Ezra Klein

Ezra Klein: "I'd suggest some nice Democratic demagoguery on the issue, but alienating the nation's CEO's probably isn't so good for our fundraising"

The Republican Party is the political party of the corporate executive. Corporate executives completely control the politics of the United States, precisely because they are the source of so much fundraising. The Democrats need to wake up to the fact that they cannot simultaneously develop policies, which are good for the country and cater the class of rapacious corporate executives.

Senate: Filibuster Showdown

Senate: Filibuster Showdown: "Boston, Mass.: I read Master of the Senate, a book about LBJ's powerful hold on the Senate during the 1950's and bold as he was, he never even considered tampering with the filibuster. How can the GOP be so audacious?

Charles Babington: It's a terrific book, isn't it? The Republicans say they are being fair, not audacious."

Frist is going to exercise a pure power play, premised as pure power plays always are, on lies. You'd hardly be able to guess it, from this discussion in the Washington Post. This exchange is as close as any in the Q&A to exposing the naked aggression in Frist's plan.

The news media is entirely in the hands of the corporate right-wing, and the Republic is lost.

Oh well.

The Washington Monthly

The Washington Monthly: "Stay tuned for a fusillade of deeply researched stories about allegations of religious desecration by American troops starting in about a week."

Don't hold your breath, Kevin. The Press, you so admired as a youth, is moribund. You said so, yourself.

See Franken, "What in God's Name is Going On?"

" the Coalition Provisional Authority, which we ran, has lost 8.8 billion dollars. By lost, I mean it’s totally unaccounted for. Not only has Congress not "looked into" this $8.8 billion and who might have it now, but it seems that some members are completely unaware that this staggering sum, which was supposed to go toward rebuilding Iraq, is missing. The Sunday morning after the White House Correspondents dinner, I ran into Senator George Allen at a brunch thrown by John McLaughlin and his wife. Allen had never heard of the missing $8.8 billion, or at least that's what he told me. And he's on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Stunned, I went up to Susan Page of USA Today and her husband Carl Lubsdorf of the Dallas Morning News, two veteran Washington political reporters, and told them about Allen’s ignorance of this huge scandal, which has no doubt contributed to hatred for America and the deaths of our troops. There’s less electricity in Iraq now than there was before we invaded Iraq.

Turns out that Page and Lubsdorf had also never heard of the unaccounted-for $8.8 billion. For a moment I thought that maybe I had been imagining things.

Then I spotted my friend Norm Ornstein, scholar from the American Enterprise Institute. "Would you believe it if Norm Ornstein told you about the $8.8 billion?" I asked Susan and Carl.

"Sure."

I brought Norm over, and indeed I had not been imagining things. "It was a huge story," Norm told them.

"Was it in the New York Times?" Carl asked Norm.

"Yes," Norm assured him.

What in God’s name is going on? "

MaxSpeak, You Listen!: CHILE CON BLARNEY

MaxSpeak, You Listen!: CHILE CON BLARNEY: "At the end of the day, SS privatization could be characterized as an exceedingly roundabout effort to accomplish two objectives. I do not necessarily endorse these objectives, nor do I assume they would be fulfilled, but they are:

* a permanent cut in Federal spending

* an opportunity for lower-income persons to buy stock"

Max is a fairly left-leaning economist with a Washington policy group. And, this characterization is typical of why Democrats never get anywhere.

The right answer, Max, is that SS privatization is a scheme for redistributing income away from the poor and middle class and toward the rich and very rich. That's it. It is class-warfare.

Any other characterization is useless B.S.

Cal Thomas: Torture, Good; Democrats, Bad!

Cal Thomas: Modified interrogation tactics: Good news for the enemy: "What's next, instructing our troops to say 'please' and 'thank you'?"

"These people are evil to the core. The only way to protect ourselves is to extract information they might have by whatever means necessary. This war won't be won (at least by our side) if we impose on ourselves restrictions that the terrorists do not impose on themselves."

Yes, ladies and gents, Cal, who would lecture us on "moral relativism" in other circumstances, wants us to adopt the same moral standards as the terrorists. Because it is the only way to "win".

Republicans are the Party of the Wealthy

The Washington Monthly: "Republican presidents produce poor economic performance because they're obsessed with helping the well off. Their focus is on the wealthiest 5%, and the numbers show it. At least 95% of the country does better under Democrats."

Well, duh. But, it is interesting to see that the numbers back up the general impression.

Another interesting point brought out in the numbers is that Republican Administrations are inclined to help out the poor and middle class, IN ELECTION YEARS!

So, people vote their pocketbooks, but have short memories.

Reform? Did someone say, "Reform"?

Reform? Did someone say, "Reform"?

Reform? Did someone say "reform"?
Reform is a response to corruption, and Democrats would have to admit that corruption is a serious problem.
Reform will work as an issue, when, and to the extent, we can make corruption work as an issue. You cannot make reform work without clearly diagnosing the corruption, which reform is to address.
Corruption is the ultimate wedge issue vis a vis the Republicans. Corruption is how we can persuade a significant part of the Republican base that they are being had, that they are getting nothing of substance on social issues, while they are being screwed economically and financially. Authoritarians – and a large portion of Republican voters are authoritarians – are programmed to believe that their leaders (i.e. parents) are competent and well-intentioned, despite all evidence to the contrary. Disabuse them of this assumption in as rude a way as possible, and we may be able to demoralize or turn a small, but significant percentage of authoritarian voters.
And, you cannot diagnose the corruption, if you support it and depend upon it, and are afraid of its progenitors. New Democrats cannot see the corruption inherent in, say, the Bankruptcy Bill, or how it deeply affects the interests of core Democratic constituencies. Nor would I expect New Democrats to embrace critical elements of reform such as corporate governance oversight at the SEC or media ownership at the FCC, for the same basic reasons New Democrats supported the Bankruptcy Bill: they think an American dominated by the Corporate Class is just hunky dory.
The promise of DeLay’s aggression on K Street in support of his permanent Republican majority, and the Kerry fundraising success and the Dean candidacy before it, is the possibility that Democrats can find not just voters, but money somewhere outside the circle of corruption. Without Democrats able to rely on a fundraising base, which is qualitatively different from the corporate management base of the Republican Party, all the campaign reform in the world ain’t goin’ make a bit of difference. The only campaign reform, which will work to root out corruption, would also, and not incidentally, cut off the Republican air supply. Democrats cannot do that if they are breathing the same, friggin’ atmosphere. And, and a lot of Democrats are breathing exactly the same, friggin’ atmosphere as the Republicans.
Real Democratic Reform will have to be very brave, because it will threaten the interests of the powers-that-be. Whether it just seeks to reduce the oxygen flow, or slices the cartoid artery, it will be perceived as life-threatening to a lot of very wealthy, powerful people.
A good test of your own commitment to “Reform” is to ask whether you would support a Democratic commitment to destroy the Corporate Right-Wing Media, through slice-and-dice policies at the FCC and Justice Department Antitrust division. If that’s unthinkable to you, you can murmur “reform” all you like, as you lie back and spread ‘em. Try to enjoy the next 36 years on your political back, heels in the air, but don’t expect to do your country any good.

Obsidian Wings: A Useful Way To Think About Torture

Obsidian Wings: A Useful Way To Think About Torture: "Conservatives don't believe in the infallibility of government agencies and all indications are that the intelligence agencies are more fallible than many. So why would we set up a situation where innocents are likely to be tortured more than the guilty, and which is likely to produce vast amounts of faulty information? Doesn't seem wise. It also doesn't seem right. "

Authoritarians DO believe in the infallibility of their leaders and of institutions under their control, and are perfectly willing to use denial and bullying to maintain their beliefs.

In my typology, authoritarians are a type of conservative.

Torture is a policy favored by authoritarian conservatives. A popular theory suggests that authoritarian conservatives believe in the infallibility of their leaders, as a defense against childhood trauma, to wit, the scary realization that their parents were neither competent nor trustworthy. If so, authoritarian conservatives are really not persuadable on this point. It is part of the appeal of demagoguery that every society has a reliable portion of authoritarians, ready to vote for Bush and to take the job of concentration camp guard.

Unions vs Corporate Power

The Washington Monthly: "Why the continuing demonization of unions from a party that's otherwise so conscientious about building its appeal to the working and middle classes?

It's because unions are the only truly effective check on the sine qua non of modern conservatism: corporate power. For all their faults — and they have plenty, just as corporations do — unions are the only organizations that have the power to bargain effectively for the interests of the middle class. Union power in the private sector began to wane in the 1970s, and it's not a coincidence that this was exactly the same time that middle class wages began to stagnate, CEO pay began to skyrocket, and income inequality began increasing inexorably."

Well, duh.

It is not about ideology, folks. Follow the money. Watch the money.

Marginal Revolution: Grisly game theory: can you avoid torture?

Marginal Revolution: Grisly game theory: can you avoid torture?: "Grisly game theory: can you avoid torture?"

The "experimental" evidence from Abu Ghraib and elsewhere suggest that this is not idle theorizing.