The Technocrat

by bk

With the country on the precipice of economic disaster and just when we need most to increase public spending, Republicans have suddenly found their long lost “fiscal conservatism,” I present two editorial cartoons that nicely sum up how that sounds to me.

(click here to view)

Adam Zyglis The Buffalo News Feb 11, 2009 EditorialCartoonists.com

(click here to view)

Mike Keefe Denver Post Feb 12, 2009 EditorialCartoonists.com

So deficits for war with Iraq and tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, totally fine but running deficits to try and prevent the complete failure of our economy, not allowed.

Nice priorities, GOP.

Update:

Thought this quote from Andrew Sullivan was very apres pos,

“A Republican party that added more than $30 trillion to the future debt in a time of boom has no credible answer but raw partisanship for opposing $800 billion in the swiftest downturn in employment since the Great Depression. That’s the bottom line. The party that campaigned for eight years on the principle that “deficits don’t matter” has no good faith standing to oppose a measure that provides the minimum to ensure some kind of bottom in the looming depression. To take their fiscal conservatism seriously at this point and in this crisis is to engage in some kind of instant amnesia.” <link>

by bk

What’s the difference between the McCain Campaign and the Titanic?

The Titanic had a band.

After the MI decision, I think it’s time to start watching for the rats jumping ship. That is a sure sign of a boat that’s going down. I know we’re not over the finish line yet but desperation has a way of feeding on itself and I think we’re approaching that point faster than we may realize, so it’s just a matter of looking for the tell tale signs.

Here is the video that inspired my post: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWCGzS7E_IM

by db

And she can speak fairly well, attacking all the while. That’s a good thing.

Because if she has time to attack (both the media and the Democratic ticket), that must mean she’s not the victim the McCain campaign had been suggesting she was over the last four days. And that must mean she can handle it when we attack her lightweight experience and hypocrisy.

Fair is fair, Governor.

by bk

So pardon me for calling the election on September 2 but within the last day the first polls showing Obama with 50%+ started showing up. I’ve long held that lots of America’s choose not to decide until after Labor Day. They can’t be bothered to, it’s just not in their blood like us partisan types. Every cycle just as the decidedly undecides starting tuning in to make their decision they use two events to judge the candidates – the convention acceptance speech and the Presidential candidate’s first executive decision on VP candidate. Some of the more serious undecides will watch and listen to everything, others will judge it by how others in and out of the media seems to perceive it. Depending on the year, the undecides may make the difference in a close election or simply pad the margin of victory. Ultimately, I believe turning out the base is the most important thing and by all measures the Democratic base is more enthusiastic this year than the Republican base so I’ve felt for awhile Obama would win and I’ve been looking to the undecides to provide the margin of victory. But that hasn’t been showing up in the polls yet so I’ve seen and heard a lot of hand wringing among Dems I know. It’s a natural reaction to how the last couple of elections have unfolded and I’m sure it will last until Obama takes the oath. But when the story of the 2008 Presidential Election is written, I believe the turning point will be fully encapsulated within less than 24 hours, the night of August 25th and the morning of August 26th.

More Americans tuned in for Barack Obama’s speech than tuned in for the Opening Ceremonies of the Olympics and the American Idol finales. He spoke to those who could be convinced, the 70%+ who believe we’re heading in the wrong direction. And they got a speech that knocked down the patriotism attacks while making the attackers look petty, they got policy proposals and soaring and flawless rhetoric, and they got to see a man they could believe could be President. The expectations were high and he still managed to surpass them; he passed the test.

The very next morning, the other shoe dropped. McCain had named Sarah Palin as his running mate and across America a collective, “WHO?” rang out. Over the course of the next 2 days, it became obvious that McCain’s team hadn’t done the most basic of vetting. The choice was instinctual and a political sop to the base. In another year, that might have been okay but not considering recent history like the rush to war and the move to privatize social security, and recalling Republican appointments like Michael Brown, Harriet Meirs, and Alberto Gonzales, it was all too familiar and in 1 fell swoop it undercut McCain’s main argument against Obama and re-inforced Obama’s main line of attack on McCain, that a McCain Presidency would be more of the same.

There are only really two parts to the VP decision as far as the voting public is concerned. Number 1 is the heartbeat question. Are we comfortable with this person being a heartbeat from the Presidency? And number 2 and more importantly, what the choice says about the Presidential candidate. Context is very important. Quayle was an obvious sop to the right as the right was starting to really flex its muscles. But he had been in Congress for 12 years and the Senate for the previous 6 and Bush was a sporty, healthy WASP. McCain is a 72 year who has twice battled skin cancer and Palin is the 2 year governor of Alaska with prior experience as mayor of a town of 7,000. Barack Obama’s choice of Sen. Joe Biden was a serious choice who could easily step in to the Presidency at a moment’s notice. Barack passed. Outside the 28 Percenters, those that absolutely can’t see past their partisan blinders and still support Bush, John McCain’s choice was clearly questionable and no one believes she’s ready to be a heartbeat from the Presidency. So on the first test of a President McCain, McCain failed and he failed the same as Bush, playing to the base and playing politics with the future of America.

On the night of Thursday August 25th, Senator Barack Obama showed America a vision of its future. On the morning of Friday August 26th, Senator John McCain showed America a vision of its past, the past 8 years. Within that short time, John McCain lost the election and Barack Obama won it.

At least, that’s how I believe it will be remembered.

by bk
I saw a comment on TPM by KD that suggested that if Obama hadn’t stopped the 527s, he’d be in a better position and it got me thinking about whether that’s right. I think KD is wrong and we’re actually better off so far in 2008 without the 527s because it’s harder to fight a proxy battle.

McCain’s attacks are coming from McCain not some third party “Citizens Against Celebrity” group, which is actually comprised of 5 billionaire Republicans. It’s his attack ad not some citizens exercising their First Amendment right so he can’t disown the attacks while allowing the attack to continue. Thus, he can’t enjoy the benefit from going negative without taking the hit for having done it himself. This is why I think we’ve seen the polls return to about where they were before the celebrity ads started. There was an initial benefit but then the backlash balanced it back out after another week.

Also when the attacks come from McCain directly, Obama’s campaign has only to confront McCain to respond instead of trying to take on a faceless 527. And so they are able to respond with the ads they did which point out 2 hypocrisies – the hypocrisy of the celebrity charge from McCain, of all people,and his hypocrisy in going negative as he so often said he wouldn’t. And because Obama didn’t go negative first, he’s simply responding to McCain’s ads, I believe there will be less backlash for Obama than for McCain.

If that’s the case then this will work out to a net gain for Obama and it will be very much because it wasn’t a 527 group shooting from the woods but rather John McCain, himself, in broad daylight. So everyone knows who did it and Obama has a clear target for returning fire.

by db

When it comes to international travel, I’m the bizarro Barack. Sweat drips from my forehead as I haul tail down some concourse, inevitably the wrong one; I dehydrate with endless cups of bad airport coffee and I’m only over-hydrated when all nearby facilities are closed for cleaning; I check bags the day the conveyors break and don’t when I have a bottle of cologne with me that’s a half-liter too big to scan. Yep, I’m that guy. Sen. Obama: No mess here. This is one presidential candidate who travels well.

I knew this was going to be a well-organized tour. The Obama advance team, from where I sit, has always been stellar: signage in the right place, audience well-positioned, mikes set to the right levels. But a trip through the middle-east and europe is no multi-county tour of Ohio. Plus, with wall-to-wall coverage guaranteed, there was little room for error. Thus far, you could not have asked for a better executed trip.

The icing on the cake, though, has been the McCain’s non-stop carping about, of all things, the media’s supposed infatuation with Obama. Beside the fact it sends a clear-cut signal you have nothing to talk about and are drenched in increasingly visible flop-sweat, it’s just plain sad. What makes it more pathetic and laughable is that it’s coming from John McCain. This is a guy of whom Chris Matthews recently said “We are his base.” That’s right. The media is McCain’s base. No matter how egregious the gaffe, they are always there to skip over the embarrassing moments. No matter how blatant the flip-flop, they crown him with the title “maverick.” It doesn’t matter that even to this day (and I mean that seriously — there were two serious screw-up’s from McCain today both under-reported), they give him every benefit of the doubt. No. That’s not good enough for the McCain people. They decide their coverage isn’t good enough. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

But that’s all good.

Don’t tell the McCain campaign they could be spending this time explaining their plans to get the country out of the economic abyss it’s enjoying or whatever it is that “Dr. Phil” Gramm feels we’re whining about. Nope. Let them go on bashing the media. I’m sure that will help cut through the noise of the million some odd people who will show up to Sen. Obama’s speech in Berlin or the fact the Prime Minister of Iraq pulled the rug out from under their “endless surge” strategy. It may do neither, but at least it would display some seriousness about his positions on the issues and, who knows, it might change some voters’ minds. But do me a favor, don’t tell them that. Tell them it’s all the media’s fault.

by bk

Had enough of these self-righteous Ron Paul supporters? I made the mistake of getting into a discussion with one the other day. After trying to explain that while there are great kernels of truth in what Ron Paul says, the devil is in the details and the details of libertarian philosophy are problematic to say the least. This was the response I got:

“The ten reasons not to vote for Ron Paul that you cite all have positive sides that you fail to mention. When one is against something, the other side is that that person is for something else.

The something else that you fail to mention involves things that appear to be alien to you – things like freedom, liberty, the right to be left alone, protection of our rights, right to property and to use it in any way you see fit that does not interfere with other’s rights, right of contract, right to keep what you earn without government stealing it from you to give it to someone else that is too lazy to earn for themselves, etc, etc.

I work hard every working day, and would truly like to keep what I earn for support of my family. I believe in our Constitution. I believe government should protect my God-given rights and not steal from me. I believe that government shouldn’t be telling me what I must do at the point of a gun.

Your research was done with a very limited point of view. I suggest that you re-assess.

God bless.”

Well I won’t stand being lectured by a Ron Paul fanatic. It’s like a born again Christian getting into a discussions with a theologian and lecturing him. Not that I am some great political scientist, but I didn’t just find religion. I’ve been interested in politics since I was at least 9 years old and I used to do a Jimmy Carter impression. When I went to college, I declared my major of Political Science on the 1st day and never changed it. In fact, I powered through it and added a second major in Government because it’s what I enjoyed studying.

So let’s just say, I went kinda ballistic on the guy. But the plus side is, it ended the discussion and I haven’t heard another word from him. So if you’re wondering what it takes to shut a Ron Paul fan up, here is what worked for me:

“…I was a political science and government policy and procedures double major in college and a political junkie to this day so I know very well what I am talking about. What’s your base of knowledge?

Ron Paul says some true and enticing things about the “Constitution and freedom” and I’m a big fan of the “Constitution and freedom” but those are broad talking points and not the details. When you break down the policy preferences, libertarianism is not a governing philosophy, it is a non-governing philosophy that believes in a weak to non-existent federal government. That is the last thing we need in this modern day and age. Without a strong federal government, we would still have segregated schools, women would be dying from back-alley abortions in 2/3rds of the states, people in rurual areas would have no mail, the Tennesee Valley Authority would never had been created to bring electricity to little town throughout the south, we wouldn’t have the National Institutes of Health conquering polio and small pox and we never would have had the clean air and water acts of the 60′s and 70′s so we would have waited till “the free market” dictated to companies that they should work on polluting less. These are but a few of the thousands of positive things done by the federal government that would never have occurred with Libertarians.

After the current adminstration’s attacks on the Constitution, which I am very concerned about, RonPaul is especially attractive but he’s not the only remedy, he’s just the only one you like.”

by db

Check it. Newt’s out. Like so many other GOPers, he was apparently worried about who was going to keep him in wingtips and tax-deductible first class fares.

by db

Outside of the Beltway cognoscenti is there really anyone who believes the GOP would benefit from the presidential candidacy of Newt Gingrich? Where, exactly, does that group live on the increasingly strained spectrum of that party? Somewhere between the Ron Paul dead-enders and Duncan Hunter xenophobes, I suppose. I will admit, the former Speaker has his moments of lucidity, but these are more often than not trumped, if not sandwiched by, equally idiotic commentary. Other than his interest in remaining on the talking head circuit in the Beltway, what could be motivating his crusade?

Then again, if I were him, I might think I would have a shot with this crew. Let’s run down the line-up, shall we?
- Rudy. Uh, really? I still don’t buy it. There’s opposition research on this guy that would fill an airport hanger. The only reason it hasn’t been deployed by the other tier 1 candidates is because they all believe the same thing I do: He won’t win a single primary of the first four and, therefore, won’t make it to the large east and west coast primary states on 2/5 his staff is apparently convinced will be his salvation. (Slight asterisk on that plan: The GOP delegate allocation formula rewards those states that vote the most reliably Republican with the most delegates. Put another way, those geographically big states may not be so impactful numerically when it comes to counting delegates, Rudy.)
- Romney. In my first week back in Atlanta, I noticed a cover of the Atlanta Business Chronicle pronouncing Romney’s support among the business leaders in the state. Makes sense to me. His Chamber of Commerce booster style seems a nice fit for GA’s “fiscal conservative” Republicans. More than that, though, his seems to be the most consistent, solid campaign of the group. They don’t seem to shift goals wildly, the messaging, while hardly one to make the heart race, is sell-able, and he’s got the look. If the look didn’t matter, why would we have…
- Thompson. You ever see the guy at the meat-market bar around 11:15, Friday night wearing the J.Crew shirt about 10 years too old and a size too tight, the tan line ring around where his wedding ring once was, lamely telling a line that even he doesn’t find convincing to some unappreciative young woman? Well, that guy reminds me of Fred Thompson. Seriously. He just doesn’t seem into it. I have been told his droopy dog delivery style is viewed as Presidential by some, but you gotta have some fire in the belly for this race, my friend. What Thompson will do, however, is provide a decent speed bump for Rudy’s plans in southern climes, specifically South Carolina and Florida. I doubt it will be enough to derail Rudy or secure either state for Thompson, but it may be enough to allow Mitt to slip by.
- McCain. As expected, the press has initiated its “don’t look now, but McCain’s comin’ back!” stories. No. No, he’s not. Sorry. He picked the wrong case on “Deal or No Deal,” the one that opens to read “Surge,” and the banker called. There’s no money left. The Senate will welcome you back with open arms, though, sir.
- Huckabee. Secured himself a veep nod with impressive debate performances and a second-place finish in the IA straw poll (no one else bothered with except him and Mitt). While I think the guy is a savvier pol than he lets on or many give him credit for, I’m a little hard-pressed to come up with a dynamic that would make him the second guy on the ticket. Of course, the GOP line-up is more milquetoast than your average yacht club board meeting so I suppose Arkansas does seem exotic and exciting by comparison.
- … Everyone else. Enh. Sorry, Ron Paul, fans.

So, yeah, maybe Newtmentum is growing.

by bk

The toxicity level in DC has dropped a little bit this week for Boy Genius, the
Architect, Turd Blossom, aka Karl Rove has announced his departure. As expressed in my previous post, I understand and even appreciate politics, which is why I have some respect for Karl Rove. He is a master practitioner of the art of politics however like previous Republican political strategists he has put politics ahead of country and he has practiced politics viciously. Just ask John and Cindy McCain. It’s that vicious style that people most associate with politics without differentiating between Republican or Democratic. For outside the political junkies, all politicians are thought to swim in one dirty pond. So it resonates when Ralph Nadar calls George Bush and Al Gore, Bore and Gush. But Rove is the continuation of the long line of Republican turd blossoms stinking up American politics so that ordinary people can’t stand the stench of it and want no part of it. (Which not coincidental also plays perfectly to their advantage.)

A quick tour of presidential politics in the last 40 years shows Republicans putting politics ahead of country time and time again while they continually wrap themselves in the flag and assail the patriotism of Democrats.

In the summer of 1967, [Kissinger] had acted as one of a series of intermediaries between Washington and Hanoi in a peace initiative codenamed “Pennsylvania”. In the autumn of 1968, he used his contacts with the Johnson Administration to tip-off the Nixon camp about an anticipated breakthrough in the Paris talks, which Nixon feared could cost him the campaign. [link]

William Casey headed up the successful presidential campaign for Ronald Reagan in 1980 and while it has never been proven;

“…in his 1991 book, October Surprise, former NSC staffer Gary Sick alleged that Casey had orchestrated a deal with Iran in 1980 to refrain from releasing the hostages until after the November presidential elections, in order to deny President Carter credit for their possible release. This came to be known as the “October Surprise.” Congress investigated in 1992, but Casey’s role was never thoroughly ascertained since he did not testify, as he had died in 1987.” [link]

After the election, Casey headed up the Reagan transition team. The hostages were released within minutes of Reagan’s inauguration and not a moment before.

In that tradition, it is my contention that we are in Iraq now because Karl Rove saw the political advantage in it after 9/11 provided the opening. I offer no proof. Rove talks to Republican conventions and journalists but not to Congress. He only reveals what he wants us to see so conjecture is the closest we’ll get to the truth.

I believe the reason we are in Iraq right now is because it’s what the neo-con foreign policy people in the admin wanted to do and what the political team thought would win elections. And it took both of those groups to make it happen. Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, and Dick Cheney had wanted to go back to Iraq since Bush 41 had stopped short of Baghdad in 1991. The political apparatus headed by Karl Rove saw it as the way to further rout the Democrats in pursuit of the permanent Republican Majority.

In the wake of 9/11, when some blamed Clinton for failing to get Bin Laden, I informed them that there were open orders to get Bin Laden and obviously it wasn’t that easy or it would have been done. If little ol’ me knew that, you better believe Karl Rove knew it too. And like me, he also knew the deference that American people were going to give Bush in war time. But an uncatchable, nebulous enemy that could disappear into the hills, like they had against the Russians, would only do for so long. So the chance to switch enemies to someone with a country and an army, someone that could be beaten made good political sense to him and he supported it with all the tools as his disposal.

If the policy and political sides hadn’t both lined up so perfectly for our Iraqi misadventure, I don’t believe Bush would have gone forward with it because the only time he’s chosen policy over politics is on immigration. So Rove was let loose with a wartime president to lead the charge in 2002 and 2004. He attacked the patriotism of Democrats, used gay marriage as a wedge issue and won.

But that’s where the success ends. Because the neo-cons pollyanna policy db’s, didn’t bother to learn the difference between Sunni and Shite, didn’t recognize the 1200 years old bloody rift between them, and didn’t appreciate that the Shites would want want revenge after being a repressed majority for 50 years. So instead of a military triumph, we’ve been bogged down in a civil war for 5+ years

So in the desert of Iraq, Karl Rove’s dream of a permanent Republican majority has died. Democrats are now outfundraising and out-polling Republicans on issue after issue and we could be on the verge of a lasting Democratic majority with the WH. And we’ll need it to fix the mess left by the boy genius who elevated an ordinary frat boy with name recognition to an extraordinary office; architect of nothing more than one of the worst Presidential Administrations in the 233 history of our country; polluter of the political waters, Turd Blossom

Stay vigilant though. If history has shown us anything, it’s there’s sure to be another Republican floater coming down the Potomac.