The Difference Between An Ex-Republican And An "Ex"-Republican-- And Winning Back The House In 2018

Elizabeth Warren is an ex-Republican. She left their ideas behind and her record of public service and as a champion of a forthright progressive vision for working families and the middle class speaks-- sings-- for itself. She's one of the best U.S. senators in history, up there with Paul Wellstone, Robert M. La Follette, Robert Wagner, George McGovern and Russ Feingold. On the other hand, "ex"-Republicans are the garbage conservatives the DCCC recruits to pretend to be Democrats while clinging onto their right-wing ideas and voting with the GOP in Congress the way former Florida Governor Charlie Crist and former Arizona state Senator Tom O'Halleran are doing today. The DCCC pushed both into Congress, both joined the Blue Dogs, both earned "F" grades for the voting records and both vote more frequently with the Republicans than with progressives on crucial votes in the House. When Paul Ryan says some especially toxic piece of GOP legislation he passed is "bipartisan," he's talking about having gotten votes from monsters like Crist and O'Halleran.

Are you familiar with Frank Schaefer, the former conservative evangelical whose autobiography, Crazy for God: How I Grew Up As One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back, helps tell the story of the political and spiritual evolution of a an ex-Republican in the Elizabeth Warren sense of the word. We've been covering his work here at DWT for over a decade and now we're collaborating with him on a 2018 election project that he introduced on his Facebook page yesterday. Before you read it, watch this clip of him talking with Rachel Maddow a few years ago:





He entitled his post "Let me explain why I'm about to launch a road tour to interview Democratic Party candidates for my video blog." And he does explain, very well in fact-- "It's because, he began, the truth in the movie It's A Wonderful Life is what millennials long for and they are the key to taking back the House in 2018."

Taking back the House in 2018 isn’t about politics. It’s about national survival. And if the Democratic Party is to take back the House of Representatives in 2018 it will need the millennial vote. And if the Democratic Party wants the millennial vote it must be earned.

Right now there are lots of younger people who seem to believe that-- as one intelligent 30-something woman told me last week-- “both parties are just as bad.” I think she is very very wrong but I can understand why she believes that.

Fear and loathing of Trump is not enough to win over the disenchanted in the ranks of progressive millennials. What’s needed is a clear moral vision of right and wrong that’s passionately articulated.

Mistakes can’t be repeated-- for instance Hillary Clinton’s identity politics-driven assumption that most progressive young women would automatically vote for a woman. Instead of voting for Hillary because of her gender many informed progressive millennials-- both women and men-- supported Bernie Sanders, on the basis of his his moral passion not his gender, age or race.

HOW DO YOU LOSE THE PRESIDENCY TO A MAN LIKE DONALD TRUMP, THE MOST UNPOPULAR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE OF ALL TIME? Here’s how: you run a campaign devoid of passionate moral clarity.

According to her new book Hillary Clinton says she turned to the people who knew what was wrong with America to craft solutions: “I started calling policy experts,” she writes, “reading thick binders of memos, and making lists of problems that needed more thought.” Proceeding in this rational, expert-sanctioned technocratic power-point presentation-style, Clinton set out resolutely on the road to… oblivion.

THAT WAS THEN. THIS IS NOW.

If the Democratic Party wants to win back the House-- and quite literally save the country by stopping the forward momentum of the Trumped Republican white supremacist party of oligarchy–it needs to learn another language. This language is not learned in books let alone in Davos, while schmoozing with billionaires. It is the language of sincere, unscripted transparent moral suasion in other words it is the art of making an appeal to morality in order to fundamentally change behavior. It is all about intrinsic values not utilitarian charts concerning what “works.”

SURPRISE! MILLENNIALS CARE ABOUT RIGHT AND WRONG!

Right wing propaganda spews lies claiming that Millennials are incapable of forming a moral vision for their generation and that someone else needs to do it for them. Another lie is that millennials are driven by identity politics. The 2016 election result proved both claims to be false.

Whatever many millennials were looking for it was not someone “reading thick binders of memos, and making lists of problems that needed more thought.” Put it this way: the new generation seems to reflect the “old fashioned” moral priorities that Frank Capra fought for in his movie “It’s a Wonderful Life.”

MORAL PASSION IS IN. COLD SELFISH CALCULATION IS OUT.

What seems important to Millennials are the things in life that have intrinsic value-- fairness, meaning, purpose, love, beauty and doing the right thing for its own sake. Thus it seems to me that one lesson learned from 2016 is that anyone who wants the Democrats to take back the House of Representatives in 2018-- as I do-- had better preach passionate moral sermons that appeal to the millennials’ longing for a higher purpose.

...THE MILLENNIALS’ TAGLINE SEEMS TO ME TO BE: “I’M FOR THE MANY, NOT THE FEW!”

To hear the deranged white supremacist Breitbart Right spew you’d think that all millennials want is “safe places” in universities where free speech is curtailed. In reality for Millennials it’s all about democratic control of the society we live in to facilitate basic fairness.

Millennials’ ideal of fairness includes:

• universal health care for all,
• universal education,
• college debt relief,
• public housing,
• eco-friendly public control of energy resources that safeguard our fragile planet,
• a generous welcome for immigrants of all races and faiths,
• coming together to combat economic injustices,
• propelling movements that fight against racism, sexism, homophobia, and other forms of bigotry,
• outrage at the Prison Industrial Complex that exists not only to oppress people of color but to line the pockets of some of country’s wealthiest white elite,
• the concept of justice and liberty that translates as this: when you put in a full day’s work, you get paid a living wage!

MILLENNIALS ARE LIVING IN THE REAL WORLD

As Chris McGreal notes in The Guardian they “get” student loan debt. And millennials’ get money woes, “rents are exorbitant and many are paying $300-a-month premiums for Obamacare.” And under Trump’s lazy introspective misrule Millennials now share most of us Americans’ disgust at the prospect of millions of us losing health coverage while millions more see their health insurance premiums surge as Trump deliberately sabotages Obamacare in favor of tax giveaways for the 1 percent.

AND THEN THERE’S COLLEGE DEBT

Unlike our more enlightened European counterparts we Americans set up young people for crushing debt and failure. As The Guardian notes,

Often, the most vulnerable borrowers are not those with the largest debt, but low-income students, first-generation students, and students of color-- especially those who may attend less prestigious schools and are less likely to quickly earn enough to repay their loans, if they graduate at all. … In its last years, the Obama administration tried to rein in the student loan industry and promoted more options for reduced repayment plans for federal loans. Since then, Donald Trump’s education secretary, Betsy DeVos, has reversed or put on hold changes the former education secretary John B King’s office proposed and appears bent on further loosening the reins on the student loan industry, leaving individual students little recourse amid bad service.

A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE FAR TOO CYNICAL ABOUT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY … EVEN SAYING THAT “THEY ARE THE SAME” AS THE REPUBLICANS. BULLSHIT!

• Republicans will let the trillionaire oil and gas folks like the Koch brothers continue to rape and destroy the planet.
• The Democratic Party is trying to stop environmental degradation.
• Democrats believe in equal rights for gays and transgenders and women. Republicans don’t.
• Trumped Republicans coddle Nazis and the KKK. Not so the Democrats.
• And there is much, much more from universal medical care to paying off student debt….

REPUBLICANS THINK THAT HAVING A SOCIAL CONSCIENCE IS DANGEROUS

Republicans in Congress back Trump’s meanness not just on immigration but the entire social safety net. Compassion is out! Codling white privilege is in! The GOP mantra seems to be: Let’s crush those needy young people– for their own good! Give em’ character! As political commentator and activist Howie Klein, pointed out in his blog on Blue America:

The stark fact of the matter is that Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan and virtually every member of the Republican congress are trying to pass [bills]… that will literally result in the deaths of tens of thousands of people, bankruptcy for many more and suffering for millions. And why are they doing this? They want to get their hands on 800 billion dollars that funds Obamacare so that for the first time since 1986 they can give permanent tax cuts to the likes of Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner.

Republicans hate the social safety net, except when tax money is used to bolster the fortunes of corporations and billionaires. They believe that a society without “economic incentives”-- in other words a society where if you need help you’re on your own–leads to economic stagnation. But as Garrison Keillor writes in the Washington Post Republicans are total hypocrites … when it’s convenient to be.

The Republic of Texas believes in self-reliance and is suspicious of Washington sticking its big nose in your business. “Government is not the answer. You are not doing anyone a favor by creating dependency, destroying individual responsibility.” So said Sen. Ted Cruz (R), though not last week. Sunday on Fox News, Gov. Greg Abbott (R) said Texas would need upward of $150 billion in federal aid for damage inflicted by Harvey. The stories out of Houston have all been about neighborliness and helping hands and people donating to relief funds, but you don’t raise $150 billion by holding bake sales. This is almost as much as the annual budget of the U.S. Army. I’m just saying.

WHAT THE MILLENNIALS CARE MOST ABOUT THESE DAYS IN POLITICS IS A QUEST FOR A NEW AND FAIR, ‘NEW DEAL’-- FOR EVERYONE

Franklin Roosevelt’s remake of the American economic system-- his shot at reining in the forces of heartless capitalism-gone-wild-- saved America. The Works Progress Administration, which provided jobs to millions made unemployed by economic collapse, was at one time the single largest employer in the country. A raft of legislation addressed pay, working conditions and housing. Roosevelt also introduced banking regulation that stayed in place until the 1990s.

Roosevelt saw his reforms as laying the foundations for the very kind of social democratic societies the US helped build in Western Europe after the Second World War through the Marshal Plan… but-- most ironically!-- then failed to build here. Bluntly: America helped make compassionate caring socialism work in Europe but not at home.

WHAT WE NEED IS A CALL FROM DEMOCRATS TO TAKE A PAGE FROM BOTH ROOSEVELT AND FRANK CAPRA… LET ME EXPLAIN…

The 1946 American Christmas fantasy-- It’s a Wonderful Life-- needs to be re-watched and re-learned. There’s a reason it has lasted over the decades: It’s a call to make America morally great, not “again” but for the first time. It is what we hunger for: a fair life, a good life, a meaningful loving life shaped not by greed and ambition but by the most humane passion of all: empathy.



And the context in which Capra made the movie-- the moment right after we’d defeated the very kind of fascism, racism and nazism that Trump is now revisiting on us-- is scarily apt in 2017. The fascist white supremacist right (not to mention angry delusional white evangelicals) are Trump’s biggest fans. Frank Capra call your office!

CAPRA ASKS US TO CHOOSE A WORLDVIEW THAT AFFIRMS THE I-AM-MY-BROTHER’S-KEEPER PHILOSOPHY OVER GREED.

The context in which Capra asked us to make this choice was one wherein he’d been working during World War Two to defeat the Nazis. And it was right after the war Capra made his statement about what to do with the hard won peace.

WHAT’S CAPRA’S POINT MADE IN IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE? It is that democracy must be based on moral fairness or it will fail.

According to Wikipedia, Frank Capra enlisted shortly after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. He was assigned to work directly under Chief of Staff George C. Marshall, who would later create the Marshall Plan and be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for helping to rebuild Europe as a fair democratic and socially responsible society, with a social safety net for all that would become an example to the world.

During his first meeting with General Marshall, Capra received his wartime orders when Marshall said, “Now, Capra, I want to nail down with you a plan to make a series of documented, factual-information films-- the first in our history-- that will explain to our boys in the Army why we are fighting, and the principles for which we are fighting… You have an opportunity to contribute enormously to your country and the cause of freedom. Are you aware of that, sir?”

Shortly after his meeting with General Marshall, Capra had viewed Leni Riefenstahl‘s Nazi-loving (alt-right-style) “terrifying motion picture,” Triumph of the Will. Capra describes the film as “the ominous prelude of Hitler’s holocaust of hate.  “I sat alone and pondered. How could I mount a counterattack against Triumph of the Will; keep alive our will to resist the master race? I was alone; no studio, no equipment, no personnel.”

Capra considered one important idea that had always been in his thoughts: I thought of the Bible. There was one sentence in it that always gave me goose pimples: “Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”

AFTER THE WAR CAPRA CONTINUED HIS MORAL CRUSADE HE’D STARTED IN HIS DOCUMENTARIES ON “WHY WE FIGHT” DIRECTED AT AMERICAN SOLDIERS.

In It’s a Wonderful Life the hero played by Jimmy Stewart-- George Bailey-- does moral battle with the heartless greed-maddened banker, the Koch brothers/Trump-like Potter. Potter is the richest man in town, only stopped from even greater riches and total power thanks to the brave efforts of Bailey and his struggling Building & Loan Company.

Bailey handles his business in a way that is based on empathy, compassion and community, goodness and mercy. Potter represents the worst qualities of capitalism and greed that lives on today in Trump’s and the Republican Party’s callous, elitist cabal of wealthy white oligarchs who the Republican lickspittles solely serve.

MILLENNIALS’ IDEALS ARE A REAFFIRMATION OF FRANK CAPRA’S AND GENERAL MARSHALL’S HUMANIST VISION

Democratic candidates in 2018 could do worse than channel Bailey’s famous speech in the movie, and adopt his (and Capra’s) non-cynical tone and substance as their own:

George Bailey: Just a minute… just a minute! Now, hold on, Mr. Potter! You’re right when you say my father was no businessman. I know that. Why he ever started this cheap, penny-ante Building and Loan, I’ll never know. … But he did help a few people get out of your slums, Mr. Potter, and what’s wrong with that? … Well, is it too much to have them work and pay and live and die in a couple of decent rooms and a bath? Anyway, my father didn’t think so. People were human beings to him. But to you, a warped, frustrated old man, they’re cattle. Well in my book, my father died a much richer man than you’ll ever be!

TRUMP’S PREDATORY POTTER-LIKE CAPITALISM CATERS SOLELY TO THE NEEDS AND INTERESTS OF THE RICH AND POWERFUL BY ENFORCING POLICIES THAT ARE DETRIMENTAL TO ORDINARY PEOPLE.

It is a system that ruthlessly defends the interests of the 1% over those of the rest of society.  And it provides a direct link to Capra’s the images of George Bailey’s moral crusade in Pottersville that-- via Trump and the GOP Trump-collaborators-- we’re reliving right now.

BUT… I AM FULL OF HOPE.

The future can be put back on a track of justice, fairness and beauty. This can be a color-blind, open and good country. We can re-embrace the real American dream that’s not defined by greed but by tolerance and compassion.

HERE’S THE GOOD NEWS…

I’ve been meeting new Democratic Party candidates from across the country and also several members of Congress running for reelection. I’m  encouraged because many of them are young, and many are women. They are smart, caring and motivated to stop Trump and the far right from trashing empathy, goodness and love forever. They are the new face of the Democratic Party.

I WANT TO DO MY BIT TO HELP INTRODUCE THESE NEW FACES (AND SOME OLD ONES TOO) TO THE MILLIONS OF PEOPLE-- INCLUDING THE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF MILLENNIALS-- WHO WATCH MY VIDEOS I POST ON FACEBOOK AND HERE IN THIS BLOG.

Why am I doing this? Because I care about my 5 grandchildren! Period.

IF NOT NOW (IN THE LEAD UP TO 2018): WHEN? IF NOT YOU AND ME: WHO?

So…

…I’ll be taking a cross-country road trip starting very soon and producing at least 20 three to five-minute unscripted videos on my iPhone talking to many of the new Democratic Party candidates.

(Some of my video commentaries in the last couple of years have had 4 to 5 million views. Others 1 million and many more in the hundreds of thousands. So I’m hoping to build on this crazy exposure to do my small part in helping the better sort of clear thinking Democratic candidates win.)

I’m not registered as a Democrat but as an independent (unaffiliated) voter who used to be a Republican and religious right leader until I fled the evangelical movement in the late 1980s. That said, I’m going to work my butt off between now and the 2018 election to do everything I can to help the Democrats to Take Back The House! They are the only viable game in town to stop Trump and the Republicans from destroying American hopes and dreams of a fairer better society, the society I want to leave to my 5 grandchildren.

WHAT CAN MY VIDEO PRODUCTION TOUR (HOPEFULLY) ACHIEVE?

I hope I can help change the image of the Democratic Party-- at least for the people who watch my video blogs. The Democrats have been tarnished by the image of an aging and failed establishment party.

The failed Hillary Clinton presidential bid-- by what seemed to be a nepotistic out-of-touch self-absorbed wealthy clan-- didn’t help. Thus Democratic Party leaders are too often perceived as just more rich people speaking for candidates who reflect the interests of billionaires.

BUT…

… today as we face 2018 this is a FALSE image!

ACTUALLY THERE’S A BRIGHT NEW DAY COMING IN 2018.

At the state, local and national level new candidates are stepping forward in unprecedented numbers to run for office, to STOP Trump and to defeat the racist, greed-driven and xenophobic Republican agenda.

So…

• I want to help others experience the surprise and joy I felt meeting today’s new faces in the Democratic Party who are vibrant, open, authentic,
• I want to share my enthusiasm for these new faces in the Democratic Party,
• I want to see the Democrats TAKE BACK THE HOUSE in 2018!

Want to take a guess which district he's starting his video tour in?

Here's The Jimmy Stewart Scene That Inspired The FBI To Warn Americans That "It's A Wonderful Life" Was Commie Propaganda

Today the 1946 Frank Capra film is universally considered a Christmas classic but when it was first released, the FBI and the House Un-American Activities Committee tried to label it Communist propaganda. In 1947, an FBI document, Communist Infiltration of the Motion Picture Industry, went after two of the screen writers, Frances Goodrich and her husband Albert Hackett for, among other things, "eating lunch daily with" known Communist screen writers. According to Michael Winship, Bill Moyers senior writer, the FBI-- which was working with Ayn Rand on this crackpot project-- was not happy with the film's storyline, in which the hero, Jimmy Stewart’s George Bailey, was in opposition to "the avarice and power of banker and slumlord Henry Potter, played by Lionel Barrymore." The FBI memo accused the film of "a rather obvious attempt to discredit bankers by casting Lionel Barrymore as a 'scrooge-type' so that he would be the most hated man in the picture. This, according to these sources, is a common trick used by Communists." The movie also "deliberately maligned the upper class, attempting to show the people who had money were mean and despicable characters."

Ayn Rand wasn't the only right-wing extremist cooperating with the FBI in its attempt to censor popular culture. Among the other rats: Gary Cooper, Walt Disney and, of course, Ronald Reagan. Today, these same types are going out of their minds because Pope Francis has been turning the Catholic Church away from knee-jerk conservatism and towards-- horror of horrors-- the actual message of Jesus Christ. All the talk about banksters and capitalism's excesses has been bad enough for them, but now the Pope has been shaking up the conservatism that dominates the curia itself.

Offering his Christmas greetings to the Roman Curia, the senior churchmen who run the Holy See, Pope Francis, having observed at close quarters for the past 20 months how the Vatican actually works, unexpectedly gave his Roman bureaucrats a severe dressing down.

He listed 15 deadly sins-- "ailments" he called them-- that he had witnessed since he took office. Too much micro-management, too little internal co-ordination, examples of boastfulness, showing off, claiming to be indispensible, a tendency to gossip and defamation and, even worse, clerics leading double lives.

...According to worldwide polls conducted by the prestigious US-based Pew Research Centre, a majority of people in over half the 43 countries surveyed say they had a positive view of Pope Francis, with particularly high ratings in Europe (84%) and Latin America (72%).

Part of his popularity derives from favourable media comment on his style of communication with his flock and with outsiders, but also with his style of Church government:

• He has made it increasingly clear that he has no time for careerism among Catholic clergy and has started to shift long-tenured cardinals and bishops away from the Vatican

• He has moved cautiously but effectively to clean up the money-laundering scandal concerning the Vatican Bank, the Institute for Works of Religion (IOR), which had tarnished the image of the church for the past two decades

• He installed Australian Cardinal George Pell as overseer of all Vatican finances

• From 1 January, new accounting and management practices become operative within all Vatican departments. They will be obliged to draw up detailed annual budgets, which-- astonishingly-- had never been done in the past

...Perhaps Pope Francis's most significant quote of the year was during a recent interview with La Nacion, a newspaper from his home town in Argentina, Buenos Aires.

Acknowledging internal resistance to his planned reforms, he said: "It's a good sign for me, getting the resistance out into the open, no stealthy mumbling when there is disagreement. It's very healthy to get things out into the open!"

Perhaps getting everything out in the open would have protected Pope John Paul I from being murdered by the curia after just a month. He was also trying to reform the corrupt, reactionary Vatican, albeit more quietly. The Pope is even making an impact inside the Beltway. Today, Brent Budowsky, writing for The Hill suggested a "Ready For Pope Francis" movement, asserting he's the most popular public figure in the world.

The people’s pope, alone among world leaders, has directly and forcefully confronted institutions of finance, politics, media and now the organization that governs the Catholic Church itself. For this reason, while the 21st century remains young, we may be witnessing in real time the leadership of a man historians will ultimately regard as one of the greatest men of the century.

Jesus taught that the last shall be first, that we should sell all of our possessions and give the proceeds to the poor, and that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Jesus forcefully challenged the institutions of his time, as Francis does, and for this he was crucified.

We celebrate the birth of Jesus not because of big discounts during holiday sales but because His message of love and generosity is timeless and common to teachings of great faiths everywhere. It is with this faith that Francis teaches and with this standard that, while Francis condemns abuses of institutions in almost every power center of the world, he criticizes himself and asks for forgiveness-- an honesty more politicians might practice.

When Francis notes that as the stock market rises it becomes a banner headline but when millions of homeless people suffer they are treated like nonpersons to be forgotten, he is challenging the institutions of media.

When Francis condemns abuses of greed in the economy and calls for dramatic reforms, he is challenging financial institutions and calling for dramatic change.

When Francis condemns the environmental degradation that could destroy the planet itself, he is challenging business and political institutions that fail to be stewards of the earth.

When Francis teaches love and kindness toward the poor, he is challenging politicians who support cutting help for the poor, such as food stamps, a program the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops strongly supports.

It is said that when Francis read stories about would-be immigrants who died seeking a better life when their overcrowded boats sank in stormy seas, and learned that when the bodies were recovered the drowned mothers were still tightly hugging their sons and daughters with love during their last moments of life, he rededicated himself to humane treatment for immigrants. Francis challenges those in power who think otherwise, as some in earlier generations did when they opposed immigration of those who were Italian, Irish and Jewish, among others.

When Francis excoriates some members of the Catholic Curia itself, listing 15 “ailments and temptations” that corrupt their service to the Lord, as he did this week in his Christmas address that read like an indictment of abuses of power within the church itself, he is challenging the institutions of governance he leads.

The White House Has A Serious Bully Problem-- Even Beyond Standing Up For LGBT Youth

I know that not everyone has studied-- or paid attention to-- history and some people may look blankly on mention of the Sudetenland, the Munich Conference, Neville Chamberlain and Czechoslovakia. In Frank Capra's documentary, above, Hitler assures Europe that the sliver of Czechoslovakia bordering Germany is "the last territorial claim" he had to make in Europe. Watch Chamberlain-- now a universally despised and loathsome figure-- declaring he "had achieved peace in our times" by giving in to Hitler. History-oriented Democrats could not have helped but think of the scene when they saw Obama celebrating his capitulation to a laughable John Boehner Friday night. Though it's ironic that this comes in the midst of the White House's anti-bullying campaign, lets have a look, for example, at what Robert Reich had to say about the efficacy of placating bullies Saturday. Is there anyone who doesn't have a personal story like Reich's cupcake war?

When I was a small boy I was bullied more than most, mainly because I was a foot shorter than everyone else. They demanded the cupcake my mother had packed in my lunchbox, or, they said, they’d beat me up. After a close call in the boy’s room, I paid up. Weeks later, they demanded half my sandwich as well. I gave in to that one, too. But I could see what was coming next. They’d demand everything else. Somewhere along the line I decided I’d have a take a stand. The fight wasn’t pleasant. But the bullies stopped their bullying.

I hope the President decides he has to take a stand, and the sooner the better. Last December he caved in to Republican demands that the Bush tax cut be extended to wealthier Americans for two more years, at a cost of more than $60 billion. That was only the beginning-- the equivalent of my cupcake.

Last night he gave away more than half the sandwich-- $39 billion less than was budgeted for 2010, $79 billion less than he originally requested. Non-defense discretionary spending-- basically, everything from roads and bridges to schools and innumerable programs for the poor-- has been slashed.

The right-wing bullies are emboldened. They will hold the nation hostage again and again.
In a few weeks the debt ceiling has to be raised. After that, next year’s budget has to be decided on. House Budget Chair Paul Ryan has already put forward proposals to turn Medicare into vouchers that funnel money to private insurance companies, turn Medicaid and Food Stamps into block grants that give states discretion to shift them to the non-poor, and give even more big tax cuts to the rich.

There will also be Republican votes to de-fund the new health care law.

“Americans of different beliefs came together,” the President announced after agreement was reached. It was the “largest spending cut in our history.” He sounded triumphant. In fact, he’s encouraging the bullies onward.

All the while, he and the Democratic leadership in Congress refuse to refute the Republicans’ big lie-- that spending cuts will lead to more jobs. In fact, spending cuts now will lead to fewer jobs. They’ll slow down an already-anemic recovery. That will cause immense and unnecessary suffering for millions of Americans.

The President continues to legitimize the Republican claim that too much government spending caused the economy to tank, and that by cutting back spending we’ll get the economy going again.

Even before the bullies began hammering him his deficit commission already recommended $3 of spending cuts for every dollar of tax increase. Then the President froze non-defense domestic spending and froze federal pay. And he continues to draw the false analogy between a family’s budget and the national budget.

He is losing the war of ideas because he won’t tell the American public the truth: That we need more government spending now-- not less-- in order to get out of the gravitational pull of the Great Recession.

That we got into the Great Recession because Wall Street went bonkers and government failed to do its job at regulating financial markets. And that much of the current deficit comes from the necessary response to that financial crisis.

That the only ways to deal with the long-term budget problem is to demand that the rich pay their fair share of taxes, and to slow down soaring health-care costs.

And that, at a deeper level, the increasingly lopsided distribution of income and wealth has robbed the vast working middle class of the purchasing power they need to keep the economy going at full capacity.

“We preserved the investments we need to win the future,” he said last night. That’s not true. The budget he just approved will cut Pell grants to poor kids, while states continue massive cutbacks in school spending-- firing tens of thousands of teachers and raising fees at public universities. The budget he approved is cruel to the nation’s working class and poor.

It is impossible to fight bullies merely by saying they’re going too far.

But was Obama's back against the wall? Or was the celebrating actually real because this is the outcome he wanted all along? Today at noon, 5 of the Democrats from New York City who voted against Obama's and Boehner's compromise-- Jerry Nadler, Charlie Rangel, Carolyn Maloney, Eliot Engel and Anthony Weiner-- are holding a press conference on the steps of City Hall, along with civic leaders to "protest imminent federal spending cuts that will slash tens of billions of dollars from vital national programs, decimate funding for New York’s hardworking community organizations, cut jobs and services, and destabilize local neighborhoods during the ongoing recession. With the imposition of an extremist GOP social and economic agenda, local leaders will address the real world cost of the planned cuts... Among the hundreds of critical local programs that will be drastically cut are:
 

• Community Development Block Grants, which provide vital services to low and moderate-income families and communities across the city.  The grants fund career training, homeless shelters, assistance for victims of crimes, and help preserve affordable housing, among many other initiatives.

• Community Services Block Grants, which fight poverty, fund programs for youth, seniors, immigrants, and families, and spur community development.

• Workforce Investment Act, which provides job training and placement for tens of thousands of New Yorkers.

• Title I funding for Education for low-income kids.

• Head Start, which provides free childcare and educational programs for pre-school and kindergarten-aged kids.

• Child Care Development Block Grants, which provide childcare for low-income families.

• Women, Infants and Children (WIC), which provides food assistance, health care referrals, and nutrition education for low-income women, infants and children.

• Public Housing Capital Fund, which funds major capital needs for the New York City Housing Authority.

Are these Democratic leaders, each of whom is far more experienced politically than Barack Obama-- not to mention far more progressive-- correct? Or did Obama have no choice? Was he up against the wall? Even Charlie Cook, the voice of mediocre Beltway conventional wisdom, thinks the Republicans have overplayed their hand and alienated voters with their extremism, giving our famous poker-playing president a strong position... if he wanted it.

One of the biggest and most frequent mistakes in politics is for a party to misread its mandate. When it happens, independent and swing voters get angry and punish a candidate or a party on Election Day. Because American politics is a zero-sum game, punishing one party means rewarding the other party-- even when the latter is not necessarily deserving of support. Frequently, the party that benefits from the spanking mistakenly interprets it to mean that the public is embracing every aspect of its agenda. Republicans shouldn’t forget that their party had dismal favorable/unfavorable poll ratings last fall. They won because they weren’t Democrats.

There is no question that the Republican base, conservatives, and supporters of the tea party want to take a meat ax to government spending. When Republican congressional members return home and meet with their constituents, they are encouraged to vote against continuing resolutions and for deep spending cuts. These supporters have intensity, and they adamantly oppose any compromise with Democrats.

It would be a blunder, however, to think that such views drove the election. Republicans, conservatives, and tea partiers did not throw Republicans out of their House and Senate majorities in 2006, and they did not vote to increase the size of the Democratic majorities and elect Barack Obama president in 2008.

Independent voters were the ones who cast their ballots for Democrats by an 18-point margin in 2006 because they were mad at President Bush and upset about the war in Iraq, not to mention Republican scandals and the general performance of the GOP Congress. Two years later, these same voters were still angry at the president, were afraid of the financial crisis, and didn’t care for GOP presidential nominee John McCain.

In 2010, these independent voters were unimpressed by the economic-stimulus package, didn’t like cap-and-trade environmental regulation, and really didn’t like the Democratic health care package. Those over or approaching 65 years of age also feared that health care reform would erode Medicare benefits. Even those unaffected by the reforms rallied to defend Medicare.

Polling is very clear. Most voters want to see the federal budget balanced and spending cut. However, they don’t want Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid touched, and, oh yes, they don’t want taxes increased. Now, anyone with an IQ over room temperature knows that all of this is impossible. Spending on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, along with interest on the national debt, amounts to approximately half the federal budget.

There is no doubt that significant budget cutting is necessary and that Medicare and Medicaid must be reformed. No one can doubt the courage or sincerity of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis. But it’s little short of suicidal to drop a Medicare reform package-- even a voucher plan that would be optional for those currently older than 55-- into tough budget negotiations stymied over Republican demands for deep spending cuts. Democrats have some experience with older voters going ballistic, even with changes that wouldn’t affect them.

For many seniors, doing anything to Medicare that can’t be portrayed as an increase is essentially a cut, and they will fight it to their last breath. From a political standpoint, Medicare reform is very dangerous territory. House Republicans are not just pushing the envelope-- they are soaking it with lighter fluid and waving a match at it.

One can understand why Republicans are pushing so hard. Their base is demanding that they do so. And if congressional Republicans resist, many of them can look forward to primary opposition next year. But it seems that GOP members of Congress have become so consumed with pleasing their base that they are ignoring general-election voters and the independents who drive the wild gyrations in American politics.

Congressional Republicans would be well advised to pay attention to the results of the latest Pew Research Center poll (conducted March 30 to April 3 among 1,057 adults) that asked Americans whether they would prefer that their lawmakers stand by their principles even if it meant that the government would shut down, or whether they would rather have their lawmakers compromise on a budget even if they didn’t agree with it. Among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who agree with the tea party movement, 68 percent said they would rather have a lawmaker who stands by his or her principles. But among all Republicans, only 50 percent said stand by their principles, while 43 percent said compromise. Among all adults, 55 percent said compromise; among independents, 53 percent said compromise, with 36 percent siding with the principles option.

The bottom line: GOP primary voters are very different from general-election voters. It would be a very shortsighted strategy for Republican members-- especially those in swing districts-- to focus too much on primary voters. A lot of Democrats did the same thing in 2009 and 2010. Many are now former members of Congress.