■ One, The Professor calls the Republican Party on its Shermanesque March to the White House, burning everything in its path. A joyful return indeed (my usual emphatic and paragraphic intrusions):
Does anyone remember the American Jobs Act? A year ago President Obama proposed boosting the economy with a combination of tax cuts and spending increases, aimed in particular at sustaining state and local government employment. Independent analysts reacted favorably. For example, the consulting firm Macroeconomic Advisers estimated that the act would add 1.3 million jobs by the end of 2012. ...What some call "cynical" others call something else. More on that below, but first this, from Krugman, in which he proves his point — that these aren't your daddy's policy differences:
But the bill went nowhere, of course, blocked by Republicans in Congress. And now, having prevented Mr. Obama from implementing any of his policies, those same Republicans are pointing to disappointing job numbers and declaring that the president’s policies have failed.
Think of it as a two-part strategy. First, obstruct any and all efforts to strengthen the economy, then exploit the economy’s weakness for political gain. If this strategy sounds cynical, that’s because it is. Yet it’s the G.O.P.’s best chance for victory in November.
[D]o Republicans really believe that government spending is bad for the economy? No.Krugman calls that "weaponized Keynesianism" — the belief that government only creates jobs when those jobs create happy pants for the testosterone crowd cheering soldiers onward. (Krugman has a slightly different definition.)
Right now Mitt Romney has an advertising blitz under way in which he attacks Mr. Obama for possible cuts in defense spending — cuts, by the way, that were mandated by an agreement forced on the president by House Republicans last year. And why is Mr. Romney denouncing these cuts? Because, he says, they would cost jobs!
And there's this:
What about the argument ... that Mr. Obama should have fixed the economy long ago? ... The short answer is, you’ve got to be kidding.I know you're being ironic, but no sir, no one's kidding. Read on.
■ Second, about that characterization. Krugman calls this "cynical." Last I heard, members of Congress have a sworn fiduciary obligation to protect the Constitution and benefit the people:
Fiduciary: a person to whom property or power is entrusted for the benefit of another.Did I say "sworn"? Thought so. What about violating that oath and damaging the nation you're sworn to "benefit" — all for personal gain?
Some dare call that "treason" — including criminal defense attorney John Reed, as quoted in this great piece by Howie Klein at DownWithTyranny:
When Kansas Republican state Senator Jean Schodorf of Wichita watched a discussion of Draper's book and learned about the obstructionist meeting she decided to quit the Republican Party, which her family had been active in since the time of Abraham Lincoln.Read Howie's post for the rest. The details are stunning. This wasn't a virtual meeting; it happened, and Howie names the participants.
She told John Celock of HuffPo that "When I heard that while people were suffering from the recession that Republican leaders were plotting to get even with the president, that was it."
People are waking up to this sociopathic behavior by the GOP leadership. And more than a few people recognize it as treason against the American people. Retired criminal defense attorney John Reed:
We know now, though, that the very same day the world welcomed the new President into office, a small group of powerful men, bent on his destruction, secretly met to design a plan to create economic and political chaos in America for the coming four years, solely for the purpose of regaining the House of Representatives in 2010, and the Presidency in 2012.And now we have the first indications that American voters are starting to grasp what the Republicans had in mind and what they did.
Half the country is now aware of the GOP conspiracy to tank the economy and even if many Republican voters have grown immune to reality most independent voters now understand why the recovery has taken so long.
Some call them traitors. I could be persuaded to be one.
I'm reminded that a "crisis" is a turning point. We had one in 2000, when the American people blessed Bush v Gore with their silent approval.
Here we have another. Imagine if Romney wins, with as many people being aware of the Republican treachery as the article above says, and he wins by less than the number of disenfranchized voters in, let's say, Ohio or Pennsylvania.
At that point, I'd be with Mr. Franklin in his comment to a fellow American. It's one thing to be the thief; it's another to be the victim who hands stuff eagerly over. If you read the sign and bought it, the product is yours with my blessing.
To follow or send links: @Gaius_Publius