They’ve been keeping Michael Steele in a bunker for several weeks now, and the minute he surfaces and opens his mouth something stupid comes out of it as usual, then they walk it back.
Breaking News
Oprah Quitting TV Show In 2011
Michael Steele Flip Flops On Palin 2012 In Hours
July 7th, 2009
38 Comments
Michael Steele is still alive?
Well, stupid in terms of parroting the message the party base wants him to. Not stupid in terms of stating the blistering effing obvious.
Steele is really glad to have Ensign, Sanford and Palin steal all the incompetent GOP spotlight. For a while there it was his head on the block. I guess they’ll keep him. How long is his term, 2 or 4 years?
This is definitely a foot-in-mouth moment for Michael Steele and totally expected, but the thing that it tells me about the current Republican party is that they are in the woods with respect to message control. A little of this is to be expected given that they no longer have the presidency to fall behind, but they’ve been acting like Democrats lately.
Here’s the deal: somebody, somewhere is going to take the helm of the party in the next couple years. I don’t know when and I don’t know how, but it will happen. That person is going to rule over the party and the party apparatus with the kind of discipline that characterized the party in the past and then they will be a force to be reckoned with. Until that happens, let’s laugh at the clowns.
Or there could be a split between the “conservative” GOP (who happily bloated the Fed and the deficit for eight years under Bush) and the Jesus/Palin freaks.
Not saying it’s going to happen, but I think it’s a possibility. Even during the dark ages of 2001-2005 for the Dems, you still had up-and-comers and dependable stalwarts (off the top of my head, Feingold, Obama, Biden).
Who does the GOP have in their stable these days? When a washed up adulterer like Newt Gingrich is taken seriously for 2012, you know you’re fucked.
I’ll grant that Romney looks good on TV, but he’s incapable of winning the party nomination since the fundies will murder him because of his Mormon background. Not to mention that there’s plenty of video of him defending a woman’s right to choose.
So I’m more sanguine about all of this than you are. Yes I’m enjoying the hell out of the train-wreck that is the GOP/movement conservatism, but I’m not convinced they’ll ever recover.
Jaim, that is a naive view. There is no more split between the factions of the Republican party than there is among Democrats. There are also a whole host of possible future party leaders. Here’s my short list: Mittster, Meg Whitman, Jeb Bush, Charlie Crist, Paul Ryan, Tom Campbell.
The problem right now is that the people out in front of the cameras are clowns, so the impression they give is of a clown party, but the message still matters to a substantial chunk of Americans. Once there is an effective messenger and an effective rallying cry, their resurgence will be complete.
“Here’s my short list: Mittster, Meg Whitman, Jeb Bush, Charlie Crist, Paul Ryan, Tom Campbell.”
Half the party hates Mitt Romney and Charlie Crist. Jeb Bush has a name problem, to say the least. Meg Whitman is like Mitt, only with less upside. I would have to wiki Paul Ryan and Tom Campbell to know exactly who they are.
“The problem right now is that the people out in front of the cameras are clowns…”
Now that’s an understatement.
“There is no more split between the factions of the Republican party than there is among Democrats.”
Excuse me? The GOP is a virtual circular firing squad these days. Don’t do what Chairman Limbaugh says, you are excommunicated.
Even Dick Cheney suggested that Colin Powell is no longer a Republican.
Dems will find a way to screw things up, but this is truly a historical low for the GOP. I think they’ll probably recover eventually, but a party split is still a possibility.
As mentioned, Romney is DOA. The fundies won’t allow it, just like the sunk him for 2008. Jeb Bush? Long-shot. Just remind people of how shitty things got under his brother. Crist? He’s already being sunk by his own party for not being “conservative” enough.
“Once there is an effective messenger and an effective rallying cry, their resurgence will be complete.”
“Once Santa Claus arrives at my house, I will get lots of presents.”
The GOP is very much in a purity of essence phase right now. That means people who would be good at bringing them back into the mainstream, like Charlie Crist, are in danger of losing primaries. My guess is that in the near time (between now and 2012) the party will come down in 2 camps: The Jesus Camp, led by a Palin-type and the Wall St Camp, led by a Romney-type. There is someone that could unify those two branches of the party and has the resume to be a serious candidate. The problem is his last name is Bush – Jeb. Otherwise those two factions will fight it out leading to a likely loss vs. President Obama.
Jaim/Oliver, you are reading your own press clippings. I could have told you in 2004 that there was no way that the Democrats would ever get off the canvas. There was just too much of a rift between neo-liberal economists and traditional Democratic strongholds like labor and protectionists. Those fissures are in the background right now, but they will re-emerge. When things are bad with a party, they tend to look terminal. They aren’t.
I’m not suggesting the GOP is gone for good (although there is a small chance of a “third party” split via Palin, and this wasn’t the case for Dems in 2004 despite much consternation). I do think it’s clear that they need to rehabilitate themselves and to do this will require a moderate (like O.W. suggests). Problem is, moderates are anathema to them right now. The longer they put off reforming themselves, the better for America (and my funny bone).
Sure, they’ll be back, but it can’t be as the party of Limbaugh. And it won’t happen by 2012 barring a 9/11-level event, god forbid.
Jaim, I suspect that, like Oliver, your frame of reference is a bit too narrow, probably owing to youth and a lack of historical insight.
Let me just say this: there are likely to be some negative economic consequences associated with stimulus money and increasingly large, unbalanced budgets. A common outcome is inflation. A common reaction from an independent Federal Reserve could be a tightening of the money supply. A common political reaction is an economic reaction of the disaffected, which in the case of highly inflationary times, can be a cross-section of moneyed interests, fixed income earners and the working poor. It is not hard to put together a number of scenarios that would enable an easy transition for an on-message Republican, and by no means does it need to come from a moderate angle. Rather, it could just as easily come from a staunch free marketeer.
zadura: “Jaim/Oliver, you are reading your own press clippings. I could have told you in 2004 that there was no way that the Democrats would ever get off the canvas.”
And I would have said you were on crack.
The Democrats barely lost 2004. For them to come out on top, all they needed was one major error by the Republicans, or a few minor errors in short order.
They got both. … And then some.
Oh yeah, they got someone at the top (Dean) who knew what it took to win elections by fighting for progressive causes, instead of pretending to be Republicans.
“There was just too much of a rift between neo-liberal economists and traditional Democratic strongholds like labor and protectionists. Those fissures are in the background right now, but they will re-emerge.”
What are you talking about? This wasn’t an issue in 2004. The issue was spineless leadership.
“When things are bad with a party, they tend to look terminal. They aren’t.”
Do a little research. Find out how long ago it was when the Democrats were as small a minority in the House of Representatives and the Senate.
It hasn’t been this bad for the Democrats in decades.
In just two elections, the Republicans lost 15 Senate seats and 54 Representatives.
And the leadership thinks the problem is they are not extreme enough.
zadura: “Let me just say this: there are likely to be some negative economic consequences associated with stimulus money and increasingly large, unbalanced budgets.”
Two problems with your theory.
First of all, it assumes that people will blame Obama and not accept that he inherited an economy that was a mess. This is not a safe assumption.
Secondly, it assumes people will have forgotten about the massive deficits brought on by George W. Bush’s tax cuts.
C S S: And here’s what’s wrong with your theory. As late as July 4, Pres Obama was talking about “problems being kicked down the road”. Sooner or later, people will notice that either he, Pres Obama, is kicking those very same problems down the road, or that those problems were “kicked down the road” by Democrats and Republicans alike, before him.
Second, when the inevitable inflation occurs after the Fed increases the money supply, the people will wish they had the increased withholding and subsequent tax refunds that a tax cut would bring.
You see, most people don’t think like Democrats (i.e., Tax cuts + Unchanged spending = Increased deficits). No, they think like Republicans (i.e., Wages + Tax cuts = More money in my pocket).
Obama just passed the largest tax cut in American history.
But he passed it for the middle class, Jaim. Doesn’t count as a tax cut.
“I’m sorry! I didn’t mean it!”-Steele to mouth-breathers
Sending an additional check to benefit recipients is not a tax cut, anymore than handing a quarter to everyone who crosses over a bridge on a Monday morning a toll reduction’
Damn, Jaim, I was born in the afternoon – not yesterday afternoon .
Frank DiSalle: “Sending an additional check to benefit recipients is not a tax cut, anymore than handing a quarter to everyone who crosses over a bridge on a Monday morning a toll reduction’”
Are you claiming most middle class people don’t pay taxes?
“Damn, Jaim, I was born in the afternoon – not yesterday afternoon.”
It’s a shame you were born at all.
Frank: “You see, most people don’t think like Democrats (i.e., Tax cuts + Unchanged spending = Increased deficits). No, they think like Republicans (i.e., Wages + Tax cuts = More money in my pocket).”
Good god, you are a stupid, stupid man.
George W. Bush cuts taxes to the richest of the rich while increasing spending, but you think people will blame Obama for trying to restart a failed economy.
When do you think this will happen?
I want dates, so when you are wrong, I can point to this prediction and tell you the shut the fuck up.
Here’s what you said back in March egarding the stimulus,CSS:
“there are already signs of hope, including people being hired thanks to stimulus money.
I remember one of the right-wing talking points was that the stimulus spending would take too long to kick it. This has been proven false.”
That has been proven TRUE. You have been proven a know-it-all idiot who in actuality knows very little.
So if failed predictions were reasons for shutting the fuck up and you had even the slightest bit of honor, YOU are the first person who should shut the fuck up.
Are you claiming most middle class people don’t pay taxes?
No.
You know what your problem is, Strowbridge? You present the evidence that you should be insulted before you insult anyone. If you ever demonstrated that you had some alternative explanation for things, or perhaps some evidence not previously presented that you were correct, and the other person incorrect, that might have some worth.
But to follow a statement that someone is stupid with a statement of your own that is stupendously stupid is really a tragic error.
It’s a shame you were born at all.
Spoken like a true 21st Century liberal, who appreciates the value of every human being. You would have been right at home in 1930’s Germany.
Pathetic
The balance of power is decided by non-ideological voters – both swing voters, and voters who usually vote for the same party when they come out to vote, but aren’t committed enough to be reliable.
In a two party system, when these voters are disillusioned with the way the party in power governs, they only have one place to go (most of time), so writing the obituary of either of the two main parties is always premature as it assumes the party in ascendancy will never disappoint the public at large.
At some time in the future, the Democrats will be vulnerable to arguments that it once again time for a change – but the Republicans will need to be able to convince enough American’s that they are capable of competently effecting that change in order to shift the balance of power in congress or the Whitehouse. It is still early, but there is very little chance of that happening in 2010 (even if the Republicans could get their shit together by then), and 2012 looks out of reach as well (given that incumbent Presidents of both parties are more likely to increase their margin of victory than to be defeated when seeking re-election).
The Republicans have five years until the 2014 midterms to find a unifying and resonant message, and another two years beyond that to find a standard bearer capable of uniting the party and reaching beyond it. Even this does not assure victory, but five to seven years is a long time in politics and the issues that will drive those election cycles are currently unknowable, but it’s as least as likely that the Republicans will be focused and united by then as it is they continue to marginalize themselves while bickering over the future of the party and rallying behind personalities who all but guarantee minority party status.
Dennis the Bigot: “So if failed predictions were reasons for shutting the fuck up and you had even the slightest bit of honor, YOU are the first person who should shut the fuck up.”
Except I predicted things would bottom out at the end of 2009 or the beginning of 2010.
We haven’t reached the end of 2009 / the beginning of 2010, so you can’t judge my predictions.
Me: “Are you claiming most middle class people don’t pay taxes?”
Frank: “No.”
Then explain what you meant when you said…
“Sending an additional check to benefit recipients is not a tax cut, anymore than handing a quarter to everyone who crosses over a bridge on a Monday morning a toll reduction’”
Me: “I remember one of the right-wing talking points was that the stimulus spending would take too long to kick it. This has been proven false.”
Dennis the Bigot: “That has been proven TRUE.”
Uhhh… You realize the money is being spent right now. You do know that, right? In fact, stimulus money was being spent almost immediately, and BEFORE INCOME TAX REFUNDS WENT OUT.
On the other hand, the Right-wingers claimed it would take too long for the money to be spend. In fact, John Boehner recently claimed no contracts had been awarded in Ohio.
This was a big fucking lie.
“You have been proven a know-it-all idiot who in actuality knows very little.”
How ironic.
I guess that’s why we’re at 9.5% unemployment when Obama’s budget people told us it wouldn’t go above 8%, because everything is kicking in.
The irony is that your comeback makes no sense. Just like your original statement in March when you were bragging that it was all coming together just like they drew it up.
That’s the irony.
Black people who vote for Obama aren’t “real” voters, just like middle and working class people who pay taxes aren’t “real” tax payers. Only tax cuts for George Soros and Paris Hilton are “real” tax cuts.
Welcome to GOP logic ca. 2009.
CSS: “The Democrats barely lost 2004.” Well, that’s weird because I seem to remember off the top of my head that there were more R’s than D’s in 2004 than 2002 in both the Senate and House. I also remember that Bush the popular vote by 2-3% where he had lost the popular vote in 2000. I also remember a lot of articles/books/academic papers pointing to the period of Republican hegemony. Please let me know the facts that support this assertion.
I am not here to tell you the sky is falling, but I am here to tell you that all of this triumphalism about Democratic majorities as far as the eye can see are “short-sighted.”
Dennis the Bigot: “I guess that’s why we’re at 9.5% unemployment when Obama’s budget people told us it wouldn’t go above 8%, because everything is kicking in.”
Wouldn’t go above 8%? What the fuck are you talking about?
I think you are mixing up the ’stress test’ vs. the budget.
“The irony is that your comeback makes no sense.”
The problem is you are fucking stupid and are mixing up two different things.
And I think you’re an idiot who doesn’t know his ass from a hole in the ground, Strowbridge. You’re the only guy here who would call someone else fucking stupid without doing any homework to know just what he was talking about before he started writing.
“Where Are the Jobs” From the Stimulus?
“The president and Democrats in Congress claim this spending binge is necessary to put Americans back to work,” House Republican leader John Boehner said Saturday in the Republican radio and Internet address. “They promised unemployment would not rise above 8 percent if their trillion-dollar stimulus was passed.”
Dennis the Bigot: “‘Where Are the Jobs’ From the Stimulus?”
You are quoting Boehner? The person who admitted he was wrong when he said no contracts had been awarded yet.
You are quoting Boehner as proof that the Democrats lied.
Could you find a less reliable source?
Can’t we all just get along?
A less reliable source, you say? How about Christina Romer, from when she prepared the report. Given the predictions, yes, a less reliable source.
In any event, here it is:
——————-
The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan
Christina Romer- Chair-Nominee-Designate, Council of Economic Advisers
Jared Bernstein- Office of the Vice President Elect
———————
Scroll down to page 5 of the pdf. Straight from the horse’s mouth, Strowbridge. Unemployment projected not to go above 8% with the stimulus plan.
If you had something to refute Boehner, you’d not only know about it from liberal blogs screaming at the top of their lungs about so blatant a lie, you’d also have posted it here intead of just scoffing at him with no evidence to refute him.
Always the dishonest one. Exposed fraudulence, once again.
The whole economic “Stimulus Package” is based on the faulty premise exposed by Bastiat in the story of the glazier and the broken window. It would be nice if it were only a zero-sum game. Unfortunately, since the spending is built on a deficit, it will prove to be superinflationary. Once again, the debtors will be rewarded, and the creditors punished.
Since the right wingers want to talk about the disastrous Republican economy…
The 2007 Great Recession is a direct result of right wing economic fictions.
The stimulus to repair the Republican damage to the economy was inadequate and lefty economists said as much when it was first being discussed.
Krugman, Baker, Stiglitz and other near-prescient economists were quite clear that the economy was much worse than was discussed in the corporate media and they were quite clear that a much larger stimulus was needed to get the economy back on track.
The Republicans damage to both our American economy AND the global economy is in some ways worse than the Republicans infliceted upon US during the Republican Great Depression.
The only difference is that we had hindsight enough to be able to respond better to the Republican Economic Disaster.
Even the Republicans in September of 2008 understood enough to know that the only way to save capitalism was to engage in radical government intervention.
Republican Bush nationalized (communism) many large banks and insurance companies.
Republican Bush used massive government/taxpayer money to boost the economy (socialism).
But that’s only forestalled US from sinking into another Republican Great Depression.
Further economic stimulus is essential to keep US out of the economic hole the Republicans have been digging US into these last 30 years.
GOP logic: Let’s criticize Obama for trying to fix the roof, rather than blame our own party for blowing huge fucking holes in it in the first place.
You guys don’t deserve to ever govern again. For the sake of America, hopefully you never will.