Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
There is an old lawyer joke that goes like this: "Question: What do you call 100 lawyers at the bottom of the Potomac River? Answer: A good start."
This captures precisely how I feel about the lazy D.C. media villagers and Beltway bloviators who every four years trot out the tired old trope from their sainted Ronnie Reagan to ask "Are you better off now than you were four years ago?" The media villagers would serve their country well by marching themselves into the Potomac River, never to be heard from again.
This is the wrong question for two reasons. First, the question frames every election as a referendum on the past four years, rather than holding the candidates accountable for what they propose to do for the next four years — the very reason why we hold elections. This is why the lazy D.C. media villagers and Beltway bloviators have allowed Willard "Mittens" Romney to get away with not providing any details about his policies that he intends to pursue if elected president — he has a "secret plan" that he will reveal only if and when he is elected — "just trust me."
Secondly, the question adopts the framing of the Republican Party's quasi-religion of narcissism and self-centeredness (Ayn Rand), which rejects the preamble to the Constitution "to provide for the common defense" and to "promote the general welfare." It also rejects the notion of one's obligation to your fellow American citizens, as President Kennedy called upon when he said "And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country." Randian Republicanism does not think beyond "it's all about me, baby!"
In that same inaugural address, President Kennedy offered a rejoinder to Reagan's tired old trope: "All this will not be finished in the first 100 days. Nor will it be
finished in the first 1,000 days, nor in the life of this
Administration, nor even perhaps in our lifetime on this planet. But let
us begin." The Great American Experiment is always a work in progress that always looks forward to the future.
Are the lazy D.C. media villagers and Beltway bloviators really nostalgic for the George W. Bush years? Are they suffering from a brain injury and cannot remember that The Bush Years Were a Lost Decade, the weakest economic growth and job creation since the Great Depression, followed by the grand finale of the Bush Great Recession, the worst economic catastrophe to befall this country since the Great Depression? Chart Book: The Legacy of the Great Recession – Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. That's what they are nostalgic for? They must be brain damaged.
If Americans are unhappy about the pace of economic recovery, as am I, the blame lies with the Republicans in Congress. For the first time since the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860, elected leaders conspired to engage in insurrection against the government of the United States for reasons of political ideology, and to sabotage the economy at a time of dire economic crisis and suffering by their fellow American citizens. They put their own political ambitions ahead of the best interests of the country and the needs of its citizens.
Robert Draper recounts in his new book, "Do Not Ask What Good We Do: Inside the U.S. House of Representatives," Robert Draper Book: GOP's Anti-Obama Campaign Started Night Of Inauguration:
As President Barack Obama was celebrating his inauguration at various balls, top Republican lawmakers and strategists were conjuring up ways to submarine his presidency at a private dinner in Washington.
* * *
According to Draper, the guest list that night (which was just over
15 people in total) included Republican Reps. Eric Cantor (Va.), Kevin
McCarthy (Calif.), Paul Ryan (Wis.), Pete Sessions (Texas), Jeb
Hensarling (Texas), Pete Hoekstra (Mich.) and Dan Lungren (Calif.),
along with Republican Sens. Jim DeMint (S.C.), Jon Kyl (Ariz.), Tom
Coburn (Okla.), John Ensign (Nev.) and Bob Corker (Tenn.). The
non-lawmakers present included Newt Gingrich, several years removed from
his presidential campaign, and Frank Luntz, the long-time Republican
wordsmith. Notably absent were Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell
(R-Ky.) and House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) — who, Draper
writes, had an acrimonious relationship with Luntz.
For several hours in the Caucus Room (a high-end D.C. establishment),
the book says they plotted out ways to not just win back political
power, but to also put the brakes on Obama's legislative platform.
""If you act like you're the minority, you're going to stay in the
minority," Draper quotes McCarthy as saying. "We've gotta challenge them
on every single bill and challenge them on every single campaign."
The dinner lasted nearly four hours. They parted company almost giddily. The Republicans had agreed on a way forward:
The dinner lasted nearly four hours. They parted company almost giddily. The Republicans had agreed on a way forward:
Go after Geithner. (And indeed Kyl did, the next day: ‘Would you answer my question rather than dancing around it—please?’)
Show united and unyielding opposition to the president’s economic
policies. (Eight days later, Minority Whip Cantor would hold the House
Republicans to a unanimous No against Obama’s economic stimulus plan.)Begin attacking vulnerable Democrats on the airwaves. (The first
National Republican Congressional Committee attack ads would run in less
than two months.)Win the spear point of the House in 2010. Jab Obama relentlessly in 2011. Win the White House and the Senate in 2012.
"You will remember this day," Draper reports Newt Gingrich as saying
on the way out. "You’ll remember this as the day the seeds of 2012 were
sown."
And let's not forget Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). In an interview with the National Journal’s Major Garrett in October 2010, McConnell candidly acknowledged that he feels his “single most important” job is to defeat President Obama in 2012:
MCCONNELL: We need to be honest with the public. This
election is about them, not us. And we need to treat this election as
the first step in retaking the government. We need to say to everyone on
Election Day, “Those of you who helped make this a good day, you need
to go out and help us finish the job.”NATIONAL JOURNAL: What’s the job?
MCCONNELL: The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.
Actively engaging in insurrection against the government of the United States for
reasons of political ideology, and sabotaging the economy at a time of
dire economic crisis and suffering by their fellow American citizens should cost evey one of these Republican conspirators their seats in Congress. Justice would demand more, but elections are all we have in America.
UPDATE: Thank you Dean Baker! "Are Americans Better Off Today Than They Were Four Years Ago?" The Question That Exposes Incompetent Reporters:
While the source is not clear, someone developed a simple
way to identify incompetent news reporters. If you hear a reporter ask
people in President Obama's administration, ideally in a belligerent
tone, "are the American people better off than they were four years
ago?,"the reporter is trying to tell you that they are not qualified to
do their job.The reason we know that the questioners are incompetent reporters is
that this is a pointless question. Suppose your house is on fire and the
firefighters race to the scene. They set up their hoses and start
spraying water on the blaze as quickly as possible. After the fire is
put out, the courageous news reporter on the scene asks the chief
firefighter, "is the house in better shape than when you got here?"
[…]A serious reporter asks the fire chief if he had brought a large
enough crew, if they had enough hoses, if the water pressure was
sufficient. That might require some minimal knowledge of how to put out
fires.Similarly, serious reporters would ask whether the stimulus was large
enough, was it well-designed, and were there other measures that could
have been taken like promoting shorter workweeks, as Germany has done.
That would of course require some knowledge of economics, but it sure
makes more sense than asking if a house is better off after it was
nearly burnt to the ground.
Discover more from Blog for Arizona
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Here is the start of the U.S. News Political Bulletin for September 15, 2008. We are a lot better off now:
Coverage of the latest crises in the US financial system casts the situation is dire terms, presenting the demise of Lehman Brothers as a potential harbinger of future collapses. The Washington Post (9/15) reports this morning, “Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy early Monday morning, becoming the largest financial firm to fail in the global credit crisis, after federal officials refused to help other companies buy the venerable investment bank by putting up taxpayer money as a guarantee.” The Wall Street Journal reports “the American financial system was shaken to its core on Sunday,” and “a sense of foreboding gripped Wall Street,” while the New York Times titles one of its stories on the crisis “Nation’s Financial Industry Gripped By Fear,” and the Wall Street Journal says in an editorial, “We are getting a Category 5 test of our financial levees.”
A number of reports pay particular attention to the role of the US government in the Lehman crisis, in some cases blaming Federal officials for the firm’s expected collapse. In reporting typical of much of the media coverage, the New York Times says “Wall Street and the federal government played a game of chicken over the weekend, and neither side backed down, pushing Lehman Brothers toward bankruptcy and setting off worries of a worldwide sell-off when markets open on Monday.” The Wall Street Journal says that while the US government “bailed out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac a week ago and orchestrated the sale of Bear Stearns Cos. to J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. in March,” it “played much tougher with Lehman,” refusing “to provide a financial backstop to potential buyers.” Another Wall Street Journal story reports that “despite serious efforts by potential bidders and Lehman, a deal never came together over the weekend, largely because the federal government refused to put up any cash.”
On NBC Nightly News, CNBC’s senior economics reporter Steve Liesman said, “The big story here” is that “the government, so far, has refused to put any money in and is letting the markets sort this out as best they can on their own.” The Washington Times reports “the federal involvement appeared minimal, aimed mostly at facilitating the liquidation of Lehman,” with Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson “adamantly against providing any guarantees on Lehman’s money-losing assets like the guarantee the Fed provided on $29 billion of Bear Stearns mortgages in March to facilitate Bear’s takeover by J.P. Morgan.” The Washington Post says that the government’s “decision not to intervene carries the risk that the ripples of Lehman’s failure could prove impossible to contain.” The New York Times, USA Today, AP run similar reports, while the Financial Times notes “some saw a good cop/bad cop act, with Mr Paulson taking a hard line on public funds while Tim Geithner, the president of the New York Fed, looked for ways to get a deal done that would be subject to this constraint.”
Liberal columnist Paul Krugman asks in the New York Times, “Will the US financial system collapse today, or maybe over the next few days? I don’t think so — but I’m nowhere near certain.” Paulson “seems to be betting that the financial system — bolstered, it must be said, by…special credit lines — can handle the shock of a Lehman failure. We’ll find out soon whether he was brave or foolish.”
More Worrying News In another sign of trouble in the financial system, the Wall Street Journal reports, “In a rushed bid to ride out the storm sweeping American finance, 94-year-old Merrill Lynch & Co. agreed late Sunday to sell itself to Bank of America Corp. for roughly $44 billion.” The AP notes that following the Lehman saga, “many market participants believe Merrill Lynch — the first of the major financial services firms to oust its CEO after the credit markets seized up last year — might have been the next firm to lose the confidence of its investors, counterparties and clients.” The New York Times, Los Angeles Times and Washington Post also report the story.
The Wall Street Journal also reports, “Insurer American International Group Inc., succumbing to relentless investor pressure that drove its shares down 31% on Friday alone, is pulling together a survival plan that includes selling off some of its most valuable assets, raising more capital and possibly going to the Federal Reserve for help, people familiar with the situation said.” The Journal adds that “during a weekend scramble to shore up its finances, AIG turned down a capital infusion from a group of private-equity firms because it would have effectively given them control of the company, an 89-year-old giant that does business in nearly every corner of the world.” The AP and New York Times run similar reports.
Moreover, the Financial Times reports that while “attention has focused on the danger presented by the failure of Lehman Brothers…the failure of a commercial bank such as Washington Mutual can have systemic consequences if it threatens a run on other weak banks.” Washington Mutual is “the sixth largest bank in the US,” and “has lost more than a third of its market value recently as investors fear it lacks liquidity and capital to survive the credit crisis.” The Times adds, “Washington Mutual had $143bn in insured deposits on June 30 about three times the size of the deposit insurance fund, but less than half of its $307bn assets.”