I had thought the Stimulus Bill was worthless, and this just confirms it:
The voters’ message is getting through, not only in settling the fights for the Republican and Democratic nominations but in changing the mind-set of Washington.
The clearest evidence of the change is what happened last week on the economic stimulus bill. A week ahead of their self-imposed deadline, the House and Senate, by overwhelming votes, sent to President Bush almost exactly the kind of relief measure he had sought for the staggering economy.
***As one example of the turnabout that has taken place, consider the comments of House Minority Leader John Boehner just before the 380-to-34 vote to approve Senate amendments and send the bill to the president.
Using Broderian logic, this means the bill was good because it was overwhelmingly supported. By my logic, that being that anything Broder supports is bad, the bill must suck.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
Huh?
/reads full article
um… er… shorter… um…
Oh!
Shorter Broder: The voters will be grateful that Congress responded in an emergency.
No wonder that read like a fourth-grader’s essay on “Teh Howses of Congres”. He wasted about 2500 keyboard strokes to tell us the patently obvious.
Man, I was confused.
J sub D
Let’s borrow some money, spread it around some, ensure the suckers electorate gets it before election day. They should be so proud of themselves. Many of the suckers electorate will fall for it.
Dennis - SGMM
Oh, goody! The bill passed. That means that banking, Big Pharma, the HMO’s, telecommunications etc. didn’t oppose it. Of course the quid pro quo was a several hundred billion dollar bailout for the mortgage lenders but hey, they threw us a fish. Everyone clap your flippers.
The Other Steve
My boss was touting it the other day as if it was going to save the mortgage industry.
LOL!
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
Nothing about this doesn’t bite.
But at least we got a good lesson on why the lower-classes are pariahs when it comes to credit. They’re too stupid and lazy to have it, at least in this country. Lending to poor people just got it’s Household name: Subprime. Like S&L.
The ironic thing, though, is that this turns out to be an excellent motive to be a classist sonofabitch, and the Republicans are instead going with the message “No no, it’s not your fault, you didn’t know better. Here, have a band-aid!”
Of course, this is because the financials got nailed too, and the financials donate to fiscal conservatives. And Republicans still laughingly think they’re fiscal conservatives.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
Did you say you work for a stereotypical example of the middleweights that got us into this?
And assuming so, wouldn’t your boss’s vapid musing be a red-flag that you should go hole-up with a conservative institution for the next couple years?
ed
By my logic, that being that anything Broder supports is bad, the bill must suck…
…must suck…rhinos.
J sub D
Danged strikeout tags work in Preview but not in the post. I suspect the lowest bidder effect.
KG
But, it’s only a flesh wound!
What’s really amazing to me, as we stand on the brink of the abyss, is that the Fed is actually contemplating cutting interest rates, again. It’s like the GOP and tax cuts, there’s a failure to understand that there are occasions when tax cuts and rate cuts might not actually be the best answer. Man, it’s going to get ugly, real, real ugly.
sglover
Exact reaction I had when I scanned the WaPo in a Starbucks: If Broder’s impressed, it’s gotta be the purest condensed and freeze-dried idiocy on a stick.
PNitty
An interesting and telling passage from the linked Broder column that no one’s mentioned on here yet:
huh? i always thought that you needed a simple majority of 51 votes to pass a bill…oh wait! that’s right! thanks to republican obstructionism and faux-filibustering, you now need 60 votes to pass pretty much anything in the Senate…love how Broder just mentions it in passing as if the 60 vote threshhold is just everyday, normal business…i guess acknowledging otherwise would destroy his lovely delusions of bipartisanship. also love how, in this case, “bipartisanship” means that republicans were able to filibuster the senate bill to get rid of things they didn’t like (extension of unemployment benefits, etc.) and Reid (of course) caved and did exactly what McConnell wanted.
Liberal Masochist
The problem with the stimulus bill is that is won’t have an effect except to pump up politicians re-election efforts. “My humble constiuents, I voted for this bill to help you. Now help me by voting for me! Help me, help you!” (Cue Jerry Maguire to Rod Tidwell in the locker room)
A lot of the people (poorer ones) will simply use it to make mortgage payments and pay bills. The money won’t lead to large injection of consumer spending. The wealthier recipients will simply pocket it and not change their spending habits one bit.
Liberal Masochist
PNitty – what you want is a simple “up or down” vote. That is so pre-November 2006…
grumpy realist
What the banks and everyone else are terrified about is if “jingle mail” becomes socially acceptable, they’re REALLY hosed. Hence the hand-waving about the mortgage-freezing for 30 days, which everyone is touting as a great deal and which will have the exact same effect as this stimulus package, i.e., zilch.
Me? I’m going to take that $600 and either pay off any credit card bills I have or save it. Sorry to disappoint whoever planned this whole schtick….
Jake
By the time the election rolls around that money will be a distant memory. It might even make things worse by reminding people how little $300 does these days. “Gee, thanks to Congress giving me $300 of my money, I’m only 4 1/2 months behind on my mortgage payments!”
Liberal Masochist
Jake – I never said it was a SOUND election strategy
You’re absolutely right, the money will be forgotten. NOT voting for it if you are up for re-election will not be forgotten however. Hence the huge yes vote in the house.
Xenos
This is not a bailout for the people, it is a bailout for the banking system. Paying credit cards is exactly what they want you to do with the money.
So, to be contrary, save the money or use it for bankruptcy filing fees.
Tax Analyst
Yes, I’ve read several news account lately that mentioned, “the failure to muster the required 60 votes necessary…”. No mention that this was due to Republican obstructionism via the faux-filibuster. One article even called a 59-41 vote a “Democratic Party failure”, as in WTF? Yeah, “Bipartisanship” today means the Republicans obstruct with over 40 votes and the Democrats cave for lack of a better idea. Apparently it’s only “obstructionism” now when the Democrats fail to Rubber-Stamp Bush’s judicial court nominations. I fear 4-to-8 more years of this even if a Democrat wins the Presidency if the Democrats can’t achieve Super-Majority status in both houses…a difficult proposition.
It’s a real problem because the Republicans don’t seem to give a fuck what harm they cause with their Congressional tantrums and if they choose to continue posturing and game-playing the Democrats are faced with only bad choices.
Liberal Masochist
It is not even that. It is political grandstanding, nothing more. The interest rate cuts will have a MUCH larger effect on the economy than this stimulus bill.
The problem with the recent cuts is twofold: the Fed looked like they were duped because of the big sell off in Asia and Europe which was probably caused by the unwinding of the rogue trading positions at Soc Gen. So they appear short term in nature (which is bad) and reactionary (also bad).
The other problem is that if the Fed cuts rates to quickly it could lead to another spiral of bad financial behavior that led us down this path in the first place. I don’t think this will happen at least for now since banks have tightened lending standards (for both people and at the corporate level) and the tightening will continue for a while and then gradually the standards will relax again and we’ll have some other kind of bubble (maybe tulips again!)
Jake
Hey, that’s it! Forget the gold standard, we can have the tulip standard. No, those are common now. How about orchids? Think of the boost the economy would get from building all those glass houses!
Ahem.
Sorry. I remember reading about the tulip frenzy as a kid and the only reason I didn’t think ‘What the Fuck?’ was because I didn’t know the F word.
Now that shit seems sane by comparison. At least if you have a tulip bulb you know you’ll get a flower every year, for years and years. If you have bonds based on a parcel of bad loans you don’t have shit.
Tax Analyst
Just remember: For heightened & improved ambiance always place your tulips over the organ.
Haltelcere
And pointy end up, or fat bottomed end down.
jake
I see someone’s been reading the walls in the Minneapolis airport bathroom.
Tax Analyst
Just tap twice then crawl into my stall.
Talk about “heightened ambiance”, eh?
DougJ
Can anyone here think of an example where this logic has failed? I’m not kidding. Seriously. Has Broder ever supported anything that wasn’t bad?
Tax Analyst
Let’s see – umm…no.
Conservatively Liberal
Broder for it = it has to be a disaster
Simple math.
The idiots are not looking at the totality of what they are facing, instead they are proposing feel-good measures that will not be anything more than a short term patch. And a very ineffective one at that. But election year is upon us, so now is the time to look decisive and be on message.
We don’t make crap, we are a service economy now. We import everything, but our dollar is worthless so we pay more for it. There would be a tiny bit of good news for exports with the dollar shrinking, but we have little to export that is worth anything. Our housing market has been exploited to heights never seen before. Corporations no longer can be trusted to tell investors the truth about their operations. It seems like everyone cooks the books in one way or another, endlessly creating one disaster after another over the years. People find a loophole or way to manipulate the markets, and we the people are left holding the bag.
If you buy everything overseas, guess where your money goes? Some goes overseas and the rest in to the pockets of a few Americans who pay little to no taxes on their real income. There is some payoff to shareholders, but only as long as the ponzi scheme keeps rolling. When the cash register is dry, guess what? It comes to a screeching halt.
And our incompetent officeholders think the solution is:
Give the public more money to spend!
Small Footnote: Make them pay for it later (or bill their children and grandchildren for it).
CEO’s and board members give themselves huge payouts when things are going good, and even when things turn sour they still get outrageous ‘compensation’. If they can get the gravy when the getting is good, then they should be able to give back when they screw up or the company suffers losses. If they can not do this, then they never should have been paid what they were in the first place. It is a two way street, and people have bought the one way street for too long now.
If you are the average worker at any job, do you get raises when you screw things up? Do you get huge bonuses when the company does well? Nope. You either get fired for the screw up, or you are told to work harder so they can profit even more. The guys at the top all pat each others backs and pass money around to each other for the good job that YOU did.
There is little to no accountability for people who milk our system to the disadvantage of everyone else. In fact, it seems that the more money you can screw everyone out of, the better insulated you are from any accountability.
Free markets my ass. Privatize profits, socialize losses.
Communistic Capitalism or Capitalistic Communism? It is one or the other because it sure as hell is not a free market, that is for damn sure.
D-Chance.
That scare tactic is sooooo 1990’s. Limbaugh: “Bill Clinton’s budgets are $200 billion in the red for as far as the eye can see. Your children and grandchildren will be paying effective tax rates of *84%* thanks to this presidency!”
Conservatively Liberal
If you paid attention to what is actually happening in the economy, you would not make silly statements like the above. This is not a Rush fact, hell I have never listened to Rush (or any other right wing radio nutjob), this is the consensus of many people who know what is going on in our economy. Go spend some time at Calculated Risk and see for yourself.
Or just keep sprouting off nonsense, your choice. I am sure that you will do your part to spend your cut of the imaginary pie and save us all from the turrists.
RSA
“Stop moneyboarding me! I can’t take it! I’ll go shopping, I promise!”
4tehlulz
That’s not logic, that’s just playing the odds. Fuck, Broder could say that the sun rises in the east and there would be a decent chance of him being wrong.