I’ve found myself diverging from Paul Krugman on many issues ever since he went nuts about the lack of mandate in candidate Obama’s health care plan. But it’s not a straight line. Often I find myself in complete agreement with Krugman, and this morning is one of those times. It also helps explain why I am in a bit of a funk. I find it hard to operate when I can’t see a way forward. Needless to say, I am disappointed in the judgment of the American people, and I’m discouraged that reasonable people are so out-gunned in the media that the Republicans could be resoundingly rewarded for their bad behavior over the last two years. I need to quote extensively here to get to my point.
Former Senator Alan Simpson is a Very Serious Person. He must be — after all, President Obama appointed him as co-chairman of a special commission on deficit reduction.
So here’s what the very serious Mr. Simpson said on Friday: “I can’t wait for the blood bath in April. … When debt limit time comes, they’re going to look around and say, ‘What in the hell do we do now? We’ve got guys who will not approve the debt limit extension unless we give ’em a piece of meat, real meat,’ ” meaning spending cuts. “And boy, the blood bath will be extraordinary,” he continued.
Think of Mr. Simpson’s blood lust as one more piece of evidence that our nation is in much worse shape, much closer to a political breakdown, than most people realize.
It’s obvious that the president made a mistake in appointing Alan Simpson to his position and in failing to fire him when presented with a golden opportunity. But that’s not the most important thing.
The fact is that one of our two great political parties has made it clear that it has no interest in making America governable, unless it’s doing the governing. And that party now controls one house of Congress, which means that the country will not, in fact, be governable without that party’s cooperation — cooperation that won’t be forthcoming.
Elite opinion has been slow to recognize this reality.
That last sentence is sadly true. Consider this exchange between Matt Taibbi, David Gergen, and Peter Hart, from a recent Rolling Stone interview.
Taibbi: To me, the main thing about the Tea Party is that they’re just crazy. If somebody is able to bridge the gap with those voters, it seems to me they will have to be a little bit crazy too. That’s part of the Tea Party’s litmus test: “How far will you go?”
Gergen: I flatly reject the idea that Tea Partiers are crazy. They had some eccentric candidates, there’s no question about that. But I think they represent a broad swath of the American electorate that elites dismiss to their peril.
Hart: I agree with David. When two out of five people who voted last night say they consider themselves supporters of the Tea Party, we make a huge mistake to suggest that they are some sort of small fringe group and do not represent anybody else.
Taibbi: I’m not saying that they’re small or a fringe group.
Gergen: You just think they’re all crazy.
Taibbi: I do.
Gergen: So you’re arguing, Matt, that 40 percent of those who voted last night are crazy?
Taibbi: I interview these people. They’re not basing their positions on the facts — they’re completely uninterested in the facts. They’re voting completely on what they see and hear on Fox News and afternoon talk radio, and that’s enough for them.
Gergen: The great unwashed are uneducated, so therefore their views are really beneath serious conversation?
Taibbi: I’m not saying they’re beneath serious conversation. I’m saying that these people vote without acting on the evidence.
Gergen: I find it stunning that the conversation has taken this turn. I disagree with the Tea Party on a number of issues, but it misreads who they are to dismiss them as some kind of uneducated know-nothings who have somehow seized power in the American electorate. It is elitist to its core. We would all be better off if we spent more time listening to each other rather than simply writing them off.
What’s ironic is that Gergen is dismissing the Tea Partiers by taking them seriously. People like Matt Taibbi take them much more seriously, as they should, but they don’t ascribe any merit to their views. They take them seriously because they are going to do grave damage to the nation. Krugman explains:
Thus on the same day that Mr. Simpson rejoiced in the prospect of chaos, Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve chairman, appealed for help in confronting mass unemployment. He asked for “a fiscal program that combines near-term measures to enhance growth with strong, confidence-inducing steps to reduce longer-term structural deficits.”
My immediate thought was, why not ask for a pony, too? After all, the G.O.P. isn’t interested in helping the economy as long as a Democrat is in the White House. Indeed, far from being willing to help Mr. Bernanke’s efforts, Republicans are trying to bully the Fed itself into giving up completely on trying to reduce unemployment.
It’s even worse than this. The GOP may not want to help the economy while a Democrat is in the White House, but they don’t know how to help the economy regardless. We saw this during Bush’s two terms in office. And when Bush finally faced reality and took the obvious steps to save the economy, the Republicans went Full Metal Teabagger in response.
David Gergen thinks it is elitist to dismiss the threat presented by this rise in Know-Nothing foolish ideology. What he forgets is that our government will no longer work starting in January. If elites like Gergen are good for anything, they should be good at protecting our institutions. They didn’t. And now we have a really big problem.
I read that Rolling Stone piece last night and LMAO, and I agree completely with Taibbi – they are fucking crazy. Doesn’t mean folks like me dismiss them, it means we have assessed them and find them fucking crazy – he was on the money. Nobody’s going to tell me that Angle and O’Donnell were serious candidates who should have been taken seriously in any way, shape, or form. If it were a group of Black folks talking this kind of foolishness Gergen would have no problem calling them out for what they are. Taibbi is on the money.
I take them as seriously as a heart attack, but I don’t take their opinions on economics or policy seriously. Why would I?
You wouldn’t!! Of course, Gergen won’t admit what the Teabaggers are really all about either(think tribalism, racism, and the mainstreaming of the Bircher paranoia).
Gergen wants the tea parties to be given respect because its in his interest to do so. The more stature and power the tea partiers have, the more likely the forced compromises that must be made in our political system to avoid a constitutional crisis will be on terms that he likes- ie the destruction of the middle class and the creation of a two class system held together by paternalism, fear, and political capture by the elite. None of this is new or suprising or any thing that anyone on this site doesn’t know already. Digby basically wrote Krugman’s op-ed from today shortly after Obama’s election. But our elite don’t read Digby and its certainly not in their interest to heed her advice.
The only question worth talking about is what Obama is going to do about all of this. Its the only “unknown” out there right now. The economy will get worse (for working americans, probably get better for the wealthy) and Republicans are going to hold the entire government hostage unless their concessions are made- true gangster all of them. Your move Obama.
Maybe I’m a cockeyed optimist, but I don’t think the economy is going to get worse. Most signs point to a gradual improvement over the next couple of years, as one would expect in the natural business cycle. That’ll put the dems in a somewhat better position in 2012, as people get back to work. And Obama still has the tools of the executive branch at his disposal to make some progress in several areas. What (probably) won’t happen is any new big programs by the gov’t to help speed the improvement along. I hope that Obama will do a better job in pinning the blame for that to the rethugs.
I don’t disagree that a lot of economic indicators will be better in 2012 then they are today. But where will unemployment be? What will health insurance costs be? I am very skeptical that the average middle class american will be better off in 2012 then they are today. The fate of the middle class has really “decoupled” from the fate of the transnational elite. And for the first time in our history, we have a political party with significant power that has openly postured that it won’t do anything to help the economy for regular people if it makes Obama more likely to win reelection.
Again, the really unknown in this equation is Obama. And I think he needs to decide if he’s going to take the path of Clinton, Carter or FDR. My money’s on Carter actually and it won’t be pretty.
I am hoping Obama goes to the wall on the tax issue, to show that he is fighting for the middle class.
Gergan became so busy shovelling words into Taibbi’s mouth that he lost the context entirely.
Unlike Taibbi, who’s interviewed from the inside, he’s instead read the memos from Armey to describe these people. In a sense he’s as guilty as the teapartyhers when it comes to actual knowledge of the facts. David reads the memos to get his opinions just as the TP’ers listen to Beck & Limbaugh to get theirs. Facts have simply left the debate.
Old, white, Silent Generation male. That’s pretty much the Tea Party. He’s not being obtuse, these are core values. To be fair, tired old CW warhorses like Gergen (or Cokie Roberts) were probably to the left of the nation on racial issues in 1960, but things changed, and they didn’t.
As for this voting bloc, well… the actuarial tables don’t lie.
Boo, stop it! Just stop it with all the apologism and sycophancy.
Obama isn’t making “mistakes.” He is being himself, a right-wing (Republican) politician with the disarming benefit of having a smiling brown face. All of these right-wing moves aren’t anomalies; they are features.
This is a growing and I think distorted view in the left blogosphere. Obama is as progressive a democrat as we’ve seen in the whitehouse since Lyndon Johnson, maybe since Roosevelt. The right-wing moves you refer to? I assume you are mainly referring to the various national security issues that he has been dealing with. I don’t agree with some of his decisions, but that doesn’t make him a republican, or a right-winger. His positions are consistent with the policies of many previous dem. presidents. Examples: Carter — kicked off jihadiism by funding Pakistani terrorism against the Soviets in Afghanistan. Johnson — escalated the war in Vietnam. Truman — began the development of the national security state. Roosevelt — incarcerated thousands of Japanese Americans. In every case, bad decisions, but they were made by democrats, and pretty progressive democrats to boot.
National security issues have always been a problem for dems in the whitehouse, since the 50s at least. They have to appear strong in this area in order to fight the pinko perception, so they overcompensate. Its a problem. (Only Nixon could have gone to China.)
I understand what you are saying but let’s not put those blinders on and pretend that his closeted right-wing only rises with a “complex” issue like “security.”
The day that Obama tells me with words and deeds that he is progressive will be the day that I believe him again. But I know he cannot and will not ever do that because that would mean he would have to stand for something other than himself, so that leaves me with my perception.
Keeping Simpson saves time becasue he is spouting all the Right Wing talking points and making himself look like a fool.
Let him talk. It helps the information to sink in that the Right Wing intends to starve little old ladies.