|
GOP Stands for Goofy, Outrageous, and Peculiar |
 |
|
Wednesday, 11 May 2011 09:56 |
|
Robert Reich writes: "With Trump, Gingrich, Bachmann, and possibly Palin now in the race for the Republican presidential nomination, 'GOP' is starting to mean Goofy, Outrageous, and Peculiar."
Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)
GOP Stands for Goofy, Outrageous, and Peculiar
By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog
11 May 11
The unbearable lightness of being Mitt.
 ne of my regrets in life is losing the chance to debate Mitt Romney and whip his ass.
It was the fall of 2002. Mitt had thundered into Massachusetts with enough money to grab the Republican nomination for governor. Meanwhile, I was doing my best to secure the Democratic nomination. One week before the Democratic primary I was tied in the polls with the state treasurer, according to the Boston Herald, well ahead of four other candidates. But my campaign ran out of cash. Despite pleas from my campaign manager, I didn't want to put a second mortgage on the family home. The rest is history: The state treasurer got the nomination, I never got to debate Mitt, and Mitt won the election.
With Trump, Gingrich, Bachmann, and possibly Palin now in the race for the Republican presidential nomination, "GOP" is starting to mean Goofy, Outrageous, and Peculiar. Mitt would pose the most serious challenge to a second Obama term.
I say this not because Mitt's mind is the sharpest of the likely contenders (Gingrich is far more nimble intellectually). Nor because his record of public service is particularly impressive (Tim Pawlenty took his governorship seriously while Mitt as governor seemed more intent on burnishing his Republican credentials outside Massachusetts). Nor because Mitt is the most experienced at running a business (Donald Trump has managed a giant company while Mitt made his money buying and selling companies.) Nor, finally, because he's especially charismatic or entertaining (Sarah Palin can work up audiences and Mike Huckabee is genuinely funny and folksy, while Mitt delivers a speech so laboriously he seems to be driving a large truck).
Mitt Romney's great strength is he looks, sounds, and acts presidential.
Policy wonks like me want to believe the public pays most attention to candidates' platforms and policy positions. Again and again we're proven wrong. Unless a candidate is way out of the mainstream (Barry Goldwater and George McGovern come to mind), the public tends to vote for the person who makes them feel safest at a visceral level, who reassures them he'll take best care of the country – not because of what he says but because of how he says it.
In this regard, looks matter. Taller candidates almost always win over shorter ones (meaning even if I'd whipped him in a debate, Romney would probably still have won the governorship). Good-looking ones with great smiles garner more votes than those who scowl or perspire (Kennedy versus Nixon), thin ones are elected over fat ones (William Howard Taft to the contrary notwithstanding), and the bald need not apply (would Eisenhower have made it if Stevenson had been blessed with a thick shock?).
Voices also matter. Deeper registers signal gravitas; higher and more nasal emanations don't command nearly as much respect (think of Reagan versus Carter, or Obama versus McCain).
And behavior matters. Voters prefer candidates who appear even-tempered and comfortable with themselves (this was Obama's strongest advantage over John McCain in 2008). They also favor the candidate who projects the most confidence and optimism (think FDR, Reagan, and Bill Clinton).
Romney has it all. Plus a strong jaw, gleaming white teeth, and perfect posture. No other Republican hopeful comes close.
What does Mitt stand for? It's a mystery - other than a smaller government is good and the Obama administration is bad. Of all the Republican hopefuls, Romney has most assiduously avoided taking positions. He's written two books but I challenge anyone to find a clear policy in either. Both books are so hedged, conditioned, boring and bland that once you put them down you can't pick them up.
Mitt is reputed to say whatever an audience wants to hear, but that's not quite right. In reality he says nothing, but does it in such way audiences believe they've heard what they want to hear. He is the chameleon candidate. To call Mitt Romney an empty suit is an insult to suits.
Yet Romney is gaining ground over Obama. According to the most recent Marist poll, in a hypothetical presidential matchup Obama now holds a one percent point lead over Romney, 46 to 45. In January, Obama led Romney by 13 points.
Why is Mitt doing so well? Partly because Obama's positions are by now well known, while voters can project anything they want on to Mitt. It's also because much of the public continues to worry about the economy, jobs, and the price of gas at the pump, and they inevitably blame the President.
But I suspect something else is at work here, too. To many voters, President Obama sounds and acts presidential but he doesn't look it. Mitt Romney is the perfect candidate for people uncomfortable that their president is black. Mitt is their great white hope.
Robert Reich is Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley. He has served in three national administrations, most recently as secretary of labor under President Bill Clinton. He has written thirteen books, including "The Work of Nations," "Locked in the Cabinet," "Supercapitalism" and his latest book, "AFTERSHOCK: The Next Economy and America's Future." His 'Marketplace' commentaries can be found on publicradio.com and iTunes.
(First published in the American Prospect.)
 |
|
The Battle for the Soul of the GOP |
|
|
Tuesday, 10 May 2011 10:24 |
|
Robert Reich writes: "Boehner is siding with the Tea Partiers. Wall Street and big business hold the purse strings in the GOP but the Tea Partiers are now the ground troops. Boehner and his GOP colleagues figure Wall Street and big business will stake them in any event. They need Tea Partiers to get out the vote in 2012. And they're afraid angry Tea Partiers will get out the vote against them in their own primaries."
Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)
The Battle for the Soul of the GOP
By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog
10 May 11
 he real battle for the soul of the GOP started today with a speech on Wall Street by Speaker of the House John Boehner.
Wall Street and big business fear Tea Partiers won't allow House Republicans to raise the debt ceiling without major spending cuts - and without tax increases on the wealthy. Wall Street and big business know this would be unacceptable to the White House and congressional Democrats.
The Street and big business want to tame the budget deficit but they don't want to play games with the debt ceiling. Credit markets are fine at the moment, but if the debt ceiling isn't not raised within the month - weeks before August 2, when the Treasury predicts the nation will run out of money to pay its creditors and its other bills - credit markets could go into free fall. The full faith and credit of the United States would be jeopardized. Interest rates would skyrocket. The dollar could plummet.
The Tea Partiers don't care about the debt ceiling. To them, it's a giant bargaining chit to shrink government. Nor do they worry about credit markets. If the full faith and credit of the US government is no longer honored, so much the better.
You see, Tea Partiers hate government more than they hate the national debt. They refuse to reduce that debt with tax increases, even with tax increases on the wealthy, because a tax increase doesn't reduce the size of government. The Tea Partiers' real aim is to shrink the government.
But the Street and big business dislike the national debt more than they dislike government. And they wouldn't even mind a small tax increase on wealthy people like themselves in order to cinch a deal on raising the national debt. They have so much money they'd scarcely notice.
In truth, government has been good to Wall Street and big business. It bailed out the Street. It saved GM, Chrysler, and AIG. And most government spending improves the profits of big businesses - military contractors, big agriculture, giant health-care insurers, Big Pharma, large construction companies.
Tea Partiers have almost as much contempt for big business and the Street as they do for government. After all, the Tea Party was born in anger over the Wall Street bailout.
This is the heart of the civil war in the GOP.
House Speaker John Boehner, appearing today at the Economic Club of New York, tried to placate both wings, but he was far more in the Tea Party camp than with his audience. He said "everything is on the table" in order to reduce the nation's debt - a bow to Wall Street and big business pragmatists. But in the next breath he ruled out tax increases.
Boehner says he won't allow the US to default on its obligations - exactly what the Street wants to hear. But then he insists on tying the debt-ceiling vote to a deficit-reduction deal. "The cuts should be greater than the accompanying increase in debt authority the president has given. We should be talking about cuts of trillions, not just millions."
Boehner knows the only way to get cuts of this magnitude without increasing taxes on the rich (or cutting defense - something else the GOP wouldn't think of) is to make mincemeat out of Medicare and Medicaid, slash education and infrastructure, and kill off most of everything else people of moderate means depend on.
In other words, Boehner's conditions are just another version of the Paul Ryan plan House Republicans approved last month - the same plan that brought howls at recent Republican town meetings. Democrats will never agree to it, nor should they. Nor will the rest of America.
And that means no agreement to increase the debt ceiling.
Boehner is siding with the Tea Partiers. Wall Street and big business hold the purse strings in the GOP but the Tea Partiers are now the ground troops. Boehner and his GOP colleagues figure Wall Street and big business will stake them in any event. They need Tea Partiers to get out the vote in 2012. And they're afraid angry Tea Partiers will get out the vote against them in their own primaries.
But Boehner is playing with fire. If the debt ceiling isn't raised and the financial system begins to collapse, the GOP loses not only Wall Street and big business. It loses everyone who's still sane.
Robert Reich is Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley. He has served in three national administrations, most recently as secretary of labor under President Bill Clinton. He has written thirteen books, including "The Work of Nations," "Locked in the Cabinet," "Supercapitalism" and his latest book, "AFTERSHOCK: The Next Economy and America's Future." His 'Marketplace' commentaries can be found on publicradio.com and iTunes.
|
|
|
Democrats, Seduced by Secret Dollars |
|
|
Sunday, 08 May 2011 19:25 |
|
Excerpt: "A political system built on secret, laundered money will inevitably lead toward an increased culture of influence and corruption. Democrats would attract more support as a principled party that refused to follow the Republicans down that dark alley."
Doris 'Granny D' Haddock, with Senators John McCain and Russ Feingold in Washington DC, 03/19/01. (photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Democrats, Seduced by Secret Dollars
By The New York Times | Editorial
08 May 11
 ast year several pro-Republican advocacy groups degraded the Congressional elections by spending at least $138 million in secret donations on advertisements. The public did not know which lobbying interests gave money, or how much, or what they would demand in return. But the donations became a significant factor in the Republican gains in the House and the Senate.
Now several prominent Democrats are abandoning the high ground and have decided to raise millions of their own secret dollars. They have promised they will again try to pass a law preventing this secrecy if they win. (They were stymied in an earlier attempt by a Republican Senate filibuster.) Whatever they gain in money, they stand to lose far more by giving up principles that President Obama and party leaders once claimed to cherish.
Bill Burton, who until February was Mr. Obama's deputy press secretary, said last week that he would help lead a group called Priorities USA, which will raise unlimited money from undisclosed sources to aid in the president's re-election campaign. The initial money will come from the Service Employees International Union and Jeffrey Katzenberg, the Hollywood producer, but more will inevitably begin to flow in from other unions and wealthy Democrats.
Mr. Obama has long claimed to champion transparency and denounced the secret-money sluice operated by Republicans last year as a "threat to democracy." As he said in October, "The American people deserve to know who's trying to sway their elections, and you can't stand by and let the special interests drown out the voices of the American people." Last year, speaking for the administration, Mr. Burton called for a "bright light" to shine on the shadowy groups.
The White House says the president has not changed his view, but somehow he no longer seems to recognize Mr. Burton as the man who was recently a close aide. "We don't control outside groups," said Jay Carney, Mr. Obama's press secretary. "These are not people working for the administration."
Mr. Burton now says he does not like the campaign finance rules, which the Supreme Court helped create, but is unwilling to cede the advantage to the Republicans. "The laws we have are not the ones we wish we had," he said. "But if you want to change the direction of the car, you have to have your hands on the steering wheel."
It is true that a group founded by the Republican strategist Karl Rove has said it would raise $120 million for 2012, and another set up by the Koch brothers, conservative activists and industrialists, will raise at least $88 million. But Mr. Obama managed to raise the staggering sum of $750 million in 2008. And though he abandoned the public finance system to do it - possibly damaging it permanently - he at least disclosed all of his donors.
If the president stood up and publicly told Mr. Burton to end his effort, that would probably be the end of it. But he has not done so. The White House is clearly worried it will have trouble collecting big checks from Wall Street and other business interests for the re-election campaign, and has decided the political end justifies the unsavory means. At the very least, he and other Democratic leaders could demand that the Priorities group raise its money through an affiliate, Priorities USA Action, which can collect unlimited funds but must disclose its donors.
A political system built on secret, laundered money will inevitably lead toward an increased culture of influence and corruption. Democrats would attract more support as a principled party that refused to follow the Republicans down that dark alley.
|
|
The Republican Plan With Lipstick |
|
|
Saturday, 30 April 2011 10:23 |
|
Intro: "Republicans figure that if they can't sell the pig, they'll just put lipstick on it and find some suckers who will think it's something else. That's the proposal emerging in the Senate from Republican Bob Corker of Tennessee and also Democrat Claire McCaskill of Missouri. It would get the deficit down not by raising taxes on the rich but by capping federal spending. If Congress failed to stay under the cap, the budget would be automatically cut."
Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)
The Republican Plan With Lipstick
By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog
30 April 11
 epublicans figure that if they can't sell the pig, they'll just put lipstick on it and find some suckers who will think it's something else.
That's the proposal emerging in the Senate from Republican Bob Corker of Tennessee and also Democrat Claire McCaskill of Missouri. It would get the deficit down not by raising taxes on the rich but by capping federal spending.
If Congress failed to stay under the cap, the budget would be automatically cut.
According to an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the McCaskill/Corker plan would require $800 billion of cuts in 2022 alone. That's the equivalent of eliminating Medicare entirely, or the entire Department of Defense.
Obviously the Defense Department wouldn't disappear, so what would go? Giant cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, education, and much of everything else Americans depend on.
It's the Republican plan with lipstick. It would have the same exact result. But by disguising it with caps and procedures, Republicans can avoid saying what they're intending to do.
The McCaskill/Corker spending cap would also make it impossible for government to boost the economy in recessions. Which would mean even higher unemployment, lasting longer.
Other Senate Dems are showing interest in the lipsticked pig, including West Virginia's Joe Manchin. Not surpringly, Joe Lieberman is on board.
But don't be fooled, and don't let anyone else be. McCaskill/Corker is the same Republican pig.
Robert Reich is Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley. He has served in three national administrations, most recently as secretary of labor under President Bill Clinton. He has written thirteen books, including "The Work of Nations," "Locked in the Cabinet," "Supercapitalism" and his latest book, "AFTERSHOCK: The Next Economy and America's Future." His 'Marketplace' commentaries can be found on publicradio.com and iTunes.
|
|
ast your minds back to November. Barack Obama had received his "shellacking" in the midterm elections, as the Republicans regained a majority in the House of Representatives and seized control of 29 of the 50 state governorships. It was the worst midterm defeat for the Democrats since 1938. Just a week earlier the president's approval ratings had fallen to a record low of 37%.
