Wisdom about Fools

In a previous post, this blog stated:

Peggy Noonan has written recently that the country has reached an “existential challenge” regarding the debt ceiling, yet our leaders in Washington choose to dither instead of engaging in order to resolve this impending crisis. Past precedent is not promising. Democrats view cuts in Medicare spending as an issue they can club the opposition with while the Republicans, led by the Tea Party and Grover Norquist, stand as an immovable object.


Click here to see who gets paid.

Choice facing our citizenry: individual hardship or collective catastrophe.


It’s not brain surgery – it’s American politics and documented history. John McCain referred to Bush administration spending as that of a “drunken sailor”. The facts are clear: the republicans are railing against a situation that they themselves created. The Bush tax cuts nearly failed congress. Cheney was the lone tiebreaker. Republicans funded two wars and a subscription drug benefit on money borrowed from the Chinese, and now they’re pissed off about it because the current president happens to be a democrat. It’s as simple as that. If the president was a republican, they’d continue to borrow, spend and cut taxes for the rich just as they did under Bush. It’s incredibly naive to think otherwise.

Vaughn, WA

From the Seattle Times

Columnist David Brooks corroborates this conclusion which was based on the simple premise that self-interest, posturing for re-election, prevails in Washington while the common good walks. The hour is late.

The Road Not Taken

Published: July 18, 2011

Over the past months, Republicans enjoyed enormous advantages. Opinion polls showed that voters are eager to reduce the federal debt, and they want to do it mostly but not entirely through spending cuts.

There was a Democratic president eager to move to the center. He floated certain ideas that would be normally unheard of from a Democrat. According to widespread reports, White House officials talked about raising the Medicare eligibility age, cutting Social Security by changing the inflation index, freezing domestic discretionary spending and offering to pre-empt the end of the Bush tax cuts in exchange for a broad tax-reform process.

The Democratic offers were slippery, and President Obama didn’t put them in writing. But John Boehner, the House speaker, thought they were serious. The liberal activists thought they were alarmingly serious. I can tell you from my reporting that White House officials took them seriously.

The combined effect would have been to reduce the size of government by $3 trillion over a decade. That’s a number roughly three times larger than the cost of the Obama health care law. It also would have brutally fractured the Democratic Party.

But the Republican Party decided not to pursue this deal, or even seriously consider it. Instead what happened was this: Conservatives told themselves how steadfast they were being for a few weeks. Then morale crumbled.

This week, Republicans will probably pass a balanced budget Constitutional amendment that has zero chance of becoming law. Then they may end up clinging to a no más Senate compromise. This proposal would pocket cuts that have already been agreed on, and it would eliminate leverage for future cuts and make them less likely.

It could be that this has been a glorious moment in Republican history. It could be that having persuaded independents that they are a prudent party, Republicans will sweep the next election. Controlling the White House and Congress, perhaps they will have the guts to cut Medicare unilaterally, reform the welfare state and herald in an era of conservative greatness.

But it’s much more likely that Republicans will come to regret this missed opportunity. So let us pause to identify the people who decided not to seize the chance to usher in the largest cut in the size of government in American history. They fall into a few categories:

The Beltway Bandits. American conservatism now has a rich network of Washington interest groups adept at arousing elderly donors and attracting rich lobbying contracts. For example, Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform has been instrumental in every recent G.O.P. setback. He was a Newt Gingrich strategist in the 1990s, a major Jack Abramoff companion in the 2000s and he enforced the no-compromise orthodoxy that binds the party today.

Norquist is the Zelig of Republican catastrophe. His method is always the same. He enforces rigid ultimatums that make governance, or even thinking, impossible.

The Big Government Blowhards. The talk-radio jocks are not in the business of promoting conservative governance. They are in the business of building an audience by stroking the pleasure centers of their listeners.

They mostly give pseudo Crispin’s Day speeches to battalions of the like-minded from the safety of the conservative ghetto. To keep audience share, they need to portray politics as a cataclysmic, Manichaean struggle. A series of compromises that steadily advance conservative aims would muddy their story lines and be death to their ratings.

The Show Horses. Republicans now have a group of political celebrities who are marvelously uninterested in actually producing results. Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann produce tweets, not laws. They have created a climate in which purity is prized over practicality.

The Permanent Campaigners. For many legislators, the purpose of being in Congress is not to pass laws. It’s to create clear contrasts you can take into the next election campaign. It’s not to take responsibility for the state of the country and make it better. It’s to pass responsibility onto the other party and force them to take as many difficult votes as possible.

All of these groups share the same mentality. They do not see politics as the art of the possible. They do not believe in seizing opportunities to make steady, messy progress toward conservative goals. They believe that politics is a cataclysmic struggle. They believe that if they can remain pure in their faith then someday their party will win a total and permanent victory over its foes. They believe they are Gods of the New Dawn.

Fortunately, there are still practical conservatives in the G.O.P., who believe in results, who believe in intelligent compromise. If people someday decide the events of the past weeks have been a debacle, then practical conservatives may regain control.


About Jerry Frey

Born 1953. Vietnam Veteran. Graduated Ohio State 1980. Have 5 published books. In the Woods Before Dawn; Grandpa's Gone; Longstreet's Assault; Pioneer of Salvation; Three Quarter Cadillac
This entry was posted in Politics and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Wisdom about Fools

  1. smog says:

    The issue is spending. The vague cuts, presented by the president, don’t involve any specifics. He is posturing about 4 trillion or 2 trillion dollar cuts, but his proposed spending his far higher than his cutting, which leaves an even higher deficit. Keynesian economics doesn’t work.

    The voting block that will decide the future of this country are the young that put this craziness in power. Don’t make the same mistake twice.

  2. usaproud1234 wrote, in response to JerryFrey:

    I think the Tea Party portion of the Republican party is the game changer in business as usual. Unless there is significant movement in REDUCING spending there will be more moderate republican Representatives and Moderate Republican Senators replaced during the next election cycle. How many liberal spending democrats fare will be at stake as well, although many won’t face viable competition outside of their party. Unfortunately, in today’s global economy we need to make sure we are living within our means and collecting all the revenue we now should be. One area which has so many cracks revenues fall through is the “subcontractor” payments made without any taxes being withheld and usually going unpaid. No Social security, no medicaid etc. No mystery why those systems are going broke!! The republicans want to keep that for the “greedy small businesses” AND the democrats want to keep it for “the little guys”. Both are wrong and driven by Political influences when they need to just do what is right and fair for all those of us who work and pay our taxes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


3 + = ten

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>