« Swing Issues? Hillary Comes Out Swinging | Desidero's Blog | Maverick Alert: Claire McCaskill Rides Tough »
Chess? I Get My Kicks Above the Waistline, Sunshine
We tried, seems Washington is too tough. After 2 years of proclaiming how important it was to move past the divisiveness that divides us, Obama supporters have now discovered that Republicans are more intransigent than they believed, and have decided to move on to the next step, post-post-partisanship, otherwise known as, "I Give Up". Well, the first 150 hours of the Presidency is the toughest - it had to happen sometime.
A new meme is now going through TPM, if not the rest of the Internets - Obama as chess-master if not kick boxer or Ninja warrior, who suckered the Republicans into looking partisan by compromising with them and then getting zero support. Of course if the Republicans trounce the Dems in 2010 as they did in 1994 by playing on a lame bailout bill they courageously refused to support, we might have to identify 1 or 2 chess-masters on the other side.
And well, the Democrats have had a fun week, arguing that a CBO report that exists doesn't actually exist, defending contraception as "stimulus" (it's actually anti-stimulus, folks, like wearing a French raincoat if you know what I mean), cheering the removal of the international gag rule on abortion while forgetting it still exists at home, feeling our oats with the passage of a stimulus that involves mostly tax cuts and sops to special interests and not too much that feels like it'll kick start the economy within the next 4 years. (Uh, education? Fast spending? Back to construction projects? State money not delivered until end of 2009?). Cram-downs unsurprisingly got eliminated (DC to homeowners: we really like to watch you suffer.) Business tax cuts unsurprisingly rule the day. (DC to business leaders: we got your back, keep those taxpayer-subsidized donations coming). And where's that IT infrastructure money?
And about those TV talk shows - now that the Democrats control all the houses and such, is it too much to get some coaching before they go out and make asses of themselves and forget crucial details in arguing against blatant falsehoods? Admire them as you like, Barney Franks and Paul Krugman don't constitute an anti-disinformation media team by themselves.
The real winner, the chess master in all of this, is unsurprising. Hillary. Foreign policy? Hard to lose there, not part of the bailout, no embarrassing votes, just the relatively easy job of getting entrenched foreign despot dictators to like us, vs. the impossible task of getting Republicans to like us. If Bosnia was a gaffe, what would "a change to business-as-usual in Washington" be? And while frequently foreign ministers end up better liked abroad than at home, that still serves what's a more likely outcome for her - Secretary General of the UN, rather than President. But in any case, I think I can safely predict that the Clinton brand will be in better shape in 2012 than it is today, something I'd hate to wager for anyone else at this point (okay, it might be when Al Franken gets seated, so make him #2). Alright, will wait until end of February before more optimistic pronouncements, such as how Iranians and North Koreans respond to Hillary love-letters.
So keep on compromising, folks - those Republicans will come around, just as you promised. One day, some day. Maybe they just need another tax cut and a faith-based initiative. Oh yes, Obama just appointed a new outreach minister for faith. Would be nice if he appointed one of those for progressives and stopped kicking sand in Howard Dean's face. Guess I've always been a dreamer. What about this week's victories? As Dissenting Justice notes, more back to the future, almost all the way to the status quo of the 90's.
That's it, my most audacious optimistic take, Queen to Bishops 4, another below-the-belt play. I've always liked unorthodox openings, and here's my favorite odd entry. Your move.
A new meme is now going through TPM, if not the rest of the Internets - Obama as chess-master if not kick boxer or Ninja warrior, who suckered the Republicans into looking partisan by compromising with them and then getting zero support. Of course if the Republicans trounce the Dems in 2010 as they did in 1994 by playing on a lame bailout bill they courageously refused to support, we might have to identify 1 or 2 chess-masters on the other side.
And well, the Democrats have had a fun week, arguing that a CBO report that exists doesn't actually exist, defending contraception as "stimulus" (it's actually anti-stimulus, folks, like wearing a French raincoat if you know what I mean), cheering the removal of the international gag rule on abortion while forgetting it still exists at home, feeling our oats with the passage of a stimulus that involves mostly tax cuts and sops to special interests and not too much that feels like it'll kick start the economy within the next 4 years. (Uh, education? Fast spending? Back to construction projects? State money not delivered until end of 2009?). Cram-downs unsurprisingly got eliminated (DC to homeowners: we really like to watch you suffer.) Business tax cuts unsurprisingly rule the day. (DC to business leaders: we got your back, keep those taxpayer-subsidized donations coming). And where's that IT infrastructure money?
And about those TV talk shows - now that the Democrats control all the houses and such, is it too much to get some coaching before they go out and make asses of themselves and forget crucial details in arguing against blatant falsehoods? Admire them as you like, Barney Franks and Paul Krugman don't constitute an anti-disinformation media team by themselves.
The real winner, the chess master in all of this, is unsurprising. Hillary. Foreign policy? Hard to lose there, not part of the bailout, no embarrassing votes, just the relatively easy job of getting entrenched foreign despot dictators to like us, vs. the impossible task of getting Republicans to like us. If Bosnia was a gaffe, what would "a change to business-as-usual in Washington" be? And while frequently foreign ministers end up better liked abroad than at home, that still serves what's a more likely outcome for her - Secretary General of the UN, rather than President. But in any case, I think I can safely predict that the Clinton brand will be in better shape in 2012 than it is today, something I'd hate to wager for anyone else at this point (okay, it might be when Al Franken gets seated, so make him #2). Alright, will wait until end of February before more optimistic pronouncements, such as how Iranians and North Koreans respond to Hillary love-letters.
So keep on compromising, folks - those Republicans will come around, just as you promised. One day, some day. Maybe they just need another tax cut and a faith-based initiative. Oh yes, Obama just appointed a new outreach minister for faith. Would be nice if he appointed one of those for progressives and stopped kicking sand in Howard Dean's face. Guess I've always been a dreamer. What about this week's victories? As Dissenting Justice notes, more back to the future, almost all the way to the status quo of the 90's.
That's it, my most audacious optimistic take, Queen to Bishops 4, another below-the-belt play. I've always liked unorthodox openings, and here's my favorite odd entry. Your move.
Advertisement
Thanks Smiley. Sumbuddy had to say it.
January 29, 2009 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Des,
Kings Knight to King 3. No Fools Mate here! Of course I didn't see the first 3 moves.
You are right of course. It is time to launch a roundhouse back kick towards the groin of the republican party. His name is Boner... er..I mean Boehner.
January 29, 2009 5:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now why do I get the sense that you enjoyed that?
3 things. 1) While the "Obama is a grandmaster" schtick is overdone, I think there's a much higher level of disgust with how GOP policies (economy, war, etc.) have turned out than in '93. He won't get much GOP help in the House, but public perception may still end up more positive than for Bill, just because we've had W, not HW, in charge. 2) Any stimulus funding takes time to move, faces bottlenecks etc. - and if this downturn lasts (and it will), we're gonna need all of these parts - whether they land in years 1,2 or 3.
3) More worrying is the Dissenting Justice quote, "Simply restoring the pre-Bush past does not excite me." This IS a real worry for me. People are so desperate for change, that a simple return to pre-W ways is gonna satisfy a lot of them. But in this time, there's no way just "fixing" things - back to 1999 - is gonna do the trick. The Admin HAS to get way more out of the box. Yes, they're limited by how fast the populace is ready to move, but we have to do better. There's not ONE element in the stimulus, for instance, that is really innovative. I SUPPORT the moves made, but we need more.
Maybe part of it is that FDR didn't start in November 1929, but he & his advisors had years of the Depression to cook stuff up, try out ideas, etc. Whereas Obama has to deal with it before most people even have a sense of the real-world consequences of what's unfolding. That's a tough chair to the new admin to be in, but they need to recognize that's where they are - and get their skates on.
January 29, 2009 7:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm concerned that the [promise of Obama] is being manhandled by his advisers in such a way that he's losing sight of bold principle.
Not saying to give up hope... just a bit cynical.
January 29, 2009 10:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are we playing the "his advisers made him do it" card now? I thought all of Obama's picks were brilliant, and now we find they boxed him in, first week? I hear Bush was okay, it was the evil Cheney and Scooter Libby and Alberto Gonzales that did him in.
January 30, 2009 1:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
If they are too smart, they can indeed bend his will to theirs. Of course it's too soon to be sure.
January 30, 2009 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I couldn't agree more. Although it seems the consensus around these parts is healthcare, if I was going to make a big, ahead of the curve play it would be on energy and the environment.
January 29, 2009 10:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes to Q in several ways, Gingrich was less obstinate than the Republicans today, 2009 is equivalent to 1929, not 1933, and Hoover unlike Bush actually put together some clever ideas, some of which FDR used while discarding some others. And our response this time isn't very creative compared to FDR's, and the Republicans seem just as happy to do nothing and let a crisis emerge. Perhaps they're banking on Obama being Hoover and not FDR.
And Quinn, while I'm happy you read the Dissenting Justice piece, I'm disappointed no mention of the obvious parallel of hurling shoes and whirling phalluses (phalli?) at the podium. A new day indeed, and a great moment in chess.
January 30, 2009 1:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Dude. If you've got a whirling, airborne, dick, nobody's paying attention to yer shoes.
Trust me.
January 30, 2009 3:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Had sumthin' like that in college, and in fact hurled on my buddy's shoes during the same chapter of this sordid life.
January 30, 2009 4:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Personal testimonials welcome. Hurling dervishes?
January 30, 2009 6:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hurling dervishes?
No, those were apprentices.
The journeyman dervishes don't get dizzy and throw up...
January 30, 2009 1:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Quinn, a query: Would you care to elaborate on "innovation"? I get a little nervous when people start talking about innovation in conjunction with money, but I'm sure you've probably got something better than quants in mind.
January 30, 2009 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey DF. Long time, dude. The Stimulus package basically expands, extends & accelerates existing programs. e.g. Weatherize 4X more homes. They did it (& I support it) because the fastest way to move bucks out is through existing programs, AND it attracts less flak than creating new ones.
Problem. The population in NO way grasps how big this shit is. The big financiers, economists & Obama & his team know. And they know this Stimulus hasn't a hope in hell of even bringing things back to say, 06-07 levels. Even with the other stuff in the pipe, and TARP I, II & III, the BEST they're hoping for is to "stabilize the patient." They also know we're in this for years. Take a look at this (a PDF, not sure who posted it here originally, maybe Ellen?), from Merrill.
The section headings read: We are likely enduring a depression today... Depressions can last anywhere from 3-7 years... We have no idea when the credit cycle will hit bottom... $6 trillion in private sector debt (mostly household) must be eliminated... Still in the early stages of credit contraction... A 20% hole driven in the household sector balance sheet... The well for the US consumer has run dry for good... Record wealth implosion... Real unemployment rate now at 13.5%....
In short, they are trying to keep the financial system AND the real economy from completely collapsing. Now, they're tarting some stuff up - like Energy - as being the saviour, a long-term restructuring. Well, I know these projects well. And I LOVE them, right? Wind, grids, plug-ins, efficiency, all that. But anyone who says this will become the new "Engine" that pulls us out in the next 5 years is... bullshitting. At best, it's 1/4 of what's needed.
Now look back at FDR & you see dozens of new agencies... new techs rolled out on mass scale... basic financial products like mortgages utterly transformed... relations between labor & the state & business, transformed... whole new social programs cooked up & brought in. And even that wasn't enough, right? Took WW2.
Do we see anything as significant yet from the new Admin? No. Now I'm NOT blaming Obama, nobody else has this stuff ready-to-go either. And FDR came in 3+ years after the '29 Crash. So new ideas were everywhere.
But now... innovation? Take something as basic as the 4-day week. KPMG in the UK just had 80% of its employees sign on to it, voluntarily. For decades, it's been out there as an issue - turn down people's hours by 20% instead of throwing 20% of them into unemployment.
Now, this is not a staggering innovation, it's fairly straightforward. But it's barely discussed in N. America right now. Obama gave a HINT of it in his speech - and that's great. What it shows is he KNOWS we have to look at this, wants the debate & experiments & ideas to get churning, but he CAN'T move on bigger innovations until the ground is prepared, people ready, organizations pushing, etc.
There are many other innovations, DF. A major one is that instead of buying fossil-fuel using capital equipment (like cars, gas furnaces, etc.) & then the fuel separately, we're going to sell renewably-fuelled equipment like lug-in cars & heat pumps. But to overcome the higher sticker price, we have to LEASE you the battery or heat pump or whatever AND the juice to run/fuel it. This will mean your plug-in car can have a sticker price LOWER than today's cars, and that your all-in fuel+battery costs are lower than today's as well. Great for car makers, utilities, oil imports, CO2, etc.
But it needs a major new public utility or leasing body, sized to handle tens of billions of $, to occur. When it does, those sectors will soar. But the supply lines aren't ready, the demand isn't pressing yet, and the idea is still in the bushes. We need it, can do it, but not until, say, 3-4 years from now for cars. This is just part of his jam, when it comes to innovation. Time.
Cheers dude. I better shut up now before Des swings in & biffs me.
January 30, 2009 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your energy innovations are interesting, Quinn. Is there serious discussion of this public utility idea going on any place...country, government?
January 30, 2009 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is FDRdog. For plug-in's, a lot of players are talking about getting involved - GM, GE, Eurobanks, utilities (public & private), green power providers, private entrepreneurs. Shai Agassi's "Better Place" project (which I think has some real technology weaknesses) is best known - signing contracts in Denmark, Israel, and heavily into San Francisco, etc. For heat pumps & solar panels, same thing - but mostly public & private utilities. The idea is simple. If a public utility can own & finance a major new hydro or coal or gas or nuclear plant, and pay off the capital invested through monthly utility bill payments, why shouldn't they pay to install 000's of decentralized "power plants" - on peoples' roofs & under back lawns? e.g. They pay the $10k, you pay it of monthly, over its working life. The existing system, where these technologies have to be analyzed & bought & financed by each person, filling out incentive forms, dealing with mom & pop installers... is a nightmare of failure. Same rationale as led to the development of public electric utilities 70+ years ago.
January 30, 2009 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Quinn, you know better, I'm not interested in biffing you, your better ideas are far past what I can come up with for innovative solutions. I'm just not going to settle for the absurd locutions of low expectations and lap dog subservience, but that's not what you're offering. So get it on, bang a gong. We need creative thinking, period. Back in the New Deal the government did this, but why pray tell in the time of the Internets do we need government to do all the thinking? It's all in the palm of our hands. Especially yours.
January 30, 2009 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Go put that stuff up at one of Obama's websites. Just don't expect to get credit or a job as an economic adviser Quinn. He's not into pride of authorship.
January 30, 2009 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thomas Friedman wrote about Agassi recently. I wasn't sure whether Agassi's plan was before its time or just not a very good idea. I wasn't convinced it would work on a grand scale. I can see it working in Hawaii where he has started already I believe, but not in Texas, for example, or Kansas.
January 30, 2009 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
You got it. It MAY work on an island. But Agassi looks to be trying to lock up both the type of car you buy, and the whole recharging aspect. And it's not needed. That is, he proposes dedicated battery change-out stations, so you can drive longer distances. But changing out batteries is #1 nightmarish, and #2 you won't NEED it with a GM Volt or Toyota Prius Plug-In. With them you can recharge at home, at work, wherever, and if you need to go longer distances - which is a small fraction of trips - that's why you have a small gas engine. But he's a hell of a salesman, and so people in the field let him run, just because he's broadcasting the core ideas as he goes.
January 30, 2009 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's a new solid state battery design in the works that allows battery recharging at line speed. Plug and go, problem solved.
January 31, 2009 3:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
With reverse metering having the utils install and bill back will make even more sense.
January 30, 2009 7:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I used a chess analogy to explain why Limbaugh was being called to the carpet. The only reaction available to the GOP would be for moderates to peel away or for them to consolidate around their leading wingnut. Either way, the GOP reacted, and you can win every Chess match if your opponent reacts to your moves.
Whatever. You are probably one of those cats who thought that Alexander solved the Gordian Knot by slicing it in half. Most of your criticisms are rehashed mainstream media pablum.
And Hillary, Chess-master?! Ha! Her P-K4 opening was swatted away by Obama's kingside fianchetto. She will have no war chest in 4 years, and that, Des, takes her out of the tournament.
January 29, 2009 7:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
You can win every match if the refs (the press) declare you the winner, conveniently forgetting what the rules were.
Did Obama achieve bipartisanship, or did he conveniently hit the trifecta even before assuming office? The fact is Hillary was right and Obama and his supporters at the time were either fabulously wrong or fabulously deceptive. "Change you can count on"? I once saw Richard Nixon light the "eternal light". It was put out 2 weeks later for the energy crisis. I'm used to the ephemeral eternal.
January 30, 2009 1:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
If the refs keep calling the games, then the spectators stop contributing to the sport. In this instance, the mainstream media is in the hands of oil/gas/pharma junta... and this plainly benefits all things GOP. So, the GOP is represented with a better than 2:1 ratio on the airwaves. Yet ratings are declining and print media is dying. The spectators have begun to realize that the games are fixed.
You are acting as if the mainstream media is the controlling factor of the game itself. Just because the refs keep fixing games DOES NOT MEAN that the spectators aren't reaching their own conclusions and writing their own history.
And your second paragraph is a mess. Fix it.
January 30, 2009 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unless you get blown out on Super Tuesday, amirite?
January 30, 2009 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for saying it, Zipper, so I didn't have to.
The appearance of compromise was more important to Barack's long-term goals than the reality. The GOP digging in their heels the next two years simply makes his strategy more effective. Even better if he throws them a couple bones and then they still don't follow through on their word.
The audience for politics right now is a whole lot bigger than it has ever been. Unfortunately, progressives are flying blind the next two years, because the earliest we can judge the effectiveness of these new tactics is the primaries of 2010.
January 30, 2009 10:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
The GOP digging in their heels
This was always a given.
What was important (and achieved) is that they be seen as doing so.
They have been backed into the antiwar democrats conundrum:
By predicting disaster, you are vulnerable to the charge of cheerleading disaster.
Bad in re foreign military adventure.
Fatal in re my own financial future.
January 30, 2009 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
No doubt they have been maneuvered and played like the amateurs they have always been, no matter how long they have practiced the profession. We need a better breed of republicans and I suspect that Obama is fomenting that trend right now by schooling the incumbents. 2010 will be a banner year for my little experiment.
January 30, 2009 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
We do not need better Republicans. The ones we have will do just fine to enable the Dems to prevail in 10 years. Bottomline: There is a crisis in the financial world that requires we do something different and the Rich only offers us the same. That's the news. The Dems asked for their help, got lip service. The Dems will be moving on with the reich wondering what to do and sending a shout out to Sarah Palin in 2010. Can't ask for a bigger loser!
January 30, 2009 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Leaving a destructive ideology in control of one of two major political parties is like marrying an arsonist after he burns down your house. Sure, he provided a perfect reason to build a new house, but do you really want him to continue sharing your bed?
I think we need to completely re-engineer all of our politics to more closely resemble what Barack articulated in Audacity of Hope. I think Barack is helping to position the conversation differently in the hopes of inspiring a revolution with grassroots conservatives.
Given that a third of the country identifies as "conservative" in some fashion, I don't think that many people deserve what they currently have in Congress, no matter how much responsibility they may bear for sending them there to begin with.
I think our country has worked best when our left and right brains are mostly in concert with each other, even if they see things from different perspectives.
January 30, 2009 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
My thought is that what we now consider "Right" is just not right. It's a wacked out marriage of thoughtless believers and heartless pretenders. The believers cannot bring themselves to accept that they have been deceived and the pretenders cannot fathom that things are actually not as they portray them to be. It's pretty disfunctional. I think the Republicans will dissipate and the Dems will split, naturally. It's how we evolve.
January 30, 2009 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
At the end of the day, we will still have conservative- and liberal-minded Americans who need to work together in order to move this country into the 21st Century, even if they offer radically different solutions to the same common needs.
I suspect this paradigm will continue to be two major parties, whatever their names happen to be, and will be ongoing until we have at least one more complete generational turnover, since many Boomers on both sides of the fence will refuse to change no matter what.
As it always is, the sins of the father are visited on the son. Here's to hoping we can break that cycle.
January 30, 2009 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am all for breaking that cycle. But I see the intransigent right, the remnant of the republican Party not as the curse of their fathers, but their own dessert for ignoring their own reasoning in favor of the false safety of being in a flock.
January 30, 2009 4:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not unlike the democrats since 1980 when they through over Jimmy Carter for Ted Kennedy.
It took democrats nearly three decades to send another progressive to the White House, all the while aiding and abetting in the country's utter humiliation at the hands of neoconservatives. A an actual progressive opposition would have been a welcome addition to the context and could have led us out of the woods sooner.
No party is immune to group dynamics and no group is immune to paradigm shifts. They just aren't obvious until after they have already happened.
January 30, 2009 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Should have been "threw" over, not through, though I guess that is almost correct as well, if not exactly as clear.
January 30, 2009 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Woulda been nice if they could have saved Jimmy. He did well for himself on the Daily Show Monday.
January 30, 2009 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
The last 28 years would have been vastly different if Carter had a better team in 1980.
January 31, 2009 9:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
silly stuff.
btw...Q to B(ishops 4)..is not a chess move.
that explains your rant.
January 29, 2009 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Des, need some cheese with that whine?
Good grief! At least President Obama is hosting cocktail hours in the White House. Maybe it isn't all that bad. We'll get the pols drunk and have our way with 'em. I've a feeling we'd drink 'em under the table.
Missed you, dude.
January 29, 2009 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bwak, I'll let you have your way with those guys unless by that you mean to drink them under the table, then strip them and dump them off in a really rough DC neighborhood at 1 AM, in which case I'll drive the bus. Now there's an image we'll all have a hard time getting out of our minds. A bunch of middle aged nekked white guys wandering the hood. We'll let em keep their socks just for the visual.
January 29, 2009 8:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Miguelito, what's that old saying about, "when you get down in the muck with the pigs"? Read down the list a bit at this link for more on how to engage pigs (no offense of course to TPM's favorite water porker):
http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3207722
January 30, 2009 1:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow! Was that as funny as I thought it was? I went back and reread it just to make sure it wasn't my sleep deprived state talking. Whatever, laughed out loud the second time too. I've bookmarked it for future reference. So this is how you've been spending your time as of late?
January 30, 2009 2:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
I say we drop this one on a few of those friggin' car avatars round here. Clean the place out, and get some proper dogs.
January 30, 2009 3:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
'Proper dogs" laddie? Be glad it weren't a singin' hedgehoag rippin' au' the o'ccipitals o' a blien' mane, Eef you knew wha' A mane.
January 30, 2009 3:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
You know, it's a weird dynamic blogging. Just to make you laugh out loud for a moment is worth a week of Sundays people ragging on me. A good audience of 1 is better than a poor audience of hundreds. Pork on.
January 30, 2009 5:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cheers Des! Looks like you got swarmed here today. Funny, cause when I read it last night, I thought the post was really about bidness as usual in DC. The Hillary component I perceived as one of those things you just toss off, with no great weight attached. Guess not, huh? You button bushing mushroom cloud, you. Kept smilin' all the while too, dintcha? Here's something to satisfy your new penchant for pig/military metaphors.
January 30, 2009 11:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ya gotta love Ike. Hadn't seen the new video. Dumb bastard that he is though, none of my top ten fave songs of his are in any kind of video. Still, we make do. Odd bugger.
January 31, 2009 1:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ya, no kidding. Why Ike didn't make a vid of 'The Boat Song' eludes me. A lot o' great musicians get stuck between stations.
January 31, 2009 2:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually I think you got it right the first time, bid bad bidness as usual on K-J-I street. The Big Sleazy.
January 31, 2009 3:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Seems to me Cheney pissed in Iraq's mudhole, fed steroids to the python, mined the periphery of said mudhole and then threw the pig a greased rope and said c'mon out, we're having spareribs for dinner and you're invited.
January 30, 2009 8:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
If only the history books of the future could see it that way...
January 30, 2009 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Des I read your post on Bononos and fell out of my chair. It was written before I got here.
Good post. I am more cheery. Or cherry.
The truth is that it does not matter what reps do in the House, period..... They are irrelevant as the dems were three years ago.
The real chess is going on with the Senate. And the propaganda is churning for the electorate.
January 29, 2009 8:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Churning hard.
The Republicans asked for tax cuts (some poll shows Americans believe that tax cuts and spending are a good/preferred idea) and Obama provided. Obama worked in a bi-partisan effort to enact something that the public supports broadly. The Republicans voted on party line.
Obama did what the people wanted and the Republicans got outed as Party before People.
Next?
January 30, 2009 12:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
The press played up the family planning bit, the package is laid out as pork, and when Obama comes back for more, Republicans will get to say, "see, you didn't consult with us, too much give away, not enough tax cut". May not matter in the House, will matter in the Senate. Can you imagine what Health Care will look like in the end?
January 30, 2009 1:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
next is the 2010 primaries when this vote comes back to bite them in the ass. The change has already begun, all democrats can do right now is slow it down.
January 30, 2009 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Elliot I had to come back and read this three times to get your point and you have it down better than me. Yes. Next...
January 30, 2009 7:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, Des: Remember back when John Edwards and Bill Richardson were the objects of TPM hero-worship? Good times.
But not much has actually changed in these parts since then.
January 29, 2009 10:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Richardson? Really?
I saw the guy close up, and all I could think was that he had an ego/emotional problem of being vain and fat.
But that is just me.
January 30, 2009 12:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
I thought the same thing about Richardson from a safe distance.
But, yes, Richardson is inexplicably vaunted on these boards.
January 30, 2009 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Inexplicably"? I imagine you have 1 or 2 theories at this point, eh pussgasket?
January 30, 2009 5:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Check!
January 30, 2009 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
C'mon now, Gasket. I checked your links, and those 2 posts only got 7 Recs combined - and the main commenter was that well-known Hillary-hater, Dij!
So let's see you rifle through those archives, and find some incontrovertible evidence! (Didn't we have a VP pool at one point? Or 1001 posts recommending one person or the other for VP? My memory's not so good. I think I put my $10 on Obama-Palin.)
January 30, 2009 10:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Knights in white satin, never reaching the end..."
January 30, 2009 9:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
King Obama
Queen Hillary
Bishop Biden
Bishop Dodd
Knight Richardson
Knight Edwards
Castle Kucinich
Castle Gravel
anyone want to name the pawns?
January 30, 2009 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
I would make Rahm Emmanuel the Queen, and move Hillary to Bishop as she only represents foreign (black) squares on white side.
The pawns? The pawns are whomever forms a single distraction that can unite into BIG distractions and thus control the board.
Rush is the base of a pawn chain that both protects and inhibits the Queenside board (The GOP seems to love the Caro-Kann), and you have to attack the base of the chain in order to smash the defense.
January 30, 2009 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
COOL!
January 30, 2009 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
"The blood of slaves reminds us that our pragmatism can sometimes be moral cowardice."
--Barack Obama, The Audacity of Hope.
We'll see.
We'll see.
January 30, 2009 2:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama won.
January 30, 2009 2:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
LOL.
Des? Your move.
January 30, 2009 3:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
"I've won", said the dog that caught the car. Wonder what the taste of rolling rubber is like.
"We've won", said the flea in the tiger's coat. Perhaps the flea will be dining on yak meat tonight?
"I've won", thought the aspiring actress who slept with Warren Beatty. "He'll be mine forever more".
I love the smell of victory in the morning. It smells like burning huts and vanquished dreams.
January 30, 2009 6:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama can fire Hillary, not vice versa.
January 30, 2009 7:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let me try again.
Yes, Obama won. He can tell you, me and the fencepost to go screw ourselves for the next 4 years.
As my boss used to say, "there is no 'u' in team, only 'me'". Obama will take care of himself, even though firing Hillary might have its perils and repercussions. Obama's dealt with repercussions before and typically measures them ahead of time.
We don't know where Obama's driving, we don't know who his constituency is at this point. Did the stimulus package make you happy? Didn't me. Obviously didn't please Republicans in Congress too much, or not enough to bring about the long promised bi-partisanship.
While I was never part of Obama's gang, a lot of people are going to wake up to find that just cause he kissed you doesn't mean he's taking you to the altar. I knew what to expect from Hillary and still know. Obama's a continual surprise, and frankly I'm bored with the surprises. Too clever by half.
January 30, 2009 8:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hard to make all 300 million people happy. But as of yet the stimulus isn't signed law. Still has to go thru the Senate and then conference with the House if it's changed much before the final product gets to Obama's desk.
If you believe Josh's frontpage CNN report McCain and another Republican senator are proposing a lot more infrastructure spending. Hard to believe considering McCain's past and present comments but who knows, maybe one of his advisers talked some sense to him.
January 30, 2009 9:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Spot on. The fat lady hasn't even started warming up her voice yet.
January 30, 2009 10:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Does anyone else get the feeling the R's have been drawn into an infrastructure feeding frenzy that they would never have considered, if they had not been gamed so masterfully?
And if his Presidency is anything like his campaign, Obama's the Chessmaster, not just the king. He is surely getting good advice, but there's no doubt he's providing much of his own strategy.
Think about it... here we have the R's screaming for infrastructure (which they would have hypocritically labeled as "pork" in years past) like a bunch of tax and spend Democrats.
January 30, 2009 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Guess infrastructure investment is a nice change of pace from spending a trillion dollars on unnecessary wars. I wish they had such budgetary clarity these last eight years.
January 30, 2009 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Tax and spend", beats "borrow and blow" any day. How much have we paid for Iraq and what do we win?!? At least I can drive on a road or bridge and want to hire an educated kid, not to mention the comfort of living in a greener world with fresh air and clean water.
January 30, 2009 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
How about Borrow and Waste as a counterpoint to Tax and Spend? Blow becomes a little unclear in this context.
January 30, 2009 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
goddamn right he did!!!!
January 30, 2009 4:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bingo.
January 30, 2009 10:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
This has to be one of the stupidest things ever uttered by anyone, let alone a boss.
(Sorry Des, but it's truly moronic on so many levels, I just don't know where to begin.)
January 30, 2009 8:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Des,
Some things will never change..you are still cheerleading for Hillary C as POTUS...poor you for declaring Obama's failure already....the man is not God and he will stumble along the way, but I bet he will be no worse than Clinton, so keep your panties in a bunch..He wont be able to please everybody..There will always be something to gripe about and at the end, so-called progressives/Dems will do Obama in if he doesn't up the ante.......
I am happy your Hillary C is safe as you put it, now give Obama some room to inch forward and pray that little by little he and his team gets this thing right for the betterment of the American people....Either way, Hillary C will be alright.......
January 30, 2009 9:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
We have a crisis at hand and the big change seems to be more appeasing not-surprisingly ungrateful Republicans. As someone (OpenLeft? Dissenting Justice?) asked, how much are we paying to make the stimulus palatable to the Right, if that's what all this biz is about? Bi-partisanship comes with a hefty price tag that only Democrats seem to pay. But sure, think it's all about Hillary and not just watching cars tumble off the cliff. No, I don't wish Obama to fail, would be very happy to have him surprise me. But I sold my shares in Hope at 3 years old, and haven't re-invested since. Cynicism and stock options, a good way to hedge my bet. When the price is right I buy or sell, depending on what I'm holding. No feel good stocks either.
January 31, 2009 3:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
"if the Republicans trounce the Dems in 2010 as they did in 1994.."
And like most bitter prognosticators who can't simply admit they were wrong about something, it sounds like you would be glad to see that happen just because you lost that long chess game we all played here on TPM, and Obama won, not Hillary.
You were wrong Des, about Obama, and you still are.
It is getting a bit sad to watch the wriggling, have you thought that maybe it's time to move away from the chessboard in your mind. You are playing against yourself.
January 30, 2009 9:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Des and Hillary. Sad sad sad.
January 30, 2009 10:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Explain what I was wrong about. Yeah, a lot of people liked him and he raised a lot of money. What else?
January 31, 2009 4:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Gee, I just feel so thoroughly chastened and contrite right now. Things totally aren't going the way Hillary's hardcore supporters retrospectively claim that Obama's supporters thought they would go. Wow, turns out you were right about everything, all along.
January 30, 2009 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Even worse (better?), Samantha Power is back.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/30/samantha-power-returns-pr_n_162452.html
January 30, 2009 11:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Monstermash!
January 30, 2009 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Holy cow! I'm just being blindsided left and right, today. I totally never saw that coming. This can only be interpreted as a deliberate and calculated insult to Hillary.
January 30, 2009 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
No more of an insult that giving Hillary the job at State in the first place. All kinds of people said all kinds of means things during the primary and then had to kiss and make up. This won't be any different.
January 30, 2009 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Providing this wasn't Tongue-in-Cheek. In which case, well done, sir!
January 30, 2009 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Goota love the chess move here, people!
Hillary now has a shadow. If she strays from Team Obama it will not be long before there's a ring on Blackberry One.
January 30, 2009 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whatta ya wanna bet Hillary's man enough to rise above Powers' criticism and work with her graciously.
One of the character qualities Hillary has always displayed is the ability to get past the politics and work for the good of the public.
Wish some of her supporters had as much character.
January 30, 2009 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
I doubt Hillary ever took it personally, in the first place. Hillary's been insulted by experts for decades and Powers' insult was strictly amatuer hour. Umbrage, and umbrage over umbrage, and umbrage over the umbrage about the umbrage were campaign tactics used to disrupt the other side's organization. The only ones who took it seriously were the hardcore supporters (myself not excluded).
January 30, 2009 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
LOL. The most accurate rendering of the campaign I've ever read. ;)
January 30, 2009 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's umbrageous.
January 30, 2009 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Samantha Powers is an undiplomatic asshat who was not just personally offensive to Hillary but also implied that Obama's statements on Iraq withdrawal were just words during the campaign. Who wants a loose cannon working in foreign policy? Can't wait for her to give a press interview calling Hu Jintao a monster (quickly followed by China calling in our IOUs). On the other hand, she'll fit right in with Joe and Jill Biden.
And if Hillary had won and had Paglia working with Obama, I'm sure you folks would be saying bygones.
January 30, 2009 4:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
More selective memory, dij.
Ever see Obama go off half-cocked like Hillary did (or here)on the campaign trail?
Hillary will do fine as SoS despite this. And so will Samantha Powers.
January 30, 2009 10:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reminds of the credits for Monty Python and the Holy Grail:
I don't find a lot of their humor as funny these days, but damned if it didn't get stuck in my head forever.Great comment.
January 30, 2009 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not.... as... FUNNY??!?? Wow.
Dude. Before you go sayin' stuff like that, remember... møøse bites Kan be pretty nasti!
January 30, 2009 10:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know! I can't understand it myself. I watched the Holy Grail recently and except for small bits, I was mostly bored. Those small bits are awesome, but the boredom was brutal. I am afraid to watch Life of Brian and Meaning of Life now for the same reason. They can live on in memory with much higher ratings.
January 31, 2009 9:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Lily Tomlin once said she worried that drugs made us smarter than we really are.
Watching reruns of "SNL" from the golden years proves drugs made our comedy funnier than it really was.
February 3, 2009 1:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
True, though the Land Shark skit still makes me laugh. John Belushi is definitely funnier with a little chemical assist - for the audience, not him.
February 3, 2009 9:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Desi-pie, going nuclear in the Cafe again. Running around this morning, so I'll be back to comment later. But you've been missed. :)
January 30, 2009 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Des is des-pleased. Where I agree:
1. The failure to gain a single Republican vote in the House for the stimulus bill is not a good thing for Obama in the least. He started with a proposal that was too small and heavily weighted with tax cuts to win bipartisan support for the bill - which was never going to happen anyway. It's like going into divorce court, starting out with an initial offer of 50-50, and bargaining further from there.
3. Obama's really lucky the economic crisis didn't hit during the Democratic primary. His proposals are so centrist, safe. Hillary had proposals that were far more audacious. I think Hillary would have taken a far more progressive, Kruggie-esque approach to the stimulus bill because it's more likely to work and the GOP is not going to support it anyway no matter how bipartisan we try to be.
4. I was so wrong. I'm glad Hillary got the hell out of Congress. She is insulated from all the domestic policy/ economic turmoil, although she is involved in meetings of Obama economic advisers. That's a great thing for Hillary and Obama, less so for Congress and the American people in general. Hill as Sec-Gen of the UN wold go along way towards making the UN a more powerful force in the world, but I think the rest of the world is still pissed at us for causing the current economic apocalypse.
5. I can't believe you left out the no lobbyists in Obama's White House Des. You're warming up to Obama! I can tell :)
January 30, 2009 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah like offering up a gas tax holiday.
January 30, 2009 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or her more aggressive answer to the impending foreclosure crisis doom before the banks started going under. Prescient and correct.
January 30, 2009 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep liked that one.
January 30, 2009 5:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
From where I sit, the world's not pissed at us, at least that's not a meme I hear. Everyone's glad to have Bush gone, which may make whatever the cost bearable, but I think they're just blaming it on greedy banks and such, not Americans in particular.
January 31, 2009 3:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
So losing the election was all some master strategy by Hillary to get safely installed in the state department where Obama's international popularity makes her job easier? It doesn't matter how pretty Hillary is sitting in 2012 - if you are discussing it in terms of her trying to challenge Obama for the presidency. No matter what she does, Hillary is implementing Obama's policy not her own. Her success IS Obama's success. Checkmate.
Hillary lost - get over it. She's on Obama's team now.
That said, I don't necessarily like how the team treated Dean - but Hillary ridiculed Dean's 50 state strategy. He would have been treated just as badly had she won.
January 30, 2009 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
"She's on Obama's team now."
You mean "OUR TEAM!"
January 30, 2009 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly.
January 30, 2009 2:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama's team.
There is no "u" in "team", only "me".
January 31, 2009 3:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Desi,
While your persistence is admirable, you are now in the flat-earth society position.
While I know that 24 hour news cycles generate lots of thrills, chess games go on for longer than that. You are looking for a video game resolution to the problem, quick and fast. And that has never been the speed in Washington. Perhaps you should wait to see what happens in the Senate first?
Here's something to chew on: 2010 will be the first time in a while that the Dems will get to gerrymander the voting districts.... so all of a sudden some of those deeply red districts may not be. Remember, as more and more seats go to the Dems, the GOPers left are, by definition, more and more to the right (since the moderates lose to the Dems). But like any problem, you isolate it before you fix it. Presently we are isolating this group.
By the way, Hillary who? Yes, she will be making headlines from time to time -- so did Ms. Rice. But she isn't President. And at the end of the day, she is enacting Obama's policy.
That you keep pining for a different outcome to the 2008 primary speaks a great deal to why the GOP has more discipline than the Dems. Hilary knows she lost. It takes nothing away from the fact she is Sec of State, for you to recognize she lost as well.
January 30, 2009 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, the end is nigh! Whither bi-partisanship? Whither economic recovery? Woe is us!
No matter, there's always Hillary 2012! Here, you go register hillaryis45.org while I.. wait, what I am thinking? We're still plenty active on hillaryis44.org, where we have secret plans to build a time machine and win the '08 primary.
I would seriously love to see Hillary play Lyndon LaRouche to Obama in '12, but I don't think her ambitions (or campaign contributions) are capable of matching your delusions.
Hey, maybe you can convince her to run again? I'll save everyone a seat!
See you there! Hillary '12!!
January 30, 2009 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are awesome, DF.
January 30, 2009 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gawd, this post has brought out so many of the old primary dogfighters that I'm getting a little verklempt. *sniff*
January 30, 2009 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Careful NCSteve.
Des is just waiting til you're ALL lured in here, and then ZAP-POOF! He hits the button & deletes the whole blog.
I'm not saying we won't get our hair mussed. But 30-40 million bloggers dead TOPS.
Then he comes out of his bunker. *shiver*
January 30, 2009 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mutual Assured Deconstruction.
January 30, 2009 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
God, if only I were so evil. But I'm willing to learn. Now where's that Nuclear Winter button?
January 31, 2009 3:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
huh ?
January 30, 2009 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
hey, we know what 2012 will bring, at least on the Democratic side.
As for the R's , I suspect we may actually see Bush/Palin ticket, with Jeb on top...
....please, don't think that way, I was talking about the political ticket...
January 30, 2009 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, then maybe Palin DOES have the Lillith complex, doncha know.
She'll only run if she's on top...
January 30, 2009 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Palin's comments were some of the most entertaining remarks I have ever heard. If she runs again it would be great for Saturday Night Live. Comedy is so much easier when the butt of the jokes writes the material.
January 30, 2009 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's one way to get to a 50 State Victory for the first time in American history. As someone who advocates for a total reformation of the republican party, I can only hope they offer this plenary indulgence of a ticket to the republican faithful.
January 30, 2009 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's an awful lot of tea leaf reading going on in here. ;)
January 30, 2009 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's an awful lot of misreading, too.
January 30, 2009 4:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's either reading tea leaves or serious delusions have overtaken our author.
Oh I want to play. My forecast: Hillary will NOT, repeat NOT, run for the nomination in 2012.
Look at it like this, Des. With the disastrous financial changes Bill signed off on instead of properly vetoing them, this is one way the Clintons can make amends and preserve some smattering of a "legacy". Bill's already been listed in the UK as one of the "Twenty-five people at the heart of the meltdown..." Best to make amends....
Best....
January 30, 2009 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, I don't think she'd run again mainly because it's a pain in the ass and this last one probably wrung any joy out of it. On the other hand, I don't think the finances would be a problem if there were a reason to do it.
January 31, 2009 4:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
...As the Democrats were busy bickering and splitting hairs, Michael Steele became the first African American RNC chairman.
January 30, 2009 6:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
How utterly cynical of them.
January 30, 2009 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink