NYCweboy

Bitter, Small Party of Several Thousand

As the heat dies down and vacations end, the story of this August is, in some ways, the story of a mythical phoenix rising from the ashes... I'm speaking of course of the sudden "resurgence" of the Republican Party.

Day after day, the drumbeat of polling suggests that opposition to health reform, as well as the challenges of other governmental projects (like Cash for Clunkers), and the general sense of economic distress has "ruined" president Obama's popularity and sent many folks rushing back to the Republican Party.

Aside from the fact that I think poll driven news writing is the worst kind of lazy journalism (except possibly trend articles based on pseudo science), I tend to think the newfound appeal of Republicans won't translate into much... at least for now. Republican - and the conservatives who feel they are stuck with their party - have not solved the very basic problems made clear in the last two election cycles. Indeed, if anything, the August "resurgence" tends to underline what hasn't happened more starkly than ever: without compelling alternative ideas, and without fresh leadership, Republicans have, in fact, little to offer but the same brew of anger, bitterness, sarcasm and resentment that the modern conservative movement has been relying on for years. That tactic is old, and relying on it to defeat healthcare, in particular, will amount to little.

It's a little, though, that could make a difference, if only a small difference. Small shifts in public sentiment built on appeals to anger and fear will make some of the more vulnerable members of Congress - especially in the House - potential victims. The bigger reality, though, is that Republican marginalization has put big, long term success out of reach... and that hasn't changed.

You Know You Can't Stop It, When They Start To Play (The Politics of Dancing on Healthcare)

Continuing my healthcare focus... I've largely ignored the politics surrounding the healthcare reform debate, mostly because the lack of a firm proposal has made the political arguments especially disconnected from anything real. That has been changing in the last few weeks, as we've begun to focus (not entirely well) on specifics. And now I think is the time to admit that the politics of healthcare reform... are not looking good.

This isn't surprising, and much of the unwinding of the political momentum has been predictable. Along with others, I've been arguing for months (okay... years, but let's focus on recent events) that we needed a full debate, in public, about our health care issues in the United States. Instead, for months, the major efforts to craft health care reform took place largely behind closed doors, and any debates about big issues took place largely among people very familiar with all the policy issues and who, generally, agreed on potential solutions.

The net effect has been, much as I and others expected, that as the reform bill's proposals have become more widely disseminated we are re-arguing points that many knowledgable people consider settled. As well, an issue like controlling costs of care now has the ability to derail the whole debate precisely because the people crafting the bill kept the cost of care debate out of their discussions. Had the reform bill been subjected to a more public (or... transparent) process, I suspect a number of key objections could have been raised and dealt with sooner.

As it stands, and as I remain convinced, the healthcare reform bill is looking kind of doomed. And politically, that may be very damaging to Democrats.

Or maybe not.

Don't Ask Me What I Want It For

I'd like to stick with the questions coming up around healthcare reform, because I think what's about to fall apart there is an indicator of what we're facing on a number of other issues coming this fall: the issue of what happens as we face facts about the lack of money within the Federal government.

The hardest question - though serious progressives hate it - that healthcare reform raised, all along, was how it would be paid for. Even when he initially proposed ideas about reforming health insurance, Barack Obama admitted that, in his theory, he knew of about half the money needed to pay for what was likely to cost about one trillion dollars. Though the plan specifics have been a moving target, that price tag has not moved substantially; for a minute it appeared that the Senate Health (HELP) committee had gotten to a $600 billion price tag... but that turned out to leave aside reforms to Medicaid and Medicare, which are under the Finance committee jurisdiction. The House bill comes in at about $1.3 trillion, all in.

The House also has offered the most mischievous solution, sure to become an easy partisan debating point - they proposed a surcharge on "high income" earners, with high income now defined at about $300,000 (bitter earners making $275,000... are now mad to discover they are not rich). The proposal to raise taxes has pretty much died on the vine: it's pretty clear that the full House can't pass a tax like this, the Senate leaders called it a non-starter, and the White House didn't really back it. And that's before conservatives had a field day going back to their familiar lines about "tax and spend liberals."

Conservatives, though, are not the problem; the problem is... we have no money. Even rich people.

Who Made The Very First Move? (Left, In The Dark, Again)

Being sick decidedly sucks... perhaps never more so than a holiday weekend where 24 hour news is dominated by 2 endlessly repeated and poorly understood stories... in my case, more about Michael Jackson and drugs... and Sarah Palin.

In the rush to sort out Sarah Palin, the general fascination with "why" and "what now" seem kind of missing the point. What this latest move shows, most vividly, is that the conservative right has an enormous problem which Sarah Palin embodies: the fact that the political narrative of right-wing politics has gotten completely away from the people best suited to help craft the agenda, and is, instead, in the hand of attractive charismatics with unclear motives.

Even as "serious" conservative types started analyzing all the possibilities, it was clear that Palin's real audience already got the message. Conservative true believers - the ardent "base" of the right - knew Palin had made the right choice because... well, she made it.

It's the cult of personality surrounding Palin, the one which brooks nary a dissenting word about her, that's most indicative of the political problem the right faces. Aside from soberly asking whether a first term Governor abandoning office midstream can seriously be considered for future office, the most basic observation of Palin's clumsy, confusing attempt to explain her choice was that it did nothing to lay the groundwork for future office seeking.

Can You Feel It?

There's a moment - I think it comes to everyone, sometime - when you realize "they just don't get it."

For me, sometime between college and my first few years out in the "real" working world, I realized that for many straight guys, it was just impossible to get them to understand being gay. And because of it, often, the idea of "gay rights" and debating them could often seem more theoretical than real.

When I look at Barack Obama, especially these days, I see that well meaning, liberal straght guy. I knew some (though not many; we were a somewhat conservative school in a conservative time) of them in college; I've met some since. In some ways, they're the biggest letdown, because years of liberal exposure has taught them all the right words. It all sounds so good... it's just so... abstract, from who they actually are.

I'm sure Obama means well; I don't think he has some kind of deep religious or moral objection to gays... but the whole thing about gay issues, for him, is I think kind of an abstraction. And because of that - and his natural "hands off" inclination to politics - I think he's been blind-sided by what gay rights mean for gay people - a passionate cause which cuts to the very core of our existence.

The More Things Change...

My road to blogging started with Lucianne Goldberg.

It's almost hard to remember, but for a long time, it was hard to find places to discuss news stories and issues, even online. Goldberg was one of the earliest to fill the need, creating a format where anyone could post interesting articles, and others could posts comments in a lively, freewheeling discussion. The bent, clearly was conservative, and it was never entirely hospitable to liberals, making folks like me lonely warriors for the opposing view... otherwise known as my favorite kind of argument.

In those days, I could affect dinner conversations much the way Jean Harlow does at the end of Dinner at Eight: "I was reading on Lucianne the other day" as opposed to "I was reading a book the other day..." but generally to the same double take effect.

Over time, I found other places; gradually, a new generation of young liberal minded folks started blogs and moved to prominence. The discussions, gradually, became a bit less freewheeling, and the arguments changed. And ultimately, I realized one way to make sure my voice was out there was... well, to put it out there.

Still, I like to wander back to where it all began... which got me thinking, today, about the way our politics and our reading and writing lives continue to evolve in the internet age.

Ghosts, Illusions... Specters

Thank goodness we bow have a clear example of how progressive ideas can make a difference; Senator Arlen Specter's realization about the importance of progressive principles and his decision to abandon the failed policies of Republicans...

Oh, heck, who are we kidding?

Well, we're only kidding ourselves. If nothing else, one can at least respect Specter's candid admission of personal success over anything else, principle included: he looked around, saw he would lose the GOP primary in Pennsylvania to Pat Toomey... and realized he was a Democrat. Or at least, that he could win as one.

Thankfully, few people are trying to dress up Specter's choice as an ideological victory (though God knows, someone would, of course), but accepting it on his terms. It's not romance, it's business. And for Specter, and for the Senate Dems, apparently this is good for business.

The Bags You Take To The Parade On The Road To Nowhere

So... anything happen while I was away?

Oh, right... tea parties. Or teabagging... or something.

I know it's a bit after the fact - though it was all the talk of the Sunday political shows - but I figured it was best to wait until they happened before weighing in. In general, I think the tea parties turned out to be just what they were likely to be: oversold, yet notable, exercises in gathering a lot of angry people to stand around... and then go home.

Whatever they were meant to accomplish - and just what that was, I think, was never established - the tea parties amounted to little more than the latest exercise in mass primal screams. The reason the tea parties can't have lasting impact - and they won't - is because, like so much of the rage that's about these days, there's nothing, really, to back it up. And really... I wish there were something to back it up, because we need that, desperately.

He's Your Guy, When Stocks Are High

For more than a week, I've been sitting on this post, hoping, in vain, that someone would provide the insights into the "bank rescue" plans of the Obama Administration. After stalling a day - ostensibly to "settle the stimulus bill" - Tim Geithner offered an explanation of his "plan" that left more questions than answers, and caused the latest wave of downward movement in the stock markets (where, I'd point out, people continue to suggest "we've found the bottom" shortly before another cataclysmic drop... does anyone understand that there's a pattern here?). Geithner's proposal, it seems clear, will not be enough... and that should not reassure anyone putting their faith in Obama's "foreclosure proposal" that arrives later this week - which so far appaears to be a $50 billion promise to rewrite some bad loans... and won't nearly address the problems at that size.

As our conversations - about the stimulus plan, the banking crisis, and our economy more generally - get more heated and less productive (I can't decide whether the conversation out of my Saturday post leaves me thrilled or terrified at the passions its provoked), I think reality is setting in, finally. And the reality is worse than many people want to face, and as bad as I've been suspecting all along.

Red asked over at her new place, a few weeks back, if we could finally have a serious conversation about nationalizing banks. The answer, I think, was pretty clear and has gotten clearer: no, we can't. Aside from the fact that - as I have to patiently explain to my Mom, too - we are not Sweden (it's the herring, I think, that's a deal breaker, not the social policies), we can't nationalize the banks because we lack the structure and the vision to make it so... and also because, that's not exactly our problem, just now.

Should we nationalize? I'd say no, still; not because it might not stave off some painful realities... but because I'm not sure we don't deserve pain. All the flailing around of the past few months - culminating in the horrendous stimulus bill and what I'd guess is our last attempt to "save" the banks - has been attempting to deny the obvious... and I'm inclined, out of it to finally say "let it come."

Weapons Of Mass Delusion

I think one of the biggest mistakes of the election season was the impression that what we want, as Americans, is to see more of the inner workings of government.  Probably, it's more like sausage making - do you really want to know how it's made, or do you just like the ambiance of a hot dogs and ribs place?

This is how Vegans win arguments. :)

I haven't written a lot this week (ha! you haven't written a lot in months... ed.) about the stimulus machinations, because it doesn't really feel all that compelling to me; there were bound to be roadblocks. Clearly there were going to have to be negotiations. And clearly, there was bound to be give and take. This story is not new... and really, I think a lot of people don't care for the sausage making of politics and government... which is why we give it over to others.

This is the week, apparently, when the Obama Nation discovered that their guy was... a politician, who often does what politicians do. He may do it with some damn fine speeches... but in the end, he's mortal, and the lofty goals he talked about... turned out to be lofty.

To be disillusioned, ultimately, you needed to start with illusions. I like to think, as a Clinton supporter from pretty early on, that I came around to Obama without illusions. And I think the answer to how we deal over the next few months is about those old Clintonian supporting instincts: welcome to our world, Obama Nation. We knew you'd get here eventually.

So let me be clear: the problem with the stimulus bill is that it's a bad bill. A brave, game-changing politician would have abandoned it and started over... and as it turns out... that's not Barack Obama.