Mark Knoller, who has secured his role in the Beltway media’s village of the damned as the idiot savant Rain Man type, but without the wit and charm of Kim Peek, spending his time counting things like the number of times Obama has golfed, how many press conferences he has had, etc., while always managing to work in the wingnut talking points du jour. Tonight, he let us all know what is important:
Hey Mark- Count how many fingers I’m holding up right now.
Yutsano
OOH! OOH! I got a guess!!
(I hope your mama’s not watching right now.)
NR
But wait, I thought the deficit deal was a huge progressive victory that proves the brilliance of Obama’s eleventy-dimensional chess playing! So why would Krugman be irritated?
gnomedad
The “pissing off liberals” theory looks less like snark every day.
burnspbesq
Krugman’s latest was a bit much.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/31/linguistic-note/
The pundit equivalent of an Oscar-quality dive by a forward who was barely breathed on by a defender on the edge of the penalty area. That post has been up for almost three hours, and he’s still rolling around holding his ankle.
gwangung
@NR: Don’t insult our intelligence.
Donut
I noticed in Kay’s thread earlier that a number of B-J commenters/scolds seem to also embrace this deal because they think it makes some other “liberals” (that they don’t like) angry.
Convincing one’s self that this deal is terrific because Jane Hamsher and a few Daily Kos loudmouths don’t like it is fucken stoopid.
Yet here we are.
ETA – some Democrats just seem to enjoy hippie punching almost as much as Republicans do … Funny, that.
burnspbesq
@NR:
Krugman has two alternating mental states where Obama is concerned: irritated and befuddled. He’s right most of the time, but not always.
Jennifer
Yeah, yeah, the hippie-punching is damned irritating…but someone explain to me how we wouldn’t be better off had the Republicans been allowed to shit their bed. Instead Mr. 11th Dimensional Chess has not only given away a good portion of the farm to hostage-takers, he’s also given them what they wanted w/r/t their stupid “disapproval” resolutions.
Tell me how this is preferable to a statement by the president that he wasn’t going to allow Congress to shirk its responsibilities, and how those who weren’t prepared to deal with them shouldn’t have run for office. Instead we’ll get a barrage of ad campaigns from these jerkoffs about how they had nothing, really, nothing at all to do with “that one’s” profligate spending which required raising the debt ceiling.
Really, at this point, I fail to see how we’ll be better off if he’s re-elected. Might as well let them shit-hammer us into the ground quickly than through this slow war of attrition. We’re going to end up as serfs either way; but the slow grind will be more dispiriting.
The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik
We are a nation of Hippie Punching.
waratah
Thank you John, I really needed a laugh after this week. You really nailed Mark with your post.
Yutsano
@burnspbesq: He’s also not paying attention. Or being intentionally myopic. Neither of which are to his credit.
@gwangung: That one isn’t even self-aware enough to recognize it being mocked. I give the screeds it comes up with the appropriate justice.
ETA@JC: you gonna share your tweet back?
some guy
ETA – some Democrats just seem to enjoy hippie punching almost as much as Republicans do … Funny, that.ETA – some Democrats just seem to enjoy hippie punching almost as much as Republicans do … Funny, that.
feature, not a bug, of Obama, The President: 2012
Steeplejack
@burnspbesq:
It’s got to be frustrating to be so right so often and be ignored so much.
To go with your analogy, he’s trying the dive because he’s playing on a team of incompetents and a midfielder just accidentally kicked the ball to within 20 feet of him for the first time in the game.
hhex65
Har, har, good one Knoller– but you’re still going home from the dance all alone.
burnspbesq
@Jennifer:
Seriously? You think there’s no difference between an Obama administration and a Perry administration?
Clue, get one.
Kyle
Rightards like Knoller are like belligerent Ralph Wiggums; kindergarteners too dimwitted to contribute anything, so they fling poop and shout swear words to get attention, smug in the knowledge that they’ve annoyed the bright kids trying to have a discussion.
It’s the same mentality as the right-wing email circulars I occasionally get, self-congratulatorily titled “Politically incorrect and offensive jokes”, as if this itself were some kind of virtue. No information on whether the jokes are actually funny or not (on average: not), just trumpeting that they use “outrageous” words that they imagine will piss off people they don’t like.
Linda Featheringill
I notice that the MSM is treating the debt agreement as a done deal. But it hasn’t been voted on yet. By anybody. Right?
It might be a done deal. I’m not so sure. The True Believers [left and right] in the House don’t like the deal. And I know that I sure as hell don’t like it.
I haven’t read Krugman’s comments on it yet but I’m not surprised the doesn’t like it.
burnspbesq
@Steeplejack:
To push the analogy even further, he chose to play for a team where he would be the lone forward in a 4-5-1 (i.e., refused to contemplate working for the administration in any capacity). His complaining about lack of service is a bit rich.
Linda Featheringill
I like Krugman’s article. Of course.
kth
That Knoller tweet is actually meant to mollify Khmer Rouge conservatives angry that there was any kind of deal at all, even though it was overwhelmingly to their advantage. That’s how far down the hall of mirrors we have gone as a republic.
The Sheriff's A Ni-
@Jennifer:
Lemme guess: White, retired, have a comfortable nest egg?
Barb (formerly Gex)
@17 – they’re just amazed that fucked up clown show managed to get something, ANYTHING, done. They will now proceed to show how intransigent Reid and Obama are because they won’t let the House dictate policy by fiat, but demand that the usual process play out.
Scamp Dog
My expectation is that the intersection of “what can pass the House” and “what can pass the Senate” is the empty set, so the deadline will pass without a deal. Based on the 14th amendment, the bondholders will get paid, and we’ll get to find out what a 40% cut in Federal spending feels like. That will be interesting, for a fairly grim value of “interesting”.
NR
@burnspbesq:
I fail to see how having Obama implement GOP policy is any better than having Rick Perry do it.
In fact, it’s actually worse, because this way, when the GOP policy hurts people (as GOP policy inevitably does), the left gets the blame for it. It’s better if the Republicans have to own their policies.
Steeplejack
@burnspbesq:
Well, I think that’s going a little far. Krugman is nonpareil as an economic analyst, but I don’t think he has the political instincts to succeed in this (or any other) administration.
But I wish someone in the administration would show any sign of having read Krugman and being moved to act on his ideas.
Maybe a better analogy is that Krugman is like the currently unemployed coach doing color commentary in the booth, breaking down the losing team’s problems in painful detail but unable to do anything about them personally (except make snarky comments about the current coach).
somethingblue
@burnspbesq:
I’ve read variations on this half a dozen times tonight. It’s interesting that the Republican cited is always Perry or Bachmann, never Romney.
Linda Featheringill
Obama versus Perry administration.
Remember Johnson’s remark to King[?], “Make me.”
We might actually be able to pressure Obama some. Perry? No. Not a bit.
Arrik
Thank you, John, for cheering me up in the wake of this atrocity.
barath
It seems the goal should be to get the economy on track well enough that unemployment starts coming down. The thing is, one of the main constraints on growth at the moment is high oil prices, and until they come down we’re not going to see a recovery.
Fortunately or unfortunately speculation can help us there, but there’s only an ugly solution to the problem – a temporary market panic that gets speculators to short oil and drive down the price, combined with a flooding of oil from the SPR, can keep the price down for a little while. This is really threading the needle – it requires the market panic to be short lived enough that it doesn’t cause a widespread slowdown but long enough that oil prices get pulled down in a fundamental way.
A failure to pass this current debt ceiling deal might deliver that, if it were to be resolved fairly quickly thereafter.
Spaghetti Lee
At this point I don’t know what to think. I’m just numb to it all. I didn’t participate in the big 500-comment thread, so I don’t know if I’m stepping on any landmines here by discussing something. My first impression is that $2.4T over 10 years is not nearly as bad as it could have been, given all the numbers that got tossed around. If a lot of the cuts are coming from military, that’s also good, although that’s not a done deal I guess. The fact that we’re not having a default is the best of all.
Now, I don’t think this deal is good. I think it is, in fact, very very bad, and in a vacuum, I would not support it. But as the final result of wriggling out of a situation where a bunch of wackjobs had a gun to the head of the world economy, it’s preferable to a lot of what could have happened. I’d say that I hope this is a good touchstone for liberals and Democrats to organize from and try to win back the House in 2012, but it’s probably too late for jokes.
Elie
@Jennifer:
“Tell me how this is preferable to a statement by the president that he wasn’t going to allow Congress to shirk its responsibilities, and how those who weren’t prepared to deal with them shouldn’t have run for office”
Seriously, Jennifer, you think that Obama scolding the Republicans earlier in this process would have resulted in success or a better place than we are now?
I don’t want to say something snarky, but seriously…
Please paint your complete alternate scenario that was not done and would have resulted in the success you seem to imply we missed from having the wrong “tone” (?), with the Teahadists…the ones where anything they proposed that was agreed to was later rejected. They definitely would have responded to a stern statement by the President…
Good golly Miss Molly…
WyldPirate
@burnspbesq:
“A bit much?”
Care to fucking elaborate, burnsy, or are you just going to pull it out of your ass and make a royal pronouncement?
this is from Krugman’s latest:
Sounds spot on to me and agrees with the historical aspects of what happened when FDR and Congress decided to cut back in ’36. The only thing you could have add was farther down the road to banana-republic status.”
Then he follows with a couple of paragraphs of fucking evidence as to WHY the austerity path is stupid.
then we have this:
Sounds right fold after fold after fold. Obama may as well start bending over and grabbing his ankles.
Yep. He folds in the face of everything. Sounds right. The rethugs will have plenty of chances to pull this extortion/hostage taking shit again.
As usual, burnsy, you’re full of it…
Elie
@Spaghetti Lee:
Winning the House back would be possible but the touchstone thing is pretty funny and very much not likely. Within two weeks Obama is going to be on trial by the Firebagger Auto da Fe and the Grand Inquisitor, Marquis Felix Krugman de Torquemada. I doubt any of us sympathizers will survive but at least we won’t be in the way.
Steeplejack
@WyldPirate:
Uh, maybe you should read the item Burnspbesq actually referred to. Here it is in its entirety:
Disagree or not, but at least get on the right page.
azlib
Paul Krugman actually cares about the unemployed and the other victims of this economy unlike our politicians in DC. What makes me so angry at just about everyone is:
a) They are dealing with the wrong problem e.g. deficits become a real big problem in 2020 or so because of medical inflation.
b) The biggest driver of the current deficits is the bad economy. Do something meaningful to push down the jobless rate and the tax revenues will increase.
I have concluded we are governed by a bunch of children who have no clue about macroeconomics or any sort of rational fiscal policy and are driving this country into a ditch. What is particularly galling is the American people get it, but our political class is essentially ignoring them.
Citizen_X
@NR: @Jennifer: For fuck’s sake, were you people in a fucking coma during the Bush Administration?
I was not, and magically I somehow remember it! It was worse; catastrophically, unambiguously, terrifyingly worse.
Fucking short-sighted motherfuckers.
Somebody Else's Metaphor
Yup, pissing off the leeebrulls is always big on the wingnut agenda– hey, it made Anne Coulter love Sarah!
Dr. Kassandra has been unpleasantly prescient about the economic picture over the past few years. No surprise Knoller wants him to suffer for it.
PS– anybody seen that Obama guy lately? I really miss him.
Davis X. Machina
It feels like… victory!
For teabaggers. Because government spending is evil.
For progressives. Because we faced the teabaggers down — called their bluff.
Victory — for everybody!
Kill the Bill, Part II
burnspbesq
@WyldPirate:
If you had bothered to follow the link I pasted into my comment, you would have found Krugman playing semantic Calvinball with a supposed distinction between “revenue increases” and “tax reform.” Apparently pointing and clicking are missing from your skill-set.
Clever moniker
@Steeplejack–love the Krugman=coach analogy. Plus, remember that he’s an academic, enjoys being an academic, and has admitted on his blog that he isn’t well-suited for actual political work, so in a sense he isn’t even the coach on the sidelines, but the journalist who can tell you everything about the game but has never played it.
My candidate for his bitter-ex-coach-turned-color-man would be DeLong, who worked for the treasury during the Clinton administration and has, afaik, not been offered anything under Obama.
And the star forward with a twisted angle definitely is Jared Bernstein, who’s been hard at work trying to push economic discourse in a liberal direction since leaving the administration while still voicing his loyalty to the team (emphasizing the Republicans’ role instead of Obama’s negotiating “skills” a la Krugman).
Spaghetti Lee
Obama is going to be on trial by the Firebagger Auto da Fe and the Grand Inquisitor, Marquis Felix Krugman de Torquemada. I doubt any of us sympathizers will survive but at least we won’t be in the way.
OK, look. I’m a Krugman fan. I think his policy analysis is unmatched, and I think he’s so mad because he genuinely cares about what’s going on, not because he uses every news item to one-up some mortal enemy in some never-ending grudge match like a lot of people in blogland do, Obots and FBs alike. Yes, he criticizes Obama sometimes, but Jesus Christ, is that fucking not allowed? Can people not be frustrated? It’s not like Krugman’s never acknowledged what Obama has to deal with.
You’re the one playing the high inquisitor role here. I like Balloon Juice because I think it’s more grounded in reality than a lot of other lefty blogs, but this sort of witch hunting is just stupid. You’re becoming what you hate.
Quiddity
@WyldPirate: Why pay any attention to that kooky Krugman? He’s an idiot. He makes a big deal about Obama failing to secure a debt ceiling limit back in December, and quotes Obama as saying it wasn’t necessary because “nobody, Democrat or Republican, is willing to see the full faith and credit of the United States government collapse”. So Obama wisely didn’t press for it.
As a result, we’ve got this much better deal, even better than the clean debt ceiling raise McConnell offered recently, which Obama also wisely rejected.
Get with the program. Obama knows what he’s doing.
WyldPirate
@Steeplejack:
That ‘intellectual surrender” theme is well represented in Krugman’s “latest” column that just went up.
And Krugman is right; Obama acts as if Keynesian economics never existed. On top of that, he goes in for the “austerity” crap as well. It’s intellectual surrender in the face of historical facts calling for the opposite approach. It’s moronic even advocating it.
Mnemosyne
@Spaghetti Lee:
THIS. And yet, somehow, it gets translated into “This is the greatest deal EVAH in the history of the universe!” when our resident firebaggers sound the words out for themselves. I just don’t get it.
Spaghetti Lee
It seems to me that this fight was ultimately unwinnable, not by Obama but just in general. I mean seriously, how do you negotiate with people who reject the idea of negotiation. If you have a hostage taker who not only doesn’t care if the hostage lives or dies, but probably wants to kill him out of pure sadistic spite, you’re either going to walk away with a dead hostage or just rolled for everything you’re worth. I mean, everyone brings up FDR and LBJ as people Obama should aspire to, but they never had to deal with this kind of crap. Sure, 30’s plutocrats and 60’s racists were venal, but they at least had some modicum of shame, and no burning desire to blow everything up if they didn’t get their way, and they didn’t live in an era where treason against the president was actively promoted by an army of teabagger automatons and their puppeteers at Fox News. This is really just uncharted territory. It’s like the South firing on Fort Sumter. I don’t know how to judge Obama’s action because there’s nothing to judge against. He’s trying to fend off a horde of orcs and just get out alive. That’s what it’s come to.
Quiddity
@The Sheriff’s A Ni-: Ad hominem. Is that all you got?
askew
You forgot to mention Knoller’s obsession with the autopen. He’s a tool to say the least.
As for the deal, it protected SS, Medicaid, Medicare benefits and Pell Grants. All of which the GOP were desperate to gut. It also cut the defense dept by $350bn which is something progressives have wanted to do for ages and the GOP were desperate to avoid.
How exactly is this a total cave by the Dems?
barath
@Quiddity:
I think there’s a lot of belief in Krugman’s omniscience, but energy and its effect on the economy is not on his radar, and it needs to be. There’s a lot of evidence (for example, the study I linked above) that oil prices are the fundamental limiter of economic growth today. Until and unless that’s resolved—through a long and difficult process of energy efficiency, transit, food system reform, etc.—we’re not going to see economic growth, regardless of whether we have stimulus spending or not.
Yutsano
@Quiddity:
Wait, WHAT? When the fuck did this happen?
WyldPirate
@Quiddity:
Steeplejack
@WyldPirate:
I’m sorry. You were frothing at the mouth so much I didn’t realize you were agreeing with Burnspbesq. Apparently he didn’t either.
Maybe you could dial it down to 6 or 7.
Clever moniker
@Mnemosyne:
The WH website calls it a “victory,” so I think that the firebaggers might have a point on this one. It’s an awful deal–trumpeting it as a success does not make it better, much as the WH’s constant touting of the stimulus a couple years ago didn’t make it any less inadequate. I understand the administration’s constraints, but that doesn’t mean they have to praise every compromise and half-measure to high heaven. Your product needs to match the hype.
Quiddity
@WyldPirate: I thought you’d recognize satire, but I’ll admit that on this blog that can be difficult.
Geoduck
Once again, we still don’t even know for sure this deal’s gonna pass. There are a lot of people in Congress, on both sides, who hate it just as much as 50% of the commentators here.
If it doesn’t.. then what?
Jewish Steel
@Yutsano:
Yeah, my question too.
Cat
@Jewish Steel:
I think there was a clean bill in April or May, the GOP as a whole voted against it and so did lots of Dems since they knew it wasnt going to pass.
Quiddity
@Yutsano: A couple of weeks ago, because Obama preferred to go for a Grand Bargain that tackled the debt and entitlements. Really. The McConnell plan would have involved some “embarrassing” votes later on which could have been used politically against the Democrats, but basically it didn’t involve any real cuts or tax increases. When first announced, it was widely rejected by conservatives.
Comrade Kevin
@Jewish Steel: It didn’t happen, he’s lying.
Ed Marshall
Two trillion dollar platinum coins, one with Reagan’s face and one with John Boehner’s.
askew
@Cat:
That wasn’t a true clean debt ceiling bill. The GOP attached a ton of wording blaming Obama for the deficit. It was a political ploy not a clean bill.
Davis X. Machina
@Cat: Yes, it got 97 ayes.
It was coat-dragging of the most obvious sort. A clean vote was never offered in the context of actual post-ceiling (we blew through the actual ceiling on 16 May, remember) negotiation.
Quiddity
@Jewish Steel: Here is TPM on the initial offer:
I’ll now look for the story where Obama rejected it, but it’s clear he rejected it because of where we ended up.
WyldPirate
@Quiddity:
Your’s was pretty subtle. Had I been a little sleepier, I probably wouldn’t have caught it.
Clever moniker
I don’t remember seeing much about the Obama and the McConnell plan–from what I recall it was mainly the TP+Cantor who killed it, with Boehner not saying anything until it was clearly dead. Obama probably disapproved of it because it didn’t follow the grand bargain narrative he was shaping, but I don’t think he had much of a role in killing it.
Citizen Alan
That really is going to be the epitaph for both Obama and the Democratic party, isn’t it?
Quiddity
@Quiddity: Everything except the last sentenced was supposed to be blockquote, and now editing is disallowed. The blogger software appears hosed for now.
Davis X. Machina
@Quiddity: The problem was the House wasn’t having it, even with — or because of — Boehner’s name on it. And speculation about what Cantor might be up to.
This was when all the “Boehner can’t even deliver his own caucus” talk began in earnest.
Cat
@askew: @Davis X. Machina:
I looked it up and the vote was May 31st, 2011 so it was post ceiling.
As to how ‘clean’ it was is a matter of opinion.
quick edit: Not that I’m disagreeing with anything your saying, just pointing out some things.
hhex65
Great to see the “political deal = rape” comments again. Been too long.
Jewish Steel
The fool! How could he say no this generous offer?
Harvey
lol, and another Debt Commission packed with Friends who love Social Security and Medicare, like Simpson and Bowles did. and Pete Peterson et al.
i just love chess, don ‘t you?
Quiddity
@WyldPirate: Generally I’m on your side and thought I’d give you an additional helping of Obot-logic for you to savor. There’s a lot flying around, especially by BooMan and selected commentors here.
Erin
Meanwhile ABL on twitter is blaming this on the voters who didn’t come out to vote for Dems in 2010. Can she really blame the voters after we find out that recovery AND productivity was way worse than previously reported?
If im not mistaken I thought i read something from her (and/or people who agree with her) saying that the depressed vote count was not due to liberals who actually did turn out but rather from the independents and 1st time voters who didnt come out because Obama wasn’t on the ticket. In other words, laziness and/or they were not liberals.
SO WHICH IS IT ABL? you can’t continue to say that progressives are solidly behind Obama and then blame them NOW when the 2010 election stats shows they came out in the same numbers that they always do.
By the way, she was the one on BJ hawkin Lawrence O’Donnell’s absurd theory that Obama was trying to get a clean debt deal all along. Both of them have seriously misjudged what Obama had in mind, but you won’t hear one of them admit they were wrong.
No ABL, just continue to blame the voters.
Quiddity
@Jewish Steel: There was no enforcement mechanism. Conservatives hated the McConnell plan.
But the McConnell plan is not the key issue here. What I want to hear is a defense of Obama failing to secure a debt ceiling raise back in December. At the time he was specifically asked why not include that in the deal that extended the Bush tax cuts (which increased the debt, BTW) and Obama said he didn’t think it was necessary. This from the guy who was already aware that the 112th Congress was about to start and which he and his advisers knew would be more obstreperous, in addition to having a majority in the House.
Ed Marshall
@Quiddity:
Because Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi thought it would be good politics to make the Republicans increase the debt ceiling instead of them.
Odie Hugh Manatee
Anything passed both Houses and signed into law yet? Nope? Then it’s time for some Manic Panic!
Quick, man the couches! Pass out firebags to the hyper-ventilators!
Oh the humanity.
Citizen Alan
@Harvey:
That is a good question and one I’ve been wondering about: Is there any news on how the members of this asinine “Super-Congress” are going to get picked? Because if it’s six Republicans, two Blue Dogs and Ben Nelson, then we’re pretty much fucked.
Mnemosyne
@Clever moniker:
From their POV, it’s a victory — Asian markets rallied after Obama’s speech tonight.
Of course, I’m one of those Obotty types who thinks we probably should emulate the Republicans in pretending that every inch of ground ceded by our opponents is the Greatest Victory Ever In The History of Man, but I realize that I’m surrounded by Schleprocks who can’t admit to even the smallest silver lining when there are complaints to be registered.
Mnemosyne
@Jewish Steel:
One might note that it’s not a “clean bill” if it comes with a bunch of pre-conditions and requirements attached. But I guess the actual facts don’t really matter much when you’re building a mythology (“The Republicans offered a clean bill and Obama turned it down so he could kill Social Security!”).
Davis X. Machina
@Quiddity:More obstrepoerous, yes, but how much more obstreperous?
Obama was in the Senate during four debt ceiling votes, with the WH (Bush) and the House (Pelosi) in different hands.
(2008) H.R.1424 – Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, passed with 91 Republican votes.
(2008) H.R.3221 – Housing and Recovery Act, passed with 45 Republican votes.
The 2006 and 2007 ceilings were deemed to have been lifted with the passage of the budget, so there was no separate vote.
Suffern ACE
@Citizen Alan: My guess it will be the same rural states that always seem to get on these things, rust belt manufacturing state interests shoved to the side and of course not one member from an urban district. Same as its been for the past 30 years.
WyldPirate
For fuck’s sakes, the goddamned White House is actually bragging about this in their “deal”:
Who the fuck needs to worry about Grover Norquist “drowning government in the bathtub” when we have Democrats like this?
Cain
Can’t wait for Obama to fail so that WyldPyrite and I will finally be on the same team again.
FlipYrWhig
@Quiddity:
If Obama succeeded in securing that, wouldn’t it have cost a pretty penny? I mean, look at the amount of leverage it provided Republicans. Why would they give it up in some other deal? It was blagojevichin’ golden.
Gus diZerega
@Quiddity:
Very good point. I am amazed/depressed that Obama’s defenders seem to take every failure of his to stand up for anything as “He didn’t have much choice” when in fact his lack of choice so often grew from choices he made and could have made differently at earlier times. The man is pathetic/stupid/arrogant beyond belief/nihilist/or a fraud, and I am not sure which. I guess I lean towards arrogant and without beliefs. But to my mind he is definitely not on the side of most Americans.
Cain
@Quiddity:
When WyldPrimate posts here, he’s not usually dealing with a full deck because his Obama hate clouds his judgement. So it would be hard for him to recognize satire when in this state.
FlipYrWhig
@Gus diZerega: The way to prove you’re on the side of most Americans? Preside over a debt default, market panic, and higher interest rates for everyone! Most Americans love that. They think it’s “butch.”
Cain
@Gus diZerega:
There isn’t really much a president can do if he’s dealing with the house of crazy. I mean, look at us.. we can’t raise the debt ceiling.. these guys hate obama so much that they will probably vote against this grand bargain and watch the whole show go up in flames.
Really, they aren’t playing with a full deck. You can’t really reason with these new 2010 freshman. They are out for blood. I bet they do it for St. Ayn Rand, she’s probably masturbating in her grave furiously.
Yutsano
@Cain:
You hand over bleach of brain now or the economy gets it!
WyldPirate
@Cain:
So what the fuck is your “answer” cain? Keep placating the crazy-assed teatards every time they play their hostage card? They are getting pretty much what they want, so why the fuck should they quit when Obama and the Dems capitulate time after time.
Don’t bother answering; you did above….
Mnemosyne
@WyldPirate:
So instead they should have released a statement saying that they were completely defeated by the masterful Republicans?
Elie
@Spaghetti Lee:
Sorry, I am not becoming Krugman nor am I filled with hate for him. I’m not sure where you get that from what I wrote. I will admit to a bit of over the top dramatic language. I thought it was effective, and apparently you did too or you would not have had such a strong reaction.
Look, glad you like the critic’s, critic, Krugman. I think its easy to do what he does since he actually has no real responsibility for the tough calls and he has no respect for that. Sure he cares. “Caring” is easy when its all head work. He has no skin — no real skin in any of this and yet he gets a lot of exposure and air time for his opinions.
In my opinion, and I entered this two years ago thinking very highly off him, he has been a relentless critic of this administration and Obama personally starting in 2008. He has not stopped nor is there any leavening or balance in his critiques.
Yeah, he’s smart. I’d love for him to be given a real job where he can walk the talk a bit. Till then he is just another role player in the MSM, flirting with power but just conveniently out of the sphere of having to do any real stuff involving a risky call. Who him?
If you understand academia, he is in good shape with his forever tenured professorship and has no need to rub his knuckles raw doing primary research or banging out a bunch of papers and such (Nobel guaranteed that). For that reason, I hold him to a higher standard and expect him to give us a little more sweat of effort and balancef thought in his observations. Don.see.dat…nope. don.see.dat.
Hey, I care too. Why don I get the love?
Elie
@Gus diZerega:
Hey, a friend of yours said that about you too but I defended you, man. I said that you were on meds and couldnt help it.
Suffern ACE
@FlipYrWhig: I have a tough time thinking that this isn’t close to what most Americans had in mind when they voted to give the House back. Well, most Americans who voted anyway. Sure, they want jobs, but then working age people should show up and vote. They didn’t want jobs, they wanted to punish Dems and government workers. 18 more months to go, I guess.
Mnemosyne
Last thing before I go to bed since people still seem a little confused why the White House would be touting this as a victory:
Asian markets soar on US debt deal
Sure, the markets are going to plunge again tomorrow when it’s proven once more that Boehner has no control over his caucus and the Teahadis reject this new deal, but that’s one of the reasons the administration is touting it as the bestest thing since sliced bread. That, and because it backs Boehner right into his corner again and puts the Republicans back into the position of being the troublemakers who refuse to make a deal.
Anne Laurie
@Ed Marshall:
If that’s what “we’re” gonna be told to kiss, why not make it explicit?
hamletta
@Ed Marshall: Boehner’s would have to be cast in copper, though, and then where would we be?
Elie
@Mnemosyne:
why is it some people can figure this out and others just keep banging the lecturn screaming “Obama caved, the socialist, nihilist, communist mooslim!”
Citizen Alan
@Mnemosyne:
It would have been nice, I thought, to have had some acknowledgement in the WH press release that there never should have been a need for any sort of deal but for the fact that the GOP conducted themselves like a terrorist cell or possibly a mafia family. If nothing else, perhaps the White House could have refrained from sounding actually pleased by the outcome, particularly if they are for any reason worried about the increasingly widespread belief on the left that Obama secretly wanted a deficit deal that will endanger the future of Medicaid, Medicare and other Democratic programs.
Spaghetti Lee
@Elie:
Well, by “what you hate”, I meant you’re putting people on ideological trial after accusing the firebaggers of doing the same.
Maybe Krugman’s just another villager who’s cornered the niche on being a concerned populist, but you know? I’m not under any delusions that media isn’t ruled by money and attention, so I’m not looking for someone who’s necessarily a liberal in his deepest truest soul. If he can become popular talking about these issues, that’s a good thing. I thought that’s what people were always talking about in terms of shifting the conversation: making it popular and profitable to advance left-wing causes again. If you attack anyone who’s achieved a bit of fame and fortune as an ivory-tower dilletante, you’re going to spend a long time on the outside looking in. I mean, yeah, he doesn’t “make the tough decisions”, but he’s not supposed to. That’s not his job. If not actually being the president disqualifies you from criticizing the president, that’s not good.
hamletta
@Erin:
No fighting w/ABL’s Twitter feed in BJ threads. Expecially non-ABL threads.
You wanna fight w/ABL’s Twitter feed? Join Twitter, follow her, and fight with her there.
FlipYrWhig
@Suffern ACE: We all already know that the two reasons anyone ever votes Republican are resentment and spite.
But I think that Republicans in ’10 told an interesting (false) story about Democrats overspending and giving away the store… and, here’s where the ironic twist comes in, being partisan rather than bipartisan. Yeah, really. That’s why they kept talking about how Obama shoved bills down everyone’s throat: “Democrats got in there, and went power-mad, and starting ramming through all this crazy stuff, and now the economy is a mess and they’re gonna raise your taxes to pay for it and that’s not fair. Vote Republican and tell them No.”
BTW, on this specific issue of the debt ceiling, it was totally tailor-made for shenanigans. It just seems way too self-evident that if you owe a lot of money, you should try to reduce what you owe, rather than borrowing even more. A really slippery thing to take a stand on.
For that matter, red-state Democrats need some Keynesian reeducation.
And, re: Krugman, I don’t think there’s much that needs explanation about why a politician wouldn’t go around saying “revenue increases.” It immediately gets translated into “tax increases.” The whole point of “tax reform,” OTOH, is being able to run a bit of a switcheroo by lowering tax _rates_ and trumpeting that, while purging the tax code of loopholes and bizarre preferential treatment for things like corporate jets and SUVs. It’s just Lakoff 101 to start saying “tax reform” instead of “revenue increases.”
Elie
@Spaghetti Lee:
I hear you and I don’t mind his success in general. I do wish he were a bit more balanced, given his his profile. Frankly, I have never found him to be balanced as far as Obama is concerned, but he is not alone…just among the most prominent.
And I Do believe that especially gifted or smart Nobel prize winners also have a responsibility to that. People take him seriously and he should try to be mindful of that. He is a bit too stridently critical and I am sorry, its part of a true intellectual assessment of a situation to also understand one’s limitations not being in the situation directly. Its like trying to do brainsurgey third hand. Surely he knows the many details and caveats to which he is NOT privy. He can only speculate — just like the rest of us (though he is certainly way smarter than most of us)
Joseph Nobles
A modest defense of Mark Knoller: he’s got an incredibly dry sense of humor that would agree with everything Krugman says but love to see him get cranked up.
hamletta
@Suffern ACE: Dick Durbin was on the Homer-Simpson panel.
Remember the D’s voted against damn near everything on that one.
FlipYrWhig
@Citizen Alan:
Not when you need the GOP Terror Dons to cast their votes for the damn thing. “I accept your offer on my house. But just one thing before we call the lawyer and finalize the papers: I think you’re a giant gaping asshole and your wife is ugly.”
Elie
@FlipYrWhig:
Thanks for the great laugh Flip!!!! What a guffaw you gave me!
FlipYrWhig
@Elie: I’ve said before that I think Krugman is too wedded to the idea that when you’re right, and the other guy is wrong, you win the argument. In politics, you can be totally right, and have that count for nothing, because it all comes down to votes, and cowards and nimrods easily outnumber the ones who are right.
Sometimes people have said, “Well, that’s because he’s a professor, and that’s how academia works.” That may be how _research_ works, but it sure as hell isn’t how academics work. If you’re on some kind of committee, and you have a great idea, but a critical mass of bored people doesn’t like your idea based on nothing more than the fact that it’s always been done some other way, you’ll still lose. Maybe Krugman is in such a plum position he doesn’t have to have those kinds of meetings. They’re very, very common.
Citizen Alan
@FlipYrWhig:
Good, awesome. So it is not enough that the President of the United States must surrender to the hostage demands of a terrorist cell, he must also carefully refrain from doing anything to suggest that he’s unhappy with the situation lest the terrorists take offense and shoot the hostages anyway. Good to know.
You know the real reason so many people are starting to flirt with not supporting Obama in 2012? It’s because when you have lost all faith in the entire democratic process and all hope that things will ever get any better under the current system, it eventually becomes seductive to think about just letting everything burn down because, hey, maybe you can get lucky and build something out of the ruins.
I have a nephew who’s just entered college and another who’s a junior in high school, and I just want to weep for them because I see no hope for their future in this nation. As I’ve said many times, we’re all on the express train to hell, and the only difference in the parties is that one wants to open her up and get to hell as fast as possible and the other wants to go to hell at a more leisurely, pleasant pace.
Elie
@FlipYrWhig:
You speak the truth as I understand it from two of my tenured friends in academia… its grueling.
I dunno, I’ve always thought that academics would approach criticism pretty carefully. He is pretty loosey goosey and emotional. I don.like.dat. Sure, I can take and actually appreciate valid, fact based comment but criticism is many times highly subjective and gets personal. Coupled with his pretty unfettered and ongoing critcism of Obama during the primaries, I just am not thinking he comes from an unbiased place even though some of his observations have accurate observations. One can accurately observe something and still be wrong about how to interpret or weigh the consequence. I think that is frequently true for him.
WyldPirate
@Mnemosyne:
At least it THAT would have been an accurate statement.
Lowest domestic discretionary spending since Eisenhower? What does that mean, Mr and Mrs America? Well let’s see….
Tighten your belt NIH, NSF, NASA, etc. Tighten your belts a little more all those universities that depend on billions in grant funding. Tighten your belt Small Businesses looking for loans to get ideas off the floor. tighten your belts EPA, NIEHS, DOE, NPS, DOT, TVA. Tighten your belts CDC, VA, etc, ad nauseum.
Say your average job with the federal “gubmint” is 120K for salary and benes. Let’s further assume that 50% of the “proposed” 2.5 trillion in cuts over 10 years is in discretionary spending and that 50% of those expenditures is for personnel costs (low-balled I would think).
Every 1 BN taken out for personnel costs is 8333 jobs. You then have a 125 BN cut in discretionary spending per year average with 50% going to compensation. That works out to roughly 500,000 jobs gone.
The whole problem with this is that the government is doing essentially what industry in America has done for years–it’s downsizing and “offshoring” via privitization with less well-paying contractors (in general). This will ripple through an economy for years IMO, both economically and delayed or lost benefits to society from the work of many of those agencies I named above.
Elie
@Citizen Alan:
Oh for Pete’s sake, lighten up!
Okokok — don’t vote for Obama. You have my permission (for what its worth).
Relax. Go get your feet massaged. You seem like you could use a good bowl of chili with corn chips and a cold beer. Right now you couldnt get a pin up your asshole with a jackhammer.
dollared
@Elie: I can’t agree. All Obama has to do is once, just once, say “I am a Keynesian,” and Krugman would occasionally write about things other than Obama.
But instead Obama is doing exactly the wrong things, and saying exactly the wrong things. And he should know better.
If Roosevelt had been running around denying the existence of gravity, Einstein would have gotten pretty frustrated, too. It’s his area of expertise.
BTW, here’s an account of Richard Nixon writing a budget that emphasized deficit spending to boost employment, and saying he is a Keynesian: http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/07/20/presidents-and-their-debts-fdr-to-bush/nixons-keynesian-solution
Chuck Butcher
I’m going to wait and see what gets done before I start re-evaluating my affiliation. Don’t bother telling me about “not as bad as…”
Davis X. Machina
Assuming arguendo that The Deal is defeated in the House, what does a non-sucky deal capable of passage through this Congress look like?
FlipYrWhig
@Citizen Alan:
I’m no expert in the field, but, yeah, it seems like one of the basic rules of hostage negotiations probably is that you don’t call the kidnapper names when he has his gun cocked.
Elie
@dollared:
Why the hell does Obama owe Krugman a “confession” about his economic philosophy — sos Krugman will “leave him alone”?!
Criminy! Gosh!.. “Obama is running around doing and saying the “wrong” things”
geez Louise — a bit too much. Somebody should get over themselves here. Krugman aint King. He has no special right to ask ME much less Obama to confess his “sins” or whatever…I surely do not know and haven’t taken Obama’s confession on what he is, but I expect he is a pragmatist, using a variety of philosophies.
Hey, is that ok with you? Didnt want the President to get in trouble or whatnot.
Suffern ACE
@Davis X. Machina: Well, I’m guessing that the plan where the budget is immediately balanced because the government doesn’t pay contractors or its employees is then defacto passed.
Elie
@FlipYrWhig:
Honestly, are these folks for real? I can’t believe that he wrote that — implying that it might be a consideration that you might want to avoid someone getting killed by hostage takers. Truly. He needs more than chili and his feet massaged.
Comrade Luke
@Elie:
That’s just idiotic. He meant that he needed to show Krugman he was Keynesian by his actions, not by inviting over for a fucking round of golf.
Davis X. Machina
@Suffern ACE: In other words, there isn’t one.
TenguPhule
Let’s start the brawling if this shit sandwich actually passes. The teabaggers are still fucking insane and I would not call it done until it actually is done. We’ve still got 48 hours for the terrorists to revise their demands for the hostage….again.
TenguPhule
I believe it starts with “A Clean Bill” and ends with “If you vote against this bill, a secret service agent is standing behind your chair ready to cap you”
Elie
@Comrade Luke:
He doesnt NEED to show Krugman squat. What? you want some? You think the President Needs to show King K his term paper describing his economic philosophy in detail so we can keep King K off of the fainting couch and sos he can grade his paper properly…
Y’all are too too much for me. Maybe if the President asked him real nice he would give him an incomplete sos he can get it done in time for grades…
Davis X. Machina
@TenguPhule: Here I was thinking we don’t roll that way…
dollared
@Citizen Alan: I’m with your last paragraph.
Look, for 100 years we’ve been playing with the house money. So we could massively overspend on healthcare and defense and on imported oil, and lately we could afford to buy massive amounts of cheap shit from China.
Well, we can’t do that anymore. Our entire basic economic model – employment, with healthcare paid and income taxes withheld, until age 67, when you retire with savings and SS/MC, is dying fast. U-6 of 20% is a depression, and it’s going to continue to grow.
So what does Obama do? Cement that upside down model with a massive privatized healthcare initiative, still charged to employers. Do nothing about employment and investment. Raise unemployment via budget cuts. No energy policy. Continued financialization. Increased defense spending.
He’s making it worse, and not making a case for anything that will make it better.
Look, aside from China and the oil states, every other OECD country has had to figure it out. The ingredients are pretty simple – college education rate over 30%, highly productive tech schools, national industrial policy and government involvement in business capitalization and regulation, health care under 12% of GDP and not paid by employers, low defense expenditures, strong safety net. Since we no longer have our previous luxuries, we need this form of social democracy. We still have massive luxuries, so we could do this with our elites only paying an effective tax rate of 25%, with maybe some carbon tax revenue.
Obama doesn’t even indicate he sees any of this. He’ll get my vote again, but I see it the way you do. The Democrats are the slow road to decline.
Suffern ACE
@Davis X. Machina: Well, we could call it the American Brutal Insolvency Super Solution. The acronym ain’t spelt right, but then we’re exceptional.
TenguPhule
@Davis X. Machina
At this point, that’s only thing that could pass this House.
FlipYrWhig
@dollared:
Yeah! I hate how he never talks about investing in education and infrastructure, framing a better energy policy, reducing health care costs, or how the wealthiest people in America really should be paying more in taxes! Also I hate how when he does, he doesn’t stick it to Republicans, and when he does stick it to Republicans, he doesn’t really mean it. He’s always doing stuff like that.
dollared
You skipped over my fundamental point about how the business model is upside down and he made it worse.
Keith G
@dollared: I am not sure that you are allowed to use fact-based intellectually sound logical arguments in a room where the highest form of proof is, “We like Obama”, followed by a shaky, “Who could do better?”
And yes, K-Thug is shrill folks, but ya know what, his views about “what the economy is headed for next” has been rather spot on since 2007-ish.
This deal is a shit sammy and I think that we better get used to what will happen when the triggers activate since that is the teabagger inspired world we will be living in.
Citizen Alan
@Elie:
You do understand, don’t you, that there’s not an actual literal terrorist with a literal gun to the head of a literal person’s literal head, right? I just wanted to clarify that for you since you seemed a little unclear.
Also gotta say how much I just love all the folksy “criminys” and recommendations that I respond to the end of functional American democracy with a foot rub. Whenever I read your posts now, I now hear them in the voice of Sarah Palin, donchaknow! That’s how vapid and condescending your coming off to me tonight.
NR
@Elie:
Wrong. Krugman was a huge supporter of the health care bill. Krugman is criticizing shitty economic policy because it’s shitty economic policy, not because he has some grudge against Obama. For fuck’s sake.
Odie Hugh Manatee
When you firebaggers figure out how many manic progressives can balance on the edge of sheer terror forever, you might want to consider Real Life.
I hear it’s out there somewhere. Hurry and get what’s left of it!
Pat
What is really sad is the fact that Krugman is right.
Obama is the worst Democratic president ever, and I have been voting Democratic for forty years.
Third party in 2012. Because there is truly nothing left to lose.
ranger3
I have never voted for a Republican. I have no plans to ever do so. I like Obama and miss Bill Clinton. But when I read alot of the comments hear, I want to literally punch you so you know what it feels like. Then you’ll stop bitching about how you’re being assaulted every time things don’t exactly the way you want them to or, God forbid… people within your political coalition disagree with you.
This Mark dude is almost certainly a douche. But I’m feeling his comment, although in a different way. While I sympathize with Krugman’s frustration, the constant freak out from him is tiresome.
I am apparently the only one who notices that in the massive, epic struggle between the Democratic Party and the Reactionary Right which began with the election of Reagan and has pretty much defined my political life… my side is in fact winning. Like most death struggles, the endgame is going to be ugly and lots of people are going to get hurt. The right became a wounded, cornered animal after 2008. They were bound to lash out one last time, in a savage way. They have nothing to lose now and they’re acting like it. But we’re still clearly winning.
Now if your definition of winning means establishing a liberal utopia… then you’re not winning. In a country where 20% of the population identifies as liberal, you’ll never get there. But for me, simple stuff like letting the Bush tax cuts expire someday and people accepting evolution and global warming as valid and not hating gay people would definitely count as winning. And that’s all going to happen within the next decade when this last ditch right wing freak out burns itself out.
I guess I just hate fair weather fans.
CaliCat
@Spaghetti Lee:
YES. Good comment.
Thymezone
There’s only one issue here. Krugman is a collossal asshole.
Not only that, he can’t engage in a mano a mano with real live people any better than your aunt Gertrude. His appearance on ABC Sunday Morning Ruined or whatever they call that stupid show was pathetic and embarrassing. When a guy with Krugman’s credentials looks bad next to George Fucking Will, that gives you an idea how good Krugman is. Your granddaughter, the one in fourth grade, could have done better.
I don’t know much about this Knoller guy, but he looks like one of those mountain people who sends package bombs to college professors.
ranger3
@CaliCat:
Being a WWII history buff, I’m reminded of how the absolutely most horrific battles of that war occured at the very end. The US losses at Iwo Jima and Okinawa were the worst of the war. Two cities were nuked before the Japanese Empire was finally defeated. Before then, it was estimated that the US would lose a million men trying to take Tokyo.
It’s always darkest before the dawn. But the dawn inevitably comes.
Thymezone
#137 — I think you guys are on the right track, but I also think that we might be getting ahead of the rodeo.
Crazy and irresponsible politicians, along with crazy, lazy and totally irresponsible pundits and “reporters,” are framing a narrative around this thing that is just bullshit, complete bullshit. “Obama should have held out for more.”
With what? The threat of default? That was the TP weapon. The threat of an executive order? That is a device that works only in the last hour of the last possible day before implosion. I might use it, in fact I wrote the speech for it, but it’s a dangerous move that cannot be made unless there is no other alternative, and nobody wants to be the guy who pushes the game to that point. The fact is, the people of the United States caved, not Obama, when they elected a terrorist congress by failing to get out the sane vote in a critical midterm. How may voted, 45%? Less? The country folded. It folded a long time ago when it gave into government that costs 25% of GDP but only raises 15% of GDP in revenue, and then looked away. The country reflects the people. The broken government reflects the people. If it doesn’t, then democracy is a farce. If it does, then democracy is in big trouble because the people are fucking it up.
Anyway, this thing ain’t over til a bill is signed and right now I can’t give passage more than a 50-50 chance, the way congress is behaving lately. There is no loyalty on the Hill to anything, not to the president, not to progressive policy, not to conservatism, not to the core GOP, not to their leaders, not to the country, not to the unemployed or the uninsured or the underrepresented. Nobody cares about anything right now except his own ass, whether he’s a congressman, or a reporter, or a blogger, or a voter. And there’s your real problem.
Okay, one guy cares, but he’s just one guy in a big house. He is underrepresented on the Hill, and undersupported in his base. His base is totally self interested. And he had to face down terrorists who would wreck the country for the fun of it. So we should have his back.
kay
@NR:
That’s not all he’s doing, though. He’s now gone full-on political pundit. He attacks political strategy and tactics.
I think it’s a mistake. There are enough political pundits/critics out there. It’s a crowded field. Krugman has something substantive to offer, which is rare.
He should stick to what he knows. What he doesn’t know are negotiations or political/issue campaigns. He just doesn’t have any practical experience there. Why go there? What Paul Krugman thinks about congressional negotiations or political tactics or strategy is no more valid than what you or I think. It’s an opinion, and in an area he doesn’t know, because he hasn’t done it.
Thymezone
@kay #141 — really excellent comment.
kay
@Thymezone:
It seems like policy people can’t resist the lure of political punditry. There are maybe three or four liberals who have a national forum and know something about some specific area of policy. Why waste that on guesses on negotiating tactics or campaign/rhetorical counterfactuals?
We have Morning Joe and Mark Halperin for that blather. It’s a crowded field because it’s easy.
WereBear
There’s good reason for the rest of Washington, including the White House, to think no one would be crazy enough to play with the debt ceiling. In our entire history, no one has.
It’s that crazy.
But we’ve got that much crazy, and I would welcome suggestions that didn’t include things that don’t work on crazy. Being firm, explaining things, taking stands, appealing to authority; none of that works on crazy.
arguingwithsignposts
@WereBear:
Unfortunately, anti-psychotic meds in the water would be illegal, but it’s the only thing i can think of.
WereBear
Happens naturally in some places in Texas.
Not that I’m recommending it, either. It seems to me that a lot of President Obama’s behavior is not aimed at liberals; it’s aimed at people, like the press and swing voters, who like to pretend these people aren’t crazy.
A conclusion is always stronger when you draw it yourself.
Thymezone
#144 — What works on crazy is being not crazy. Over time, the sane win out over the crazy. Not necessarily easily, or quickly, or cleanly, or nicely, or with unarguably better immediate effect, not necessarily winning any popularity contest while it does so.
But here’s the deal: If you don’t stand up for sane, and keep doing that even when crazy seems to be getting the upper hand, if you aren’t just there for sane when sanity needs somebody to stand for it, then sane can lose the long game.
The tragedy here is that the the human material answering that call is … the Democratic Party. Which is to say, if you expect that party to stand up for you when it counts, then you are in for bitter disappointment. I have no doubt that the White House should, and will, throw the left wing of that party under the Big Wheel in order to work the middle and get reelected next year. And that is what the left wing deserves. The entire rationale for the left wing arguments you are seeing today is, “I could be a better president than Obama.” Uh, no, I don’t think so, but thanks for stopping by, Mister Krugman. You can’t even win a three minute scrimmage with George Will for crissakes.
Chinn Romney
To answer the question posed by Cole at the end of us post, it’s the exact same number of fingers I’m waving at the spineless Harry Reid. I feel the same way about Fearless Leader, who was looking awfully pleased on the teevee this morning. But someone might call me racist if I call him out on it. Democrats suck.
over_educated
I have been a pretty ardent supporter of the “Let’s see the deal before we all flip out” approach. Now, having seen the deal I think it is an appropriate time to flip out.
No matter how you look at this I cannot conceive any universe where:
1. 2.7 trillion in spending cuts
2. No mention of revenue increases
3. Continuing to give the Republicans the ability to politic over both of those issues.
is not a complete and utter capitulation. Perhaps I am wrong but I think the white house political side is gravely miscalculating the consequences of achieving a dela vs. going the 14th Amendment route.
I understand the politics of it. Obama doesn’t want to deal with the debt issue and doesn’t want to spend the next year and a half defending what would be viewed by many Republicans (and his own legal staff) as an extra-constitutional measure.
Honestly though, I believe this little dog and pony show has caused far more damage to the Republic than a President unilaterally raising the debt ceiling as it has effectively validated the strategy of electing obstinate crazy people as an effective means of promoting your political agenda.
Every budget from this point out is going to be a rodeo of crazy, as teabaggers include insane demands and bully their agenda into the mainstream because they know it will be completely effective.
It also undercuts this administrations credibility terribly, as we have been forced to watch the spectacle of our President draw a series of lines in the sand only to immediately cross them and draw other lines in the sand. If I were a Republican I would view the entire exercise as proof positive that Obama is a pushover.
Don’t get me wrong, I am still going to vote for the man and support him financially, because I understand the stakes involved and the danger the other side poses to the health and well being of the republic. But I think in the end he undercut this deal undercuts our democracy in general and obama’s political future in particular.
Cat Lady
@Thymezone:
Thanks for this comment. I’m sad to say the progressive left has shown themselves to only be useful for whinging and marching with giant puppets.
Keith G
@Thymezone:
Because of this above quote, I downloaded the show in question and just watched it. Thymezone, would you help me by pointing out what exchange resulted in a George Will triumph? I just don’t see it.
In a broader view, because of the comments of Kay and others, I read Krug’s current column. There are no transgressions worthy of insult there as well. I can see where many here would find reason to disagree, but many of the attacks here do seem defensive and over emotional. Are some of you not feeling well?
OzoneR
@azlib:
The American people who sent a tea party majority to Congress “get it?”
This is what’s wrong with the left, you’re too stupid to realize how stupid the country is
Jinxtigr
Now the question is- will the mainstream media, which has worked tirelessly for DECADES to convince a clear majority of the electorate that non-defense discretionary spending was bad, report non-ironically that Obama is able to do this- or will they report that Obama is lying and doesn’t mean it?
I don’t even care if they redefine all the progressive causes as ‘not really discretionary’ or ‘not really spending’, but in my opinion they’ve got to find angles to salvage things while still speaking the language of a seriously compromised electorate.
People are brainwashed teabaggers, and vote, and any real-world plan has to be couched in terms that deliver the socia1ized relief people will need, but frame it in such a way that Zombie Reagan wouldn’t cry, until we have more people who can think and learn again…
There is no getting around that, so playing to the brainwashing is just straight-up power politics. Co-opt the rhetoric, and come up with ways to do what needs to be done even when you have to hide it and claim you’re doing the opposite…
crack
This needs to be added to the lexicon:
Knoller:
Noun
knoller (collectively (UK) knoller or (US) and when referring to two or more kinds knollers or informally knolldogs)
1 A middle finger extended to someone good at counting stupid things.
2 The result of a tally that reveals the number of knollers in a set; a quantity knollered.
Verb
knoller (third-person singular simple present knollers, present participle knollering, simple past and past participle knollered)
(transitive) To determine the number knoller shown to a person.
There are three knoller; knoller them.
As in:
Hey Knoller, knoller the knoller I’ve got for you.
FlipYrWhig
@kay:
Greenwald, BTW, has the exact same problem, and has even less experience to back it up.