• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Yeah, with this crowd one never knows.

Russian mouthpiece, go fuck yourself.

Republicans seem to think life begins at the candlelight dinner the night before.

It’s all just conspiracy shit beamed down from the mothership.

But frankly mr. cole, I’ll be happier when you get back to telling us to go fuck ourselves.

In short, I come down firmly on all sides of the issue.

He really is that stupid.

Our job is not to persuade republicans but to defeat them.

Historically it was a little unusual for the president to be an incoherent babbling moron.

Insiders who complain to politico: please report to the white house office of shut the fuck up.

Red lights blinking on democracy’s dashboard

Republicans are the party of chaos and catastrophe.

This blog will pay for itself.

Sadly, there is no cure for stupid.

Make the republican party small enough to drown in a bathtub.

Happy indictment week to all who celebrate!

The revolution will be supervised.

Putin must be throwing ketchup at the walls.

Everybody saw this coming.

I’ve spoken to my cat about this, but it doesn’t seem to do any good.

The party of Reagan has become the party of Putin.

Republicans don’t trust women.

I see no possible difficulties whatsoever with this fool-proof plan.

They were going to turn on one another at some point. It was inevitable.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable VA House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Past Elections / Election 2008 / Brooks Is Right

Brooks Is Right

by John Cole|  May 20, 200810:43 am| 38 Comments

This post is in: Election 2008, Politics

FacebookTweetEmail

Obama and the almost 400 other Senators and Congressmen who voted for the bloated, outrageous, wasteful farm bill were wrong, and John McCain got it right. Hell, for that matter, Bush is right to veto it.

*** Update ***

Brooks never claimed Obama voted for the bill, but supported it. I was wrong to imply he voted for it.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Wearing Blinders Until the Very End
Next Post: Inside the Campaign »

Reader Interactions

38Comments

  1. 1.

    Leo

    May 20, 2008 at 10:50 am

    Ugh, I have to agree. Why couldn’t Obama have sat this one out?

  2. 2.

    redterror

    May 20, 2008 at 10:53 am

    Amen! This thing is a tragedy for everyone except the industrial corn and soybean growers. We have a lot of educating to do.

  3. 3.

    bernarda

    May 20, 2008 at 10:56 am

    Here is a good example of how U.S. food subsidy programs kill people. In this case Haiti.

    “Subsidized US rice began flooding in 30 years ago, so cheap that Haitians began eating it instead of the corn, sweet potatoes, cassava, and domestic rice that had sprouted from plains and mountainsides from the colonial era to the late 1980s.

    “Miami rice,” as Haitians call the US import, drove rice farmers out of business and incited a rural exodus that swelled the slums of Port-au-Prince.

    Today, more than 70 percent of Haitians live on less than $2 a day, and the US rice that is the staple of their diet has doubled in price in little more than a year. Hungry hordes rioted in the capital last month, leaving at least six dead by the time President Rene Preval restored calm by announcing that foreign aid and subsidies would lower the price of a 110-pound bag of rice to $43 from $51.

    But importers and economists warn that those supports are unsustainable and predict further unrest in this poorest country in the Americas when the subsidies run out in late summer and, based on current price trends, the same sack will cost $70.

    The answer, experts say, is revitalizing domestic production and returning to more traditional foods.”

  4. 4.

    Ben

    May 20, 2008 at 10:59 am

    I agree; it’s a terrible bill. On the bright side, this helps sew up Iowa.

  5. 5.

    jag

    May 20, 2008 at 11:00 am

    Word.

  6. 6.

    Egilsson

    May 20, 2008 at 11:02 am

    John, this is worth a diary.

    Gillespie is a 23 year Army veteran who served in Iraq, and yet Redstate says he’s proof the democrats hate the military, so he’s contemptible.

    Up really is down in their world.

  7. 7.

    Church Lady

    May 20, 2008 at 11:05 am

    Absolutely. For the most part, it’s just another corporate welfare program. But why in the world do the food stamp program and certain nutritional programs fall under the Farm Bill? Just to help jam it through?

  8. 8.

    Tom Hilton

    May 20, 2008 at 11:06 am

    Hate to say it, but…yeah.

  9. 9.

    Zifnab

    May 20, 2008 at 11:06 am

    Hell, for that matter, Bush is right to veto it.

    Oh bullshit. Bush isn’t going to veto this bill out of some noble stance on spending limits. He’s going to veto the bill for two reasons: 1) So he can get that food stamp / nutrition insert cut. Can’t have tax payer money going to terrible, horrible, no good, very bad entitlement programs like that. 2) So when the Democrats do cut something out of the bill, he and his GOP buddies can cackle with glee as they paint the entire Dem party as hating poor farmers.

    The farm bill has always been a political land mine. You’re handing out billions of dollars to some of the most lightly populated states in the country. The result is that you’ve got a very large number of Senators representing a very small number of people on legislation that ranks right up there with the ’05 Cheney Energy Bill in terms of pork, waste, and kickbacks.

    All that said, Midwestern Dems would be committing political suicide by opposing a bill like this in a swing year.

    McCain has a free hand. He’s not going to kill this bill with his opposition. He can play “maverick” and talk about fiscal reform, and everyone will nod their heads sagely while ignoring his repeated support of bloated military budgets. And Bush will veto it with all the stridency of a “true fiscal conservative” while his party silently locks hands with Democrats to shovel the bill past.

    Republicans stood strong on SCHIP. They stood strong on Stem Cell Research. They stood strong on Iraq. But now, when a truly bad bill comes down the pipe, they put up some election year brough-ha and let the legislation pass anyway.

    Bullshit. Any other year – say 2002 – this would sail through a GOP Congress, no problem, and Bush would be all too quick to sign it. This is the most token resistance imaginable because its all for show. If you give McCain or Bush an inch of credit on this issue, you’re just getting fooled again.

  10. 10.

    Pb

    May 20, 2008 at 11:16 am

    …and I’m sure it’d be way better if Bush managed to get a bill passed that cut out all the provisions for food stamps and school lunch assistance, and kept more farm subsidies for the richest factory farmers?

    And incidentally, update your post (and tell Brooks to update his)–according to The New York Times, Obama didn’t vote for it, and for that matter, McCain didn’t even vote against it:

    The three presidential candidates, Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois, both Democrats, and John McCain, Republican of Arizona, were absent. Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, also did not vote.

    Fuck you, David Brooks. And you too, New York Times, for printing his hackery.

  11. 11.

    Justin

    May 20, 2008 at 11:17 am

    I agree. And 8 years ago, I would have voted for McCain based on this information.

    However, the Republicans had their chance to balance the budget. And they didn’t.

    So instead, I’m going to vote for the guy who will try to avoid a war with Iran.

  12. 12.

    joe

    May 20, 2008 at 11:18 am

    To follow up on bernada’s point, there was actually a proposal to amend the Farm Bill to allow the government to buy foodstuff from local growers when we provide food relief overseas – for example, if there’s a drought in Sudan, buy the grain we provide for the food convoys from nearby countries. Not only would this be cheaper, but more importantly, it would put money into the pockets of local growers and further economic development in those areas.

    It was, of course, killed at the behest of the American farm lobby. So now, not only will we continue to spurn those growers, but we will actually undercut their businesses by providing free goods where they might have sold some.

    I HATE IT when the libertarians are right!

  13. 13.

    The Other Steve

    May 20, 2008 at 11:18 am

    Illinois is a huge Agriculture state.

    Arizona is not.

    How about we look into McCain’s support of subsidized water in Arizona? Did you know Arizona residents pay less for their water consumption than residents of Minnesota, a state which has plentiful fresh water?

    Phoenix water rates

    For comparison… Roseville, MN water rates. These rates are pretty typical for what we pay throughout the metro area.

  14. 14.

    John Cole

    May 20, 2008 at 11:20 am

    Oh bullshit. Bush isn’t going to veto this bill out of some noble stance on spending limits. He’s going to veto the bill for two reasons: 1) So he can get that food stamp / nutrition insert cut. Can’t have tax payer money going to terrible, horrible, no good, very bad entitlement programs like that. 2) So when the Democrats do cut something out of the bill, he and his GOP buddies can cackle with glee as they paint the entire Dem party as hating poor farmers.

    After eight years of Bush, I will gladly accept his doing the right thing for all the wrong reasons.

  15. 15.

    Pb

    May 20, 2008 at 11:23 am

    He’s not even doing the right thing, he’s grandstanding–he’s vetoing a bill that has a veto-proof majority. Then he can make up whatever reasons he likes for why he theoretically ‘opposes’ the bill–it doesn’t matter, because he knows it’s getting passed. So. Bush wasting our time and money by vetoing a bill that’s going to get passed = doing the right thing? Please.

  16. 16.

    John Cole

    May 20, 2008 at 11:25 am

    He’s not even doing the right thing, he’s grandstanding—he’s vetoing a bill that has a veto-proof majority. Then he can make up whatever reasons he likes for why he theoretically ‘opposes’ the bill—it doesn’t matter, because he knows it’s getting passed. So. Bush wasting our time and money by vetoing a bill that’s going to get passed = doing the right thing? Please.

    Fair enough, but you never know what might happen after the veto.

  17. 17.

    Mary

    May 20, 2008 at 11:26 am

    Obama apparently didn’t vote for the bill — gosh, Brooks getitng a detail wrong! — but he did issue a statement last October in support of it.

    “I applaud Chairman Harkin for his tireless efforts on this bill, and for gaining important ground on many of the priorities for our family farmers. The bill maintains a strong safety net for family farmers, and provides more funding for conservation and nutrition and rural development. By increasing funding for renewable energy, the legislation recognizes those farmers who are working to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. I am pleased that it includes a provision I cosponsored to expand E-85 fuel infrastructure to help the ethanol and biofuels industry succeed.

    “We need to do more to reform payment limits to make sure that farm program assistance is going to those who need it – family farm operations – not big agribusiness interests. I will support separate legislation sponsored by Senators Grassley, Dorgan and Harkin that will achieve the payment limitations we need to make sure our family farmers have the support from the federal government that they deserve.”

    Joe Klein already blasted him for his support last week.

  18. 18.

    The Other Steve

    May 20, 2008 at 11:31 am

    BTW http://www.farmpolicyfacts.org has some more details, and notes that many of the claims against the farm bill are wrong.

    This bill includes a number of good things, such as hard caps on subsidies to individuals with non-farm income, and farm-income over a certain amount. This is going to have a HUGE impact, as most of the farm subsides in the past had been going to corporations in Chicago or Los Angeles who ran mega-farms.

    Farm subsidies are in the form of minimum price guarantee. They act as a safety net when commodity prices plummet. So it’s not true that as prices go up, the farmers are getting paid doubly. They’re not. If prices go up, less is paid out in subsidies.

    I could go on and on. What Bush is really complaining about is that he wanted to cut the food stamps program.

  19. 19.

    The Grand Panjandrum

    May 20, 2008 at 11:33 am

    The candidates didn’t have to vote for or against. It was a foregone conclusion. Remember the joke about a camel being a horse designed by committee? Well, the Farm Bill is always a camel-like piece of legislation, and it is always a fucking mess that does little for small farmers. But it does have a huge impact on our food supply; and that impact will be destating unless we change what and how we grow our food.

  20. 20.

    Andrew

    May 20, 2008 at 11:34 am

    What Zifnab said.

  21. 21.

    Z

    May 20, 2008 at 11:34 am

    The bill was a disgrace. Of course, I don’t expect my candidate to be perfect. I am more libertarian than he is.

  22. 22.

    Punchy

    May 20, 2008 at 11:37 am

    Brooks Is Right

    Poor guy just couldn’t adjust to life outside of prison…

  23. 23.

    The Other Steve

    May 20, 2008 at 11:38 am

    Again, when are we going to talk about subsidized water in Arizona?

  24. 24.

    Pb

    May 20, 2008 at 11:41 am

    Brooks never claimed Obama voted for the bill, but supported it.

    Either he did claim that, or he’s a huge crap-weasel; note here:

    Barack Obama talks about taking on the special interests. This farm bill would have been a perfect opportunity to do so. But Obama supported the bill, just as he supported the 2005 energy bill that was a Christmas tree for the oil and gas industries.

    Obama’s vote may help him win Iowa, but it will lead to higher global food prices and more hunger in Africa. Moreover, it raises questions about how exactly he expects to bring about the change that he promises.

    “Obama’s vote” — was he talking about the 2005 energy bill when he said that it’d “help him win Iowa, but it will lead to higher global food prices and more hunger in Africa“? I don’t think so. But I could picture Brooks trying to use that claim as an out. So my “Fuck you, David Brooks” stands. And so does the one to the NYT — either way, he badly needs a competent editor and a fact-checker.

  25. 25.

    TenguPhule

    May 20, 2008 at 11:53 am

    Brooks Is Right

    One of those words is not like the others.

    One of those words does not belong.

  26. 26.

    Wilfred

    May 20, 2008 at 12:06 pm

    Col. Pat Lang smacked Brooks down last week:

    It is increasingly clear that David Brooks is not an editorial columnist. He is a propagandist for the hard right in this country and in Israel.

    Brooks has been gunning for Obama for a while and will continue do so.

  27. 27.

    sparky

    May 20, 2008 at 12:30 pm

    observing that a stopped clock is right without noting the stoppedness just emboldens stopped clocks everywhere.

  28. 28.

    ThymeZone

    May 20, 2008 at 12:39 pm

    How about we look into McCain’s support of subsidized water in Arizona?

    Hey, wait a damn minute, trying to raise my water bill?

    Why, you ….

    Okay, seriously, here’s where a thing like subsidized water prices really hurts: It skews consumption. The way to force water reforms is to price the water realistically. In fact, if we were smart, we’d tax water to add to the pain of buying it and really get people conserving water.

    McCain’s slithering around and helping his buddies and his favorite lobbyists hurts everyone in the long run.

    The idea of him in the White House is actually scarier to me than another 4 years of Bush. I think McCain is more dangerous than Bush.

  29. 29.

    ThymeZone

    May 20, 2008 at 12:44 pm

    Just curious, but how many of you (us) have ever looked closely at farm bills and farm policy before?

    There are several Americas, one of which is Farm America. Do we really know enough about the realities of Farm America to be talking about it?

    What is the thinking on this?

  30. 30.

    Zifnab

    May 20, 2008 at 12:53 pm

    Do we really know enough about the realities of Farm America to be talking about it?

    What is the thinking on this?

    I’m immediately suspicious of anything printed by David Brooks. Beyond that, you’ve got me. I know a little about price floors and price ceilings and a little about how subsidies are set. And some general trivia about crop rotation and gardening. But I know precisely diddly squat beyond that.

    So it is very possible that a great deal of this bill goes towards productive purposes. It would be nice if our Congresscritters – those not feeding us GOP bullshit – perhaps sought to educate people about the bill before the impending 60 Minutes investigative report. A little extra transparency would do wonders for the legislative process. At the very least, people wouldn’t take a collective shit every time they heard the word “earmark”.

  31. 31.

    Chuck Butcher

    May 20, 2008 at 12:54 pm

    Chuck for…, Obama in Pendleton

    A question about the recent Farm Bill and subsidies creating an atmosphere of dependence from a beef rancher. You have to be ready for a ride with this one, Barack voted (***supported-I misunderstood the thrust of the words***) for the bill but doesn’t like some aspects of it but regards it as an improvement over previous ones. He disapproves of the benefits accorded agribusinesses, subsidizing the Fortune 400. He would like to see the emphasis more on catastrophic protection, natural or the bottom falling out of a market and the encouragement of a more varied food production. He believes that the epidemic of childhood obesity is linked to the Farm Bill, through food offered in schools and the food stuffs subsidized which links into health care costs and educational success. Yes, the Farm Bill gets you to health care and education and you’ve got enough information to do the connection work without me spending six paragraphs on it. Like I said, these were not simple sound bite answers.

  32. 32.

    Cyrus

    May 20, 2008 at 2:15 pm

    What is the thinking on this?

    Interestingly enough, I’m no expert, but I’m commenting here when I’m supposed to be writing an article for a Vermont newspaper about this very bill. I’m kind of torn — yeah, waste pork bloat farm lobby sucks, I agree with the blogosphere hive mind on that — but I’m reading about several parts of it that really do look like they’d be important for my state, and good or at least harmless overall. And indexing food stamps to inflation seems so basic that I’m surprised (well, not really) that it hasn’t been done before.

    I blame the Senate and the Electoral College, which give residents of rural states something like five times the representation of residents of urban states. Iowa wanting ethanol subsidies, for example. This should give you an idea of how basic the problem is. Farm bills will start to look much better after the next constitutional convention.

  33. 33.

    bernarda

    May 20, 2008 at 3:14 pm

    Joe, libertarians are not right. Take the bullshit propaganda by asshole libertarian Penn(of Penn and Teller and CATO Institute). He advocates more selling of American crops.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIvNopv9Pa8

  34. 34.

    KRK

    May 20, 2008 at 3:20 pm

    Church Lady Says:

    But why in the world do the food stamp program and certain nutritional programs fall under the Farm Bill? Just to help jam it through?

    ThymeZone Says:

    Just curious, but how many of you (us) have ever looked closely at farm bills and farm policy before?

    There are several Americas, one of which is Farm America. Do we really know enough about the realities of Farm America to be talking about it?

    People love to bloviate in ignorance about Farm Bills. They’re easy marks. There’s lots to criticize. But the ignorance really does tend to predominate.

    They’re not really “Farm Bills,” that’s just a nickname for what are essentially bills authorizing all U.S. Department of Agriculture operations for a set period, usually 5 or 6 years. Every year during that period will have separate appropriations bills in which Congress tweaks things and can adjust funding for favored/disfavored programs, but it’s the authorization bills, aka Farm Bills, that set federal farm, nutrition, and rural policy for the time they’re in effect.

    Once you know that, it becomes rather obvious why food stamps and other nutritional programs are in the Farm Bill: because they’re administered by USDA. Similarly, U.S. Forest Service programs are addressed in the Farm Bill, as are Rural Housing programs, financing programs through the Rural Utilities Service, and tons of others, because these are all under the umbrella of USDA.

    In 1995, the Republicans had the genius idea of replacing what had up to that point been supply management payments for the major commodities with “decoupled” payments. That is, payments were no longer tied to the price for a given commodity but were instead based on a snapshot of the given farm’s planting practices, with payments for those once-planted crops every year, in decreasing amounts over the 6-year term of that Farm Bill. These “Agriculture Market Transition Payments” would wean farmers off of government payments so that in 2002 the programs could be eliminated. Of course, 2001 rolls around and the lobbyists aren’t about to give up on the payments, so the transition payments are dumped and instead the 2002 Farm Bill adopts a “Direct and Counter-Cyclical Payment Program” under which farmers get paid a “direct payment” no matter what and could also get a “counter-cylcical payment” if the market tanks for their particular crop. I believe the current Farm Bill continues these DCP payments, but I haven’t been able to make myself read that part of the bill yet. [This whole paragraph is my rough recounting of these programs; I don’t have the details down. It’s not my area.]

    The great bulk of the money represented by the Farm Bill are these commodity programs. And there’s no question that they’re a big mess. Most farmers agree with that. )Lower caps on eligiblity would be a big step forward, but the cotton lobby, for one, is too powerful.) Land rents skyrocket in certain regions as landlords move in to get their share of these payments, meaning that anyone not growing a commodity crop (e.g., fruits, vegetables, some legumes, nursery crops, seed crops, hay and other forage) starts getting priced out.

    People who really want to understand how we got to this point and what can be done should do some reading. There’s plenty of information out there from, for example, progressive farm organizations, sustainable ag organizations, and even ag ecnonomists at many universities.

    For reasoned opposition to this Farm Bill that’s actually informed by its contents, a good source is the Center for Rural Affairs in Nebraska. For support for this Farm Bill that nonetheless recognizes its deficiences, try the Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.

  35. 35.

    Jamey

    May 20, 2008 at 3:22 pm

    How about we look into McCain’s support of subsidized water in Arizona?

    Subsidized water in AZ. Big deal, big schmeal. It’s not like McMaverick’s beer baroness centimillionaire wife* stands to gain from artificially low water prices or anything …

    Oh, wait.

    *Who, despite what John McCain says, is not a cunt.

  36. 36.

    D-Chance.

    May 20, 2008 at 5:10 pm

    Mary Says:

    Obama apparently didn’t vote for the bill—

    The Messiah transcends voting on bills…

    Wilfred Says:

    Col. Pat Lang smacked Brooks down last week:

    It is increasingly clear that David Brooks is not an editorial columnist. He is a propagandist for the hard right in this country and in Israel.

    Yes, it’s those damn Jews who are responsible for this farm bill… /rolls eyes.

  37. 37.

    Phoebe

    May 21, 2008 at 5:12 am

    “imply”?

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. Balloon Juice says:
    May 20, 2008 at 11:37 am

    […] never claimed Obama voted for the bill, but supported it. I was wrong to imply he voted forit. […]

Primary Sidebar

VA Purple House Delegates

Donate

Political Action

Postcard Writing Information

Recent Comments

  • Shalimar on Sunday Morning Open Thread: Vacate the (Empty) Chair!… (Oct 1, 2023 @ 2:17pm)
  • Alison Rose on An Angel Match for Virginia! (Oct 1, 2023 @ 2:10pm)
  • Geminid on Sunday Open Thread (and Ajabu update) (Oct 1, 2023 @ 2:04pm)
  • RaflW on Sunday Open Thread (and Ajabu update) (Oct 1, 2023 @ 2:03pm)
  • Memory Pallas on An Angel Match for Virginia! (Oct 1, 2023 @ 2:03pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
What Has Biden Done for You Lately?

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Cole & Friends Learn Español

Introductory Post
Cole & Friends Learn Español

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!