowledged that they don’t yet see a viable alternative to Mr. Obama among the Republican field.

more on mcconnell and "washington" -

http://baselinescenario.com/2011/06/27/what-is-this-washington/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/column-in-praise-of-mitch-mcconnell/2011/05/19/AGoMj1oH_blog.html

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/06/obama-has-finally-become-dick-cheney/241116/

starting to wonder how much these assholes stand to make if the US defaults. salon says Cantor's got money in ultrashort securities

http://www.salon.com/news/eric_cantor/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2011/06/27/eric_cantor_conflict_of_interest

x-post- Mcconnell does not always tell the truth as the item Tracer posted shows. What's Ezra talking about? It's kind of like when Ezra was on the Paul Ryan is brave meme.

In this case the headline is wrong but the column is terrific.

i think it's the exact opposite! xp

Klein is in part just summarizing the obvious (but and maybe I read the piece too quickly--but under-emphasizing the smell of the Mcconnell contradictions and hypocracy). Mcconell alternates between truth-telling (I want Obama to be a one-term President) and slickness and lies (stop giving money to "Washington") and controls the Republican message in the Senate, all in a effective manner for a politician.

in re: the story goole posted, anybody who leans even a little left needs to get real with themselves and jump ship from the Democratic party. Absolutely nothing, especially not the joke build-internal-coalitions-and-improve-gradually approach, is going to fix that ship. Well-meaning progressive coalitions eventually cough up candidates who, surprise surprise, threaten to jail reporters for protecting their sources.

wait so instead we should support other well-meaning progress coalitions?

progressive

aero u should run for president

he's my secretary of state.

Shakey's already got Defense.

Morbs is my Haldeman, kevin k my NSA.

Shakey's already got Defense.

I can't wait for his news conferences where he exhibits zero regret about our forces wasting some d-bag.

it's actually probably good that I went to jail a couple of times in my youth or my narcissistic ass might actually have political ambitions, which would be bad for everybody & most bad for me & my peace of mind

i thought i saw you yesterday. but then the guy opened his mouth and asked for a sandwich with "tomahto"

that is true, by the way!

"get real with themselves"

I love this worldnet daily article (and i did receive e-mails regarding various public interest groups such as moveon.org banding together to create a progressive anti-tea party tea party)

THE USUAL SUSPECTS

Look who's launching anti-tea-party group
And you thought you were through with Van Jones ...

By Aaron Klein
© 2011 WND

A new movement led by communist revolutionary group founder Van Jones seeks to counter the tea party while petitioning for a progressive agenda that includes "making Wall Street and the super-rich pay their fair share."

The organization, dubbed "The American Dream Movement," is partnered with a slew of radical groups funded by billionaire George Soros.

As WND first reported, the movement was introduced using subversive tactics, particularly a hoax Youtube video in which it appeared the ticker outside News Corporation's Manhattan headquarters had been hacked and reprogrammed with an anti-Fox News script calling for revolution

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=316001

radicals!

A new movement led by communist revolutionary group founder Van Jones

looool

subversive tactics

subversive tic tacs

http://freetheapps.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/tic-tac.jpg?w=320&h=480

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/06/meet-the-iowans-who-gently-disapprove-of-sarah-palin/241142/

ha, my hometown. i know some of the ppl quoted.

Bernie Sanders is trying (now if only Obama would support his proposal! I'm dreaming I know):

Washington Post-

Sen. Bernard Sanders, a Vermont independent with socialist leanings, delivered a 90-minute address Monday outlining his plan calling for 50 percent of all savings to come from tax increases. “The wealthiest Americans and the most profitable corporations in this country must pay their fair share,” Sanders wrote Monday in a letter to Obama.

Such a proposal has no chance of passing because Republicans and many Democrats believe steep tax increases are both politically unpopular and potentially harmful to the struggling domestic economy.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-enters-debt-talks/2011/06/27/AGdCzBoH_story.html?hpid=z3

The Republicans won't even accept the current Dem proposal that is skewed towards cuts:

In the Dems’ latest effort to pay the ransom, they’ve offered to slice $2.4 trillion from the debt over the next decade — $2 trillion in cuts and $400 billion in increased revenue.
from Washington Monthly