Sunday, December 08, 2019

The Democratic Party Should Not Be Nominating Republicans-- Not For Anything

>


Like Hillary, Biden started off as a Republican. He found himself in a Democratic environment at work-- and he didn't like Nixon-- so he re-registered as a Democrat. But, issue-wise, like Hillary, he's always been a moderate Republican at heart. He wants to run for president as one too-- and if he does, like Hillary, he will probably lose. Status Quo Joe's only real chance would be if voters decide he's the lesser of the two evils. In a post for In These Times last week, Reagan Lives On In Biden, Branko Marcetic reenforced something Georgia progressive Nabilah Islam wrote earlier today: "Growing up in the South, Democrats are indoctrinated early on to believe a specific type is what is electable. That type is usually white and even more often moderate or centrist. The strategy is to play to the middle and hope to get Republicans to vote for you. That’s not a winning strategy. When Republicans go to the voting booth, they vote for the real Republican, not the fake one." Biden, by the way, is on the record saying Delaware was part of the South and would have joined the Confederacy except Maryland was in the way." He spent a considerable part of his time palling around with Southern racists from both parties; he just gravitated to them. They're his people.

Marcetic cautioned Democrats trying to decide who to vote for in 2020 that "Amid warnings of a coming global recession, it’s worth asking what the 2020 presidential aspirants would do during an economic downturn. When it comes to Joe Biden, we may already know. Biden’s formative political years were spent in the shadow of economic crisis. After more than a decade of economic expansion and blissful, carefree consumerism, recession hit in 1973, the same year Biden entered the Senate. Two years later, 2.3 million jobs had disappeared. Americans also had to contend with runaway inflation that reached double digits by 1974. The United States had barely exited that recession when it plunged into another one in the early 1980s, with unemployment climbing past 10% by 1982. During this economically turbulent decade, Biden fended off Republican challenges to his seat by embracing right-wing doctrine--specifically, that restraining federal spending is more important during economic downturns than priming the pump."
This fiscal austerity would become a core conviction of Biden’s and help animate a lifelong belief that compromise and reaching across the aisle are the perennial solution to what ails America.

Biden had always been a somewhat ambivalent New Deal liberal-- fretting about government spending as early as 1975, even as he garnered positive scores from liberal groups for his voting record-- but the recession and his time in the halls of power nudged him in a more conservative direction.

“I must acknowledge that when I first came to the U.S. Senate at age 29, not too long out of college, many economists had been telling me why deficit spending was not all that bad,” he told the Senate in 1981.

“So I was not very convinced of the arguments made by my friends here, who I must acknowledge, were mostly on the Republican side of the aisle.” But, he went on, “as I listened over the years in this body, I became more and more a believer in balanced budgets.”

By the close of the 1970s, Biden began calling himself a fiscal conservative and introduced what he called his “spending control legislation”: a bill requiring all federal programs to be reauthorized every four years or automatically expire. He also voted for a large but unsuccessful tax cut introduced by Sen. William Roth, his Republican counterpart.



Ronald Reagan took office in 1981, pioneering the economic program of generosity to the rich and stinginess to the poor that became known as Reaganomics. Biden was right there with him.

Biden, Reagan and other conservatives pushed the flawed idea that the government is like a household and must take drastic measures to pay off debt to stay solvent. Six months into Reagan’s first term, Biden called the reduction of deficit spending “the single most important” path toward “an economically sound future.”

To curtail government spending, Reagan severely scaled back or eliminated federal programs-- even as he slashed tax rates for the rich. Biden voted for both (including an updated version of Roth’s failed tax cut). When the president proposed a budget freeze in 1983-- to cut the enormous deficits that, ironically, his tax cut helped produce-- Biden one-upped him, working with two Republican senators to propose an even more aggressive budget freeze doing away with scheduled cost-of-living increases for Medicare and Social Security.



This idea is contrary to what economists and experience tell us is the proper course of action in times of economic downturn. Economist Joseph Stiglitz credits Obama’s 2009 big-spending stimulus for ameliorating the recession (criticizing it only for being too small) and criticized austerity politics for undermining it. Meanwhile, countries like the United Kingdom and Greece stand as living monuments to the economic ravages of budget cutting during a recession, something even the International Monetary Fund belatedly acknowledged.

The economy under Reagan did recover-- even as he slashed programs for the poor and vulnerable, he ramped up defense spending, in effect creating an economic stimulus much larger than what would come in the wake of the Great Recession.

Meanwhile, Biden voted three years in a row for a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget. When the 2008 financial crisis plunged the world into recession, Republicans again called for cuts to entitlement programs. As ever, Biden stretched out a bipartisan hand. As Obama’s lead negotiator during the “grand bargain” negotiations, Biden-- to his Democratic colleagues’ horror-- capitulated to every one of Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell’s demands, including cuts to Medicare, Social Security and food stamps, and warned in 2013 that, left untouched, deficits “may become a national security issue.”



While that effort collapsed due to Tea Party obstinacy, a President Biden could get one last shot. Following the Reagan playbook, the Trump tax cuts have sent the national debt soaring, and Republicans and conservative groups are now pushing for stringent budget cuts. Biden stands alone among the leading Democratic presidential candidates in his insistence that Democrats can work with McConnell’s GOP. Add a recession into the mix and the temptation to resume what he and Reagan began may be too great. Who says the era of bipartisanship is dead?

Peter Wade, writing yesterday for Rolling Stone, gave another example of Biden's utter unfitness to be the Democratic candidate. During his "No Malarkey" tour of Iowa, the decrepit Status Quo Joe from another era told reporters he's rather share power with Republicans than wild power the way FDR did. I suppose when you have nothing important to do-- and the ego-driven Biden has nothing at all he wants to accomplish other than self-gratification-- you can embrace the kind of dysfunction that plagued the Obama administration. Has he already forgotten how McConnell blocked whatever Obama tried to do-- like the Merrick Garland Supreme Court nomination? Or, as I suspect, was that just find with Biden? Wade reported that "Biden expressed concerns about Republicans possibly getting 'clobbered' in the upcoming election mainly because" of Trump's toxicity. I can't remember ever seeing someone as politically out of touch with the moment as Joe Biden is today.
The candidate said he’s held back on his “ass-kicker” side because he knows the American people want someone who can get things done and work with the other side.

“I mean look, everybody, anybody who knows me in politics including Trump knows they’re not going to be able to screw around with me. Not a joke,” Biden continued. “But that’s not what this is about. I think what the American people want to know is how am I going to make their life better.”

Biden went on to say that he thinks it’s important to have a political balance and the possible lack thereof concerns him. “I’m really worried that no party should have too much power,” Biden said. “You need a countervailing force. You can’t have such a dominant influence that then you start to abuse power. Every party abuses power if they have too much power.”

This warm-and-fuzzy attitude toward divided government is surprising coming from the former President Barack Obama’s VP. During Obama’s first two years, Democrats controlled both houses of Congress and, briefly, had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Despite that, they relentlessly chased Republican moderates, begging to get just one to sign onto a health care plan that included no public option and was modeled after a system implemented by [checks notes] Mitt Romney. All those concessions to the middle gave them exactly zero GOP support.

Instead, they got Republican GOP leadership that decided on Day 1 to block everything Obama did and a tea party movement that claimed Obama was born in Kenya. Democrats lost the House in 2010, and for the final three-quarters of Obama’s presidency, he got damn near nothing of any importance through Congress. And when it was Obama’s turn to pick a Supreme Court justice, Mitch McConnell stole it because he could.

Republicans, meanwhile, used Trump’s first two years in office to ram through absolutely everything they could, including trillions in tax giveaways to corporations and the rich, despite having only the slimmest of Senate majorities.

For Republicans, “sharing power” is only important when Democrats have control-- and Biden should know that better than anyone.
Bernie and Elizabeth have powerful and compelling agendas of things they want to accomplish. Status Quo Joe, much like Trump, just wants to be president. There's virtually nothing he'd do if he were, except some vague, dysfunctional notion of a status quo ante which is at the heart of the rise of Trumpism. I'm sad so many of my countrymen voted for Trump. I'm just as sad that so many of my countrymen are preparing-- a few even eager-- to vote for an utterly worthless sack of crap like Joe Biden.


Labels: , , , , ,

16 Comments:

At 6:05 AM, Blogger Chris Roberts said...

i had calle dbiden bascly a republican who should run against trump in gop primary except trump is cabling those lol but even i wasn't aware of some of things here.biden is worse than i thought.wanting to cut ss,medicare,and medicaid,opposing most every benrie supports,loving bush republicans and corporate trade deals.

i don't give a damn what polls say now inless trump becomes so despesed people vote agains thim no matter what biden will lose.only bernie ould beat trump.not that dem establishment cares about that.

 
At 6:23 AM, Anonymous ap215 said...

Amen & now you can add his stupid comment about AOC doesn't represent the direction of the party two words for you Joe Anita Hill.

 
At 7:17 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

So... I ask this author... WHEN, not if, the party convention shits out a biden nom, what will you do?
You'll vote for him and talk yourself into liking it, that's what.

And that is why this is a shithole. The democrap party is corrupt. They foist corrupt noms and candidates. And you voters just go along.

GFY guy accuses several of us who know the truth of being one person. American elections is the money pretending to be two parties so that 2 in 3 in the eligible electorate, the dumbest and evilest 2 in 3, still participate so that there is that whiff of legitimacy to the elections.

He's correct about one thing, however. AOC is NOT the direction of the party. The party will never allow that to happen. And the rigged convention will prove it. again and still.

 
At 7:39 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

AOC is NOT the direction of the party, says the gasbag who said he wouldn't vote for her if he lived in her district.

 
At 8:23 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@7:39

You just don't understand his mission, his life's work - it's... well, I'll let you see how he explained it.

"That is the task of myself, 1:56 et al -- To point out the schizo DWT fallacies about the democraps ever being fixed by making more of them. DWT keeps posting this nonsense... we have to keep pointing out that it *IS* nonsense.

Not many will understand, obviously."


That's what you're dealing with. Can you believe the level of self-importance? The obnoxious pomposity? He's clearly a delusional shut-in fixated on this blog. His life's mission is to convince the blog's proprietors that they're wrong and what they're doing is pointless and stupid. Logic and reason are be wasted on him. He has no idea how batshit crazy he is (which is typical of most who suffer with mental illness) and what he does here is probably the only contact he has with the outside world.

I find his obsessiveness kinda funny and will continue to needle him until it stops entertaining me. But he's not going anywhere and you're never going to get him to concede a single point. NEVER.

 
At 8:50 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@8:23, look at him using 'you voters" as a pejorative. Here's Democraps in a death camp to other prisoners who are planning a breakout: "You DUMB ASSES, don't you realize this is an exercise in FUTILITY? You know you're going to get killed anyway, right? Why spend the energy on a breakout when we're all doomed???? HEY GUARDS, THESE GUYS ARE PLANNING A BREAKOUT!!!!"

 
At 9:03 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Biden has a record that any challenger should love. Kamala Harris proved that attacking Biden's record is a useful strategy, for it helped her campaign - until Gabbard applied the same strategy to Harris.

But none of the other candidates have. It's like the Party has issued an edict: "It's Biden. Submit."

Harris brought up Biden's opposition to busing, which is when I first heard of Biden and detested him then. Anita Hill and Clarence "Uncle" Thomas have hardy gotten a mention. The odious bankruptcy bill. Biden's protection of the ridiculous fees that credit card issuers have available to abuse. And this is just off the top of my head while the coffee sinks in.

The pinch hitter for Biden -dropping in the polls- is Mayo Pete, and South Bend is the albatros which should be killing off his candidacy.

These two men are what the Democraptic Party represents. This is the best they are GOING to do. Since Trump has lowered all the standards to insignificance, and since Biden has already promised Big Money that nothing is going to change, is this what you want?

 
At 9:13 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@9:03, who are you asking if Biden is what they want? Are you dumb enough to think regular readers of this blog want Status Quo Joe or Mayo Pete? Do you think regular readers of this blog don't understand the corrupt neocon establishment of the Democratic Party? Do you have any idea of what the purpose of this blog is?

 
At 10:15 AM, Anonymous Skip K., DC said...


For some time, I’ve wanted to say something on behalf of the leadoff “Anonymous”.

Here goes. When he's on hand, who needs Russian trolls or Cambridge Analytica? Their best efforts pale by comparison.

I kind of wish each “Anonymous" would throw in an initial or number or town just to clarify orbits when comments start flying.

Though one Anonymous is usually as easily differentiated as Voldemort. Like a broken clock trying to figure out which two times of the day it’s right. Occasionally he has a decent point, but he buries it in mud and cynicism.

My holiday wish for Anonymous is that he breaks the chain off his pattern, so he doesn’t keep lugging it about like Marley’s Ghost.

Jolly Merry!

 
At 11:30 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's a question aimed at all readers of this blog, 9:13. With the Democratic slate of candidates still in serious need of a culling, it is a fair question to ask. Are they willing to allow the DNC to shear the flock again? Or is there an opportunity to awaken the slumbering? To do nothing guarantees the wrong outcome.

If my question doesn't reach anyone, then I know what I am going to do. What everyone else decides to do is up to them.

 
At 12:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@11:30 (coming from the author of the 8:23 and 8:29 posts)

I ask in complete seriousness: what are you doing other than posting anonymous comments on this blog?

"If my question doesn't reach anyone..." Hello? Are you talking about "reaching" the 5-6 people who actually read the comments on this blog? What is wrong with you? Look, I admit to not liking you very much, but if you indicated that there's some bigger thing you're doing in the world - if you had your own blog, etc., that would go a long way towards lessening my dislike. The writer Chris Hedges' message isn't all that different from yours, but that guy is a part of the world - he put himself on the line for his principles and lost a cushy job at the NY Times as a result and he's still out there making his case forcefully and brilliantly. Whether or not I agree with someone like him, at the very least I have to admire his commitment. You're just some grumpy, anonymous dipshit on the internet. It's impossible to take you seriously when it seems the sum total of your activism is what you're posting here.

SPM

 
At 1:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Skip, is the "mud and cynicism" where I'm correct and DWT is not?

For 40 years I've been observing the creeping corruption and rightward march of democraps. For 40 years I've observed that when the money really wants something (GLBA, CFMA, deregs, xxFTAs, obamneycare...) they got it from democraps. For 40 years I've observed that they never put bankers or torturers in prison, but they put a lot of whistle-blowers there. I observed refusals, until just recently, to impeach criminals in high office. I've observed election fraud and suppression but never the democraps fixing them.

I observed, confirmed by Donna Brazille, that the democraps gave us/US $hillbillary when we wanted Bernie -- resulting in trump. I'm observing the same thing, only worse, now.

AND I observe that DWT still insists on pushing the fallacy that fixing the democrap party is only a few more BA candidates away. This has not been true for decades and it is not true now.

And, most depressingly, I observe that the more I observe, the more vile the replies are to those observations, as GFY/suicide guy illustrates so clearly.

prove me wrong (about the democraps; about DWT; about voters...). please. I've been hoping to be wrong for 40 years.

 
At 1:05 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What do you mean "when we wanted Bernie"? You said you wouldn't vote for him because he's not pure enough for you. You belittle the idea of voting.

"I've been hoping to be wrong for 40 years."

My God, what a Messianic complex.

 
At 5:40 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@1:00

You can call me vile all you want (I suspect the fellow you're talking to here is actually the OTHER guy who frequently tells you to go kill yourself, so there's plenty of "vileness" to go around here), but you're sorta missing the point. My big issue with you is that you're a delusional freak. I'm not bullshitting when I talk about my admiration for someone like Chris Hedges. He's out there in the world trying to make an effective case for his perspective. You're just a weirdo fixated on this blog (probably the only one that hasn't blocked your IA at this point) who has made it his "mission" to express the same opinion, over and over and over (etc), in the most tedious and smug manner possible. Every now and then I do talk to you with some degree of respect - usually when you post something moderately interesting without the overwhelmingly obnoxious, unearned sense of superiority that smothers everything else you write.

@1:05

It's patently ridiculous that someone who takes so much obvious smug pleasure in being ahead of everyone else on everything is "hoping to be wrong". Again, this is the kind of patently obvious dishonesty that makes it impossible NOT to troll this guy.

SPM

 
At 6:32 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Again, 'we' is conflated with 'I'.

'I' voted for Berine in 2016's primary. He lost me AFTER when he self-repudiated and endorsed the anti-Bernie. said so often, which annoys you.
Again, the limbic reflex of hate turning what might remain of your cerebrum into tapioca.

other guy, what is so surprising to you about observing the devolution to shithol-ness, observing the reasons and hoping that I somehow missed something?

If you were watching a train wreck that is killing people, would you not rather have dreamed it? No?

troll away folks. your bitching and hate doesn't make me wrong. it makes you bitchy and hateful. god bless.

 
At 7:21 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@6:32

Way to miss the point, sillyboots. It's a trainwreck. It's a shithole. The Democraps should all be lined up against the walls and shot for their complicity in it. WHAT ARE YOU DOING ABOUT OTHER THAN POSTING THE SAME DUMB COMMENTS HERE - OVER AND OVER AND OVER? NOTHING.

The only joy in your life is the affirmation of your superiority provided by "haters" like me. Get off your high horse and look in the mirror. I confirm what you already believe to be true AND YOU LOVE THE WAY IT MAKES YOU FEEL. How do I presume to know this? Because it's how I feel whenever I see you obsessively toiling away here on your goofy little "mission". You're a kook. There are certainly aspects of you I dislike, but you're way too pathetic to merit "hatred". As always, your ego forces you to inflate everything way beyond the parameters you actually operate within. Howie Klein is a rich guy with a full, busy life. He throws together blog posts when he has a spare minute. I'd be surprised if he's actually read more than one or two of your cranky posts. He hasn't blocked you and he doesn't reply to you. Which means he doesn't give much of a shit about you one way or the other. A sane person would figure this out. But I guess a person operating as far outside reality as you would be unlikely to do so.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home