Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

January 29, 2009

HALPERIN BLAMES OBAMA.... President Obama went to great lengths to reach out to House Republicans, trying to get them to support an economic stimulus in the midst of an economic crisis. The president not only offered them more tax cuts than seemed necessary, he also acted swiftly to remove spending provisions -- family planning, National Mall renovations -- that they mocked.

The entire Republican caucus, we now know, balked anyway. Time's Mark Halperin, naturally, is blaming Obama. From this morning's appearance on MSNBC:

"This is a really bad sign for Barack Obama to try to change Washington.... He needs bipartisan solutions. They went for it and they came up with zero.... [This] does not bode well for a future that is supposed to be post-partisan. [...]

"[Obama] could have gone for centrist compromises. You can say to your own party, 'Sorry, some of you liberals aren't going to like it, but I am going to change this legislation radically to get a big centrist majority rather than an all-Democratic vote.' He chose not to do that, that's the exact path that George Bush took for most of his presidency with disastrous consequences for bipartisanship and solving big problems."

It's hard to overstate how foolish this analysis is.

Halperin believes, for reasons that are unclear, that the paramount goal was to win the support of lawmakers who were wrong and who were advocating bad ideas. It's not about what works, or what would actually improve the economy in the midst of a serious recession. What really matters is "bipartisan solutions." Why? Because Mark Halperin says so. Merit be damned -- if Democrats liked the legislation and Republicans didn't, it's necessarily flawed.

In our reality, Obama did make "centrist compromises," and liberals in the Democratic Party didn't like it. Obama did the opposite of Bush's style of governing -- he engaged the congressional minority, listened to their ideas, and weakened his own bill to garner a larger majority. House Republicans insisted on a worse bill, Democrats wouldn't give them one, so the GOP voted against it. Halperin inexplicably believes that's Obama's fault.

I'm trying to wrap my head around Halperin's logic here. By his reasoning, the only appropriate thing for Obama to do was let Republicans -- who failed at governing, and who've been rejected by voters -- shape the bill, addressing the crisis they helped create. If the far-right House GOP caucus was unsatisfied, it was Obama's responsibility to make them happy. Why? Because Mark Halperin says so.

This is absurd.

Steve Benen 10:30 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (114)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments
I'm trying to wrap my head around Halperin's logic here.
Please re-read that sentence slowly a few times until the absurdity of the premise becomes clear to you. Posted by: Steve LaBonne on January 29, 2009 at 10:28 AM | PERMALINK

You apparently haven't followed Halperin very closely. This is exactly what you'd expect him to say. What's true has little to do with what he writes. He simply supports the Republican side.

Posted by: Mark-NC on January 29, 2009 at 10:33 AM | PERMALINK

If you are a regular reader of his blog like I am, you know Brad DeLong has a familiar heading that asks "Why Oh Why Can't We Have a Better Press Corps?" Sometimes, I think he might be going too hard on some people or institutions. But after seeing something like this, perhaps he's going too easy. "Absurd" doesn't even cover it, Steve. Unless the definition of "bipartisanship" has been changed to "give the other side whatever it wants, whenever it wants, despite recent election results," Obama's done quite a bit to reach out to the other side. It's not his fault if they chose to spit in his face each time.

Posted by: Brian J on January 29, 2009 at 10:34 AM | PERMALINK

i really wonder sometimes what the powers that be have on those washington magpies that they are so willing and eager to promote such obvious gop propaganda.

note to markie mark -- the public ain't buying your bullshit no more.

Posted by: linda on January 29, 2009 at 10:36 AM | PERMALINK

I was watching Morning Joe minus Joe live this morning and saw him spouting this drivel. I immediately changed the channel. I wish they would stop putting him on. His Politico style hackery is NOT how I was to start my day.

Posted by: Jon Parker on January 29, 2009 at 10:36 AM | PERMALINK

Is Halperin related to David Broder?

Posted by: zeitgeist on January 29, 2009 at 10:37 AM | PERMALINK

It should be clear by now that 'bipartisan' is a code-word for 'moderate Republican'. Of which there are none. Consequently, 'bipartisanship' is simply a mirage. Regrets and condolences may be sent to Mr. David Broder, c/o The Washington Post.

Posted by: MattF on January 29, 2009 at 10:37 AM | PERMALINK

Oooo, poor babies. They don't understand that no has to kiss their butts anymore.

Posted by: The Answer WAS Orange on January 29, 2009 at 10:37 AM | PERMALINK

it's not hard to overstate how foolish halperin is.

for example: even by the debased standards of right-wing commentary, this posting by mark halperin is blitheringly stupid and indicates that halperin is in the wrong profession.

or, for example: mark halperin apparently thinks there's an opening for another mindless right-wing hack to spout gibberish into the wind.

or, for example: mark halperin confirms what many of us have long suspected - he is a complete moron.

that's 3 in 60 seconds!

Posted by: howard on January 29, 2009 at 10:39 AM | PERMALINK

Drudge does rule his world, you know. We've been having an interesting discussion over w/ Karen Tumulty over at Swampland on the issue of media malfeasance.
.
http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/01/28/the-high-sheriffs-do-davos/?apage=2#comments

Posted by: wvng on January 29, 2009 at 10:41 AM | PERMALINK

The Mayor wants the Fire Department to use water to put out fires.

The Fire Department wants to use water.

The Republicans want to use gasoline vapor to put out fires.

Mark Halperin thinks it's the fault of the Mayor and the Fire Department for not adding gasoline vapor to the pumps.

Halperin is basically Drudge with an press pass.

Posted by: riffle on January 29, 2009 at 10:41 AM | PERMALINK

The logic is found in his motive not his statements. He's as big of a hack as Limbaugh. His only goal is to make Obama look bad.

Posted by: Justin on January 29, 2009 at 10:42 AM | PERMALINK

Halperin on "Mourning Joe" - Funny how they cut the part where he sat on Mika's lap, or did she sit on his?

Joe has become "Our Man of Constant Sorrows" with Sister Mika in attendance.

Posted by: berttheclock on January 29, 2009 at 10:45 AM | PERMALINK

Pundits would be wise to note the real politik of America - it's called electoral referendum, and the American people spoke loud and clear. The only safe Republican in '08 was one who had a congressional district drawn to his/her favor.

All other open contests in '08 were clear in their results - Democrats won because we the voters concluded Republican policies of the last 8 years were the ruin of our nation. Further, American voters are ready to make the Republicans obsolete if the Republicans can't change.

Halperin would be better served if he'd update his analyses! -Kevo

Posted by: kevo on January 29, 2009 at 10:47 AM | PERMALINK

Why is this a surprise? This is the guy who deemed McCain the "winner" of the week of Sept. 15, when the financial crisis hit, the stock markets tanked, Obama regained a lead in the polls that he never relinquished, McCain said the "fundamentals" of the economy were strong, changed his position about eight times on Lehman Bros., AIG, etc., and that both campaigns now look back on as the definitive turning point in the campaign. What's really surprising is why anyone takes this guy seriously.

Posted by: Geneva Mike on January 29, 2009 at 10:48 AM | PERMALINK

When the Republicans want to be part of a bipartisan approach to dealing with America's problems, they should let the Democrats know. Until then, the Democrats can ignore them and point out that the Republicans have not even tried to be bipartisan, no matter what deluded writers like Mark Halperin are telling us.

Posted by: freelunch on January 29, 2009 at 10:49 AM | PERMALINK

Time's Mark Halperin, naturally, is blaming Obama.

And in other news, water is wet.

Halperin is dumb, put maybe not dumb enough to have thought this up on his own. I wonder if one of his good GOP buddies passed on the meme at a coktail party, or if he just read it on Drudge.

Either way, the Washington press corps is intolerably corrupt. When the good denizens of these threads have GOP tools lying to them all the time -- hi, Matthew Marler! Hi, Mike K! Hi, Chicounsel! -- we learn not to trust them on anything they say. If they say the Sun rises in the East, we look it up. When one of those jackasses posts links about his favorite topic, we ignore them.

But the Washington press corps just says "More, please!"

Posted by: Gregory on January 29, 2009 at 10:50 AM | PERMALINK

Funny that Mark Halperin cites George Bush. I don't recall him being critical of the Bush administration and its "disastrous consequences for bipartisanship and solving big problems."

Posted by: OKDem on January 29, 2009 at 10:50 AM | PERMALINK

I think a lot of people miss the "big picture" perspective on Obama's promise to change the way Washington does bidness. If he's to have any success at all, he has to take the initiative, even when it involves important legislation, and even if the opposition isn't ready to play nice. Of course, this make hyperpartisans on both sides nervous, and maybe the left even more than the right. That's because when Republicans are in the majority, they run roughshod over everybody; now that Democrats are in the majority, there is some interest in using their majority to push through an aggressive and ambitious agenda. I think Obama is seeing the longer-term picture and modeling what genuine bipartisanship looks like. I, for one, hope he is successful.

Posted by: Spanky on January 29, 2009 at 10:51 AM | PERMALINK

Obama already did compromise with those miserable failures, but it's never gonna be good enough unless he actually lets the Repubs write the damn bill themselves. And it's never going to be good enough for Republican apologists like Halperin either.

Posted by: Allan Snyder on January 29, 2009 at 10:53 AM | PERMALINK

Greenwald has noted this before, to the press bipartisan means doing what the Republicans want regardless of Dem majority or public opinion. It's a lot like "mainstream" which also means doing what the Republicans want regardless of public opinion or polls.

Fuck 'em, the voters have spoken, Obama tried, now just marginalize the bastards and push them into their sorry minority corner for the rest of the term.

Posted by: ckelly on January 29, 2009 at 10:57 AM | PERMALINK

Steve, understanding Mark Halperin is a tricky matter if you assume he's a journalist of any sort.

Understanding Mark Halperin is an easy, simple matter if you understand that he's a Republican douchebag.

If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, why the hell would you think it's anything else?

Posted by: Chris on January 29, 2009 at 10:58 AM | PERMALINK

Republican rule is normative; Democratic administrations are aberrant.

This is one of the zombie memes. It lives in the medulla oblongata, next to 'Republican governance is a model of fiscal restraint' and 'Democrats are weak on defense', 'Republican governance is good for the stock market', and a host of others.

Success in the media, like success in banking, doesn't come from being right, it comes from being wrong the same way as everybody else who was wrong. You're measured by closeness of fit with the convention, not with reality.

"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." Max Planck (1858-1947)

Baseball managers are subject to the same process.

Posted by: Davis X. Machina on January 29, 2009 at 11:01 AM | PERMALINK

Corporate media in full effect. This is a surprise? The corporate powers are content to let Obama take his one term in the sun. They've branded him the first black president and they've decided to keep telling us that hope and change meant America is "post-racial" not that the progressives have taken over.

Posted by: grinning cat on January 29, 2009 at 11:02 AM | PERMALINK

To Mark Halperin-This from Robrt Ellsbergs HuffPost Today.
Having Republicans devise economic plans to help get America out of its economic disaster is like having the guide who got your group lost in a forest demand to be part of the team that will find a way out. If the guide had the slightest clue how to get you out, you wouldn't be lost in the first place.

Need I say anything more.

Posted by: Gandalf on January 29, 2009 at 11:04 AM | PERMALINK

If Halperin, OReilly, Limbaugh et al did to Superbowl coverage what they do to political coverage, would they keep their jobs?

Why are standards for sports coverage higher than for policy coverage?

Posted by: jen f on January 29, 2009 at 11:07 AM | PERMALINK

We have dropped our satellite and are going antenna. The stupid that oozes out of cable news no longer contaminates our home.

And Mark Halperin is a major source of stupid. Almost as stupid as that moron, Mike Pence.

Posted by: becca on January 29, 2009 at 11:07 AM | PERMALINK

"I was watching Morning Joe minus Joe live this morning and saw him spouting this drivel. I immediately changed the channel. I wish they would stop putting him on. His Politico style hackery is NOT how I was to start my day."

Why would anyone think they would stop putting him on? You think the kleptocracy wants real news on it's propaganda stations?

I think it's probably a decent effort to keep tabs on the corporate propaganda this blog and others spend way too much time devolved inside the kleptocrats propaganda.

Posted by: grinning cat on January 29, 2009 at 11:12 AM | PERMALINK

Haperin may be the stupidest person in print. How he even got 1/2way to where he is incomprehensible. With McCain out of the limelight, I think we can expect Halperin to declare everything is bad news for Obama.

Posted by: JoeW on January 29, 2009 at 11:16 AM | PERMALINK

It's not about what works, or what would actually improve the economy in the midst of a serious recession.

Really? So why is 1/3 Billion being spent on STD prevention? I look forward to convoluted rationalizations on this one.

There's a ton of stuff in the stimulus bill that has little to do with stimulating the economy and everything to do with pet partisan Dem projects. Hey, kudos for exercising the majority power you have, but don't kid yourself. The bill is as much about pork and pet projects, many which are anathema to republicans, as it is about stimulus.

Posted by: red state mike on January 29, 2009 at 11:18 AM | PERMALINK

Obama has exposed them for what they are. By taking away the silly issues they give for their opposition, Obama has stuck them to reasons that will be harder to defend in the future.

Posted by: bakho on January 29, 2009 at 11:19 AM | PERMALINK

There's something very strange going on today. A lot of people don't seem to understand that the stimulus bill actually passed the House.

Who needs bipartisanship? The Dems seem to be getting things done without it.

Posted by: Herb on January 29, 2009 at 11:19 AM | PERMALINK

Mark "McCain's Houses Gaffe is Terrible News--For Barack Obama!" Halperin? I wonder if he reads his GOP talking points verbatim, or generally just paraphrases them?

Posted by: Anon21 on January 29, 2009 at 11:21 AM | PERMALINK

I'm trying to wrap my head around Halperin's logic here.

I'm trying to figure why my dog humps the couch.

Posted by: Ed on January 29, 2009 at 11:24 AM | PERMALINK

The bottom line here is that the GOP is playing games... at their own peril. I believe that the American people, as evidenced by their voting back in November, are way past these petty little republican shenanigans.

I predict all this posturing will backfire on them.

Posted by: citizen_pain on January 29, 2009 at 11:27 AM | PERMALINK

we really, really, really need to stop paying attention to people like Halperin and drawing attention to them. is it really surprising that he would say any of this? of course its not! every time he opens his mouth, something just as stupid as what you've highlighted here comes out. every time. when has this guy ever had some kind of major, useful insight? what's he ever done but shill for Republicans? the guy's a biased, conservative Republican, and he 'reports' the news accordingly. the correct response to someone like his is not full engagement and refutation, its just a simple "Wrong. Sorry. Next!"

Posted by: onceler on January 29, 2009 at 11:28 AM | PERMALINK

The vote ought to send a message to President Obama that no matter the number of concessions, the Republicans simply don't want to cooperate. Bipartisanship requires the efforts of both sides.
Develop policy and implement it with or without them.

Posted by: impartial on January 29, 2009 at 11:31 AM | PERMALINK

uhhh red state, Do you realize how much the US spends on HIV-AIDS treatment? The STD prevention is a drop in the bucket. Fewer people on disability. Lower health insurance costs for everyone- (money that can be spent on something else). Lower costs for employers, less absenteeism. Why would you NOT want to promote a healthy workforce? Why would you want to spend gazillions on treatment if you could spent less than a penny on the dollar for prevention?
Stimulus is about putting more money in people's pockets. One way is to let them keep more of their money for other things by spending less on preventable diseases.

Not convoluted and not rocket science.

Posted by: bakho on January 29, 2009 at 11:32 AM | PERMALINK

Halperin . . . just another example why thinking Americans are ignoring the elite talking head, press corps.

Posted by: Continuum on January 29, 2009 at 11:35 AM | PERMALINK

Steve Benen wrote: "I'm trying to wrap my head around Halperin's logic here."

Halperin is not engaging in "logic". He is doing his job, for which he is paid a whole lot more than you are, and his job is to propagandize the American people on behalf of his employers, America's Ultra-Rich Ruling Class, Inc.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on January 29, 2009 at 11:36 AM | PERMALINK

The Obama campaign's stated position that if Halperin said they're winning then they were losing is going to prove to be a remarkably helpful rule of thumb for the next four (eight?) years.

Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/magazine/21Gibbs-t.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

Posted by: a on January 29, 2009 at 11:36 AM | PERMALINK

"I think Obama is seeing the longer-term picture and modeling what genuine bipartisanship looks like. I, for one, hope he is successful."

Genuine bipartisanship is what had us stuck in Vietnam and rushed into war in Iraq under false pretenses. I think it also killed welfare, led to the collapse of the banking system etc etc. To me "bipartisanship" means freezing out dissent and running lock step like a lemming with conventional wisdom. A conventional wisdom which is usually wrong.

Posted by: grinning cat on January 29, 2009 at 11:40 AM | PERMALINK

What "centrist" solutions is he talking about? SPELL IT OUT! If he talking about a bill that is mostly tax cuts- does he really think that would pass in the House!? Even Blue Dogs would vote against it.

Posted by: Raoul on January 29, 2009 at 11:41 AM | PERMALINK

uhhh red state, Do you realize how much the US spends on HIV-AIDS treatment? The STD prevention is a drop in the bucket.
Posted by: bakho

It belongs in a different bill whose purpose is disease prevention and creating a healthy workforce, not in a bill whose primary purpose is economic stimulus. The key metric for success of this bill is jobs created and economy grown, sooner than later.

Posted by: red state mike on January 29, 2009 at 11:43 AM | PERMALINK

GOP! No, new ideas but they can sure say NO real loud. They're boldly stepping forward to bring Hooverism into the 21st century!

Posted by: socialist tom on January 29, 2009 at 11:48 AM | PERMALINK

Halperin is a professional liar; he pretends to speak as an analyst and speaks instead for the right wing. He calls the right wing the "middle" and argues from that distorted position. He is not a trustworthy person. He will be very busy in the coming days.

Posted by: widebear on January 29, 2009 at 11:50 AM | PERMALINK

It belongs in a different bill whose purpose is disease prevention and creating a healthy workforce, not in a bill whose primary purpose is economic stimulus. The key metric for success of this bill is jobs created and economy grown, sooner than later.

Let's see, as an economic stimulus, STD prevention creates jobs by:

--increasing production of vaccines.
--increasing doctors and nurses.
--increasing clinics and those who staff them.
--increasing research activities into more and better vaccines.

See? That took all of 10 seconds for me to identify. Try thinking outside of the 'Demz love the SEXXor!' box you're in and you might realize something. Thinking for yourself is fun!

Posted by: Terraformer on January 29, 2009 at 11:57 AM | PERMALINK

Let's see, as an economic stimulus, STD prevention creates jobs by:
--increasing production of vaccines.
--increasing doctors and nurses.
--increasing clinics and those who staff them.
--increasing research activities into more and better vaccines.
Posted by: Terraformer

Yea, vaccine production is manpower-intensive...not. And generating new doctors to fill the slots you've created can happen quickly...not. And research programs hire lots of the people who will be losing their jobs in the downturn...not.

Try again.

Posted by: red state mike on January 29, 2009 at 12:04 PM | PERMALINK

In all fairness, Obama invited this analysis by making bipartisanship one of the criteria by which the legislation should be judged and giving Republicans one of the easiest possible victories by voting against it.

Republicans are in the opposition. It's their job to oppose! It's the Republican position, and some probably actually believe it, that the current recession was caused by too much government, too high of taxes, too much regulation and too much spending. Of course they are going to try and water down any stimulus package as much as possible and then vote against it any way. That is 100% consistent with their beliefs.

Posted by: Solomos on January 29, 2009 at 12:21 PM | PERMALINK

Steve LaBonne

I am guessing that you can only read "that sentence slowly" because you have to. It takes you that many times to come up with the un-interpretable response as to the so-called "abusrdity" of it. Good luck getting out of pre-school!

Posted by: James Matson on January 29, 2009 at 12:22 PM | PERMALINK

Elections only have consequences when Repubs win. Otherwise, it's a call for bipartisanship that reinforces the center-right status quo.
I know because Broder, er, Halperin, er, some other douchebag said so.
Geez, in order to be a conservative commentator at Time, do you merely need keep from drooling to much on the copy and have someone remind you to breathe, preferably through your nose, once in a while?

Posted by: Strangely Enough on January 29, 2009 at 12:22 PM | PERMALINK

I call bullshit on Red State Mike's assertion that pork is anathema to Republicans.

As for the "convoluted rationalizations," we need nothing of the kind, and Mike is either being dishonestly or deliberately obtuse in his professed ignorance (not, of course, that ignorance isn't Red State Mike's default condition). Asked and answered already, jackass, but just for laughs, here we go again:

The money goes to bolster state Medicaid budgets, thus freeing state funds for other projects. Nice. Simple. Effective. The Democratic way.

It's no surprise to see Red State Mike so fervently embrace the talking points of the Republican clown show, but it is shameful to see him so smug in his ignorance, if unashamed of his embrace of a mendacious, corrupt, incompetent and tyrannical Party.

Shame on you, Mike.

Posted by: Gregory on January 29, 2009 at 12:23 PM | PERMALINK

"absurdity" -

Posted by: Matson on January 29, 2009 at 12:25 PM | PERMALINK

Halperin's Wiki entry is hilarious. One paragraph about basically his life before 2000 and 27 citations of his being Wrong About Everything for the rest of it.

But, like everyone said, his 'job' is to be a GOP hack. It helps to know this is what is going through his mind whenever he opens his mouth: "what I'm saying now is how I wish things to be, la la la, I can't hear you!"

Posted by: Bigby on January 29, 2009 at 12:27 PM | PERMALINK

Take 100 people and put them on a basketball court. Stand 47 of them on one side and 53 on the other. Make each side stand in one group, close together, then decide which group has the advantage of being the majority. That group has the "mandate".

If you think you can tell the difference between 53 and 47 people standing in a group you're either the Rainman, or you are probably foaming at the mouth and writing about the horrible concessions that the Democrats have made to those big jerks who used to be in charge.

Posted by: dannyshenanigan on January 29, 2009 at 12:30 PM | PERMALINK

When the GOP was in charge bi-partisan = Democrats give everything now that the Democrats are in charge bi-partisan = give the GOP everything it wants.

When the FUCK did Bi-Partisan come mean give the other side everything they want at the expense of everything you want? Seriously. Bi-partisan is a two way street people!!!!!!!!!

The media are hacks and stupid to boot.

Posted by: ET on January 29, 2009 at 12:31 PM | PERMALINK

Your analysis is very prejudiced. Obama is the one engaging in terrible policy. Yes, he did attempt to move to the center by incorporating "tax cuts" into his plan. But not all tax cuts are the same. Temporary payouts don't stimulate the economy. Permanent rate reductions do. Permanently reduce the corporate income tax and the capital gains tax rates --- *then* you will get Republicans to sign on. And this is to say nothing of the spending provisions in this bill, which are atrociously partisan and have nothing to do with economic stimulus.

Posted by: asr on January 29, 2009 at 12:40 PM | PERMALINK

Yes, dannyshenanigan, but 5 yrs ago when there were 51 on one side and 49 on the other, the 51 said, "you may as well not even be in this room because 100% of the time, we are 100% going to vote 100% the same way (against you), so why don't you 49 go stand out in the hall, and for good measure, we're going to LOCK THE F*CK!NG DOORS SO YOU CAN'T EVEN SPEAK OR HEAR WHAT WE'RE SAYING.

And don't forget taking their ball and going home...

Now, with a BIGGER Majority, everyone (Mark Halperin loves) has to have their way? Hypocrites, the lot of them.

Posted by: Bigby on January 29, 2009 at 12:43 PM | PERMALINK

I'm trying to wrap my head around Halperin's logic here.

Ever try to "wrap your head around" a cloud of methane gas recently emitted by a cow? Same thing.

Posted by: TCinLA on January 29, 2009 at 12:45 PM | PERMALINK

Stimulating the economy means getting people to spend (again). If people are in debt, tax cuts will result in people paying down their debt, not spending it. If you give tax breaks or credits on consumption taxes, then people will be inclined to spend it to take advantage of a short term break. Tax credits for energy conservation mods to houses, for example.

Want to stimulate the manufacturing sector? Recapitalize the equipment being worn out in Iraq. The assembly lines are there, the workforce is there, the work is there, it is almost all made in the USA, the jobs pay well, the work can begin immediately. Yet a relative pittance is being spent in this fashion.

And this is to say nothing of the spending provisions in this bill, which are atrociously partisan and have nothing to do with economic stimulus.
Posted by: asr

Fact

Posted by: red state mike on January 29, 2009 at 12:47 PM | PERMALINK

Maybe when someone keeps saying stupid things, it's because he's stupid.

Posted by: rbe1 on January 29, 2009 at 12:49 PM | PERMALINK

Can someone please explain why Halperin still has a job?

Posted by: annderson on January 29, 2009 at 12:51 PM | PERMALINK

10 "blue dog" democrats were against the bill. Dont you guys think its strange that we have blue dog democrats but not a single red dog republican?

Posted by: Akinola on January 29, 2009 at 12:53 PM | PERMALINK

Halperin's Wiki entry is hilarious. One paragraph about basically his life before 2000 and 27 citations of his being Wrong About Everything for the rest of it.

Yep. Apparently DougJ at Balloon Juice provided some of that.

Posted by: TR on January 29, 2009 at 12:59 PM | PERMALINK

In any other country in the world, Democrats would be viewed as hardcore right-wingers. From what Obama has shown me so far, he's no different than Bush except for the fact that he's intelligent.

Posted by: Lynn on January 29, 2009 at 1:01 PM | PERMALINK

While I detest his political views, I continue to respect Mark Halprin as a fantastic novelist, pardon, I meant fabulist.

Posted by: Ouroboros on January 29, 2009 at 1:12 PM | PERMALINK

Mark Halperin and John Harris wrote "The Way to Win."
The title of the third chapter? "Matt Drudge Rules our World."

Posted by: Aaron on January 29, 2009 at 1:24 PM | PERMALINK

I'd just like to thank red state mike and asr for proving they have no clue how an economy actually works.

For example, they don't understand that many states aren't allowed to run deficits. Due to that, they're going to have to make huge cuts, including in family planning and other health services.

So instead of giving money to the states to keep people employed (those who provide those aforementioned services), to reduce health costs, and to help cover other needs, folks like rsm and asr think giving more tax breaks to huge companies. Many of which either received a tax cut from GOP's first round of them several years ago, or which don't actually pay taxes anyway (two thirds of all American corporations).

You know, there's a reason the American people are sick of the GOP -- they've been proven wrong time and again over the past 8 years, and put is in this mess.

So you'll have to excuse us if we choose not to listen to you or take you seriously.

Posted by: Mark M on January 29, 2009 at 1:29 PM | PERMALINK

Oh, and while there is a lot of junk in the stimulus bill as it currently stands. Tom Edsall points out that much of it is, in fact, GOP junk, put there as Obama tried to make concessions.

Just an FYI ...

Posted by: Mark M on January 29, 2009 at 1:32 PM | PERMALINK

akinola--those "red dogs" (don't know if that's the right color to call them, but it doesn't matter) in the House have either been primaried out (in more conservative districts) or beaten by Democrats. A lot of them used to be in the Northeast; the current breakdown of the House among New England and New York members is 48 Dems to three Republicans. New England, once a key area for the party, has none whatsoever.

Moreover, if they voted for the stimulus, many feared they'd be challenged in a primary by anti-tax folks like the Club for Growth, and a few have been beaten in recent years that way, so they thought it was safer to vote no.

That means of course, Obama can say "hey, I tried to cooperate and gave them things many Dems didn't like, but the Republicans gave diddlysquat in terms of votes, so we'll just do it ourselves now", but the Republicans don't seem to be thinking more than about a half step ahead right now, where Obama is watching their pitches, waiting for ones he can send over the fence...

Posted by: noplot on January 29, 2009 at 1:34 PM | PERMALINK

I can think of no one in the punditry game with less credibility than Mark Halperin.
Mark, that includes Dick Morris.

Posted by: THC on January 29, 2009 at 1:44 PM | PERMALINK

"It's hard to overstate how foolish this analysis is.

Halperin believes, for reasons that are unclear, that the paramount goal was to win the support of lawmakers who were wrong and who were advocating bad ideas."

He's also foolish to think there are centrist ReThuglicans left in Congress.

Posted by: Cal Gal on January 29, 2009 at 1:44 PM | PERMALINK

"We have dropped our satellite and are going antenna."

I've read that HD antennas are superior to cable. Something about not enough bandwidth to carry full HD signals for 500 channels, or along those lines.

Good luck!

Posted by: Sarah Barracuda on January 29, 2009 at 1:53 PM | PERMALINK

Oh, I am going to hate myself in the morning for feeding the trolls, but here goes.

"Really? So why is 1/3 Billion being spent on STD prevention? I look forward to convoluted rationalizations on this one."

First of all, it's not for STD prevention, it's for not requiring states to obtain a waiver to spend Medicaid money on family planning.

And second, because it saves more money for states that it spends. More money to spend on, say, fixing schools or roads and bridges, or (my favorite and not generally cited as crucial infrastructure) replacing century-old water and sewer pipes.

Posted by: Cal Gal on January 29, 2009 at 1:58 PM | PERMALINK

"Dont you guys think its strange that we have blue dog democrats but not a single red dog republican?"

Not really.

We're not members of an organized political party. We're Democrats. (Will Rogers)

They're members of the Cult of Rush. Haven't you been reading the news lately?

Posted by: Sarah Barracuda on January 29, 2009 at 2:06 PM | PERMALINK

The GOP wants SOCIAL PROMOTION of their failed ideas. I thought they were against that sort of thing.

Posted by: iLarynx on January 29, 2009 at 2:10 PM | PERMALINK

The substance of the GOP opposition is largely irrelevant to the narrative for guys like Halperin.

That is to say, suppose John Boehner had said the following on the floor of the House yesterday:

We are simply not going to support a bill that does not include substantial tax relief for hypothetical high-earning microorganisms on Venus. This package fails to consider the growth generating potential of non-existent bacteria on faraway planets, and instead wastes hard-earned heartland dollars on Big Government programs designed to increase abortions and line the pockets of fat cat high school teachers and bus drivers. This is a matter of principle and conscience. We must act wisely. Venusian stimulus is the only responsible choice.

I suspect he'd still kvetch and cluck about the failings of bipartisanship ... In what can only be seen as a failure to change the culture in Washington, President Obama was unable to persuade House Republicans that earth-centric investment would be more likely to create jobs on earth ...

On the other hand, I think the public is not quite so thick-headed, and that the general impression in the world out there is, well, this.

Posted by: mk on January 29, 2009 at 2:16 PM | PERMALINK

Mark Halperin=pundick.

-GSD

Posted by: GSD on January 29, 2009 at 2:27 PM | PERMALINK

There is no such job as "stimulus". This means it is always possible to describe any possible job that stimulus money could create as "not a stimulus job". The republican talking point about contraceptives is meaningless.

Saying that "whatever you don't like" should be in another bill, in a system of government that allows riders, is meaningless. Especially when discussing an overarching "stimulus" bill that has possibly the largest remit for wide ranging topics other than an omnibus budget bill.

Halperin is a tool. You notice he never applied his logic to both parties for the "bipartisan" solution, only that the democrats should give up their ideas. I can only presume that Republicans can't do bipartisan, because "bi" means "essentially gay".

Posted by: royalblue_tom on January 29, 2009 at 2:29 PM | PERMALINK

Temporary payouts don't stimulate the economy. Permanent rate reductions do. Permanently reduce the corporate income tax and the capital gains tax rates --- *then* you will get Republicans to sign on.

In other words, we should continue the same failed policies of the past 30 years in the hope that maybe this time they'll actually work because we really really really really want them to?

Clap harder -- I don't think Tinker Bell can hear you yet.

Posted by: Mnemosyne on January 29, 2009 at 2:30 PM | PERMALINK

Ah, red state mike, aren't you the goon who compares the murder of innocent women and children via high explosive to veneral disease? Don't you think that a mere 1/3 of a billion spent on preventing that kind of thing is worth it?

By the way, how many 1/3rds of billions is spent every month in Iraq?

Only a psychotic moron supports blowing our money on blowing up people and denigrates spending our money to save the lives and heath of our citizens.

Posted by: the on January 29, 2009 at 2:49 PM | PERMALINK

Sorry RSM. Jobs will be created or saved. That's an improvement over jobs lost, and has a more stimulative effect than making the Bush tax cuts permanent.

Try again.

Posted by: kenga on January 29, 2009 at 2:59 PM | PERMALINK

Halperin is whistling past the (not completely full) graveyard of the recent Republican-dominated era.

Obama offered to deal, but Repubs didn't help. Can Repubs survive Congressional races whether the economy recovers? Are they joining Limbaugh in hopes Obama fails, so America will return to Repubs in 2010 and 2012? Do they really really want America to fail?

Posted by: MarkH on January 29, 2009 at 3:01 PM | PERMALINK
Recapitalize the equipment being worn out in Iraq.

Perhaps you could explain to me why that doesn't belong in a bill for Defense Appropriations?
Oh, wait, it already is.
And the economy is still tanking.
It'll take longer to ramp-up assembly lines for up-armor kits than it will to train nurses.
And we already know the military procurement process is laden with both pork and flat-out waste.

Posted by: kenga on January 29, 2009 at 3:05 PM | PERMALINK

Stimulating the economy means getting people to spend (again).

Which is why the plutocratic policies of the party you support got us into such a mess. Given your support for the GOP's New Gilded Age polices -- to say nothing of your serial dishonesty, willful obtuseness and general bad faith -- why should anyone listen to your jackassery now?

Posted by: Gregory on January 29, 2009 at 3:08 PM | PERMALINK

Recapitalize the equipment being worn out in Iraq.

Or, we could cut our bloated military that gleefully signs up for slaughtering innocents (see, for example, SJGRSM's many posts in support of the war on Iraq) and save hundreds of billions every year for things that actually make the lives of Americans better. Oh, and cut down on the amount of suffering inflicted on non-American peoples. Oh, and with all that money left over we might even be able to improve the lives of people outside of the United States. Without dropping bombs on their women and children.

Posted by: the on January 29, 2009 at 3:14 PM | PERMALINK
But not all tax cuts are the same. Temporary payouts don't stimulate the economy. Permanent rate reductions do. Permanently reduce the corporate income tax and the capital gains tax rates --- *then* you will get Republicans to sign on

Cites, please.
1. re: temporary payouts
2. re: permanent rate reductions
3. corporate income tax and capital gains(Cayman Islands? Frankly, I don't believe they exist.)
4. re: Republicans signing on

You're going to have to refute the information in the link I'll put below, on 1, 2, 3, and numerous articles and statements about and from Republican leaders for 4.

http://www.economy.com/dismal/article_free.asp?cid=102598
Scroll down to the chart: "Fiscal Economic Bank(sic) for the Buck"

Posted by: kenga on January 29, 2009 at 3:21 PM | PERMALINK

And second, because it saves more money for states that it spends. More money to spend on, say, fixing schools or roads and bridges, or (my favorite and not generally cited as crucial infrastructure) replacing century-old water and sewer pipes.
Posted by: Cal Gal

There are lots and lots of ideas that save more money than they spend. That is not the test for what is a good idea here. Stimulus here is focused on jobs and getting the economy going. Can you show anything that might suggest the $$$/job of spending on STD prevention is better than, say, recapitalizing worn out Humvees? I really doubt it.

Posted by: red state mike on January 29, 2009 at 3:22 PM | PERMALINK

For example, they don't understand that many states aren't allowed to run deficits. Due to that, they're going to have to make huge cuts, including in family planning and other health services.

The stimulus bill contains huge payments to the states to help them remain solvent.

So instead of giving money to the states to keep people employed (those who provide those aforementioned services), to reduce health costs, and to help cover other needs, folks like rsm and asr think giving more tax breaks to huge companies.

Uhhh, show me where I am advocating for tax breaks for huge companies.

Posted by: red state mike on January 29, 2009 at 3:25 PM | PERMALINK

It'll take longer to ramp-up assembly lines for up-armor kits than it will to train nurses.
And we already know the military procurement process is laden with both pork and flat-out waste.
Posted by: kenga

First, I'm talking about rehabbing and refurbishing vehicles. We already have depots that can do this, and would surge the manpower. We can start immediately. We can ramp up the uparmor kits immediately. We can keep open assembly lines due to shut down immediately.

Second, how long does it take to make a nurse? Is it 2 years or 4?

Posted by: red state mike on January 29, 2009 at 3:30 PM | PERMALINK

Second, how long does it take to make a nurse? Is it 2 years or 4?

"Make" a nurse? Do you mean educate and license a nurse?

What kind of nurse? Licensed practical nurse? Registered nurse? Nurse practitioner? Clinical nurse leader? Certified registered nurse anesthetist? Clinical nurse specialist? Does the nurse in question already have a degree? What state are you talking about?

Posted by: shortstop on January 29, 2009 at 3:52 PM | PERMALINK

Mark Halperin is one of the most repulsive, repellant, and nauseating pundits in the business.

The guy is an obnoxious hack who wouldn't know the truth if it whacked over the head.

He's madly in love with Matt Drudge and Rush Limbaugh.

Posted by: JK on January 29, 2009 at 3:54 PM | PERMALINK

First, I'm talking about rehabbing and refurbishing vehicles.
Vehicles which are presently 8000 miles from the US, and in indeterminate shape. Those easily re-habbed can be done onsite. The others must be transported by non-US workers, often on non-US vehicles and vessels. Unless you're gonna tell me all the contractors in Iraq dealing with logistics are US citizens. Furthermore, we'd first have to assess which will cost more to transport and fix than to replace outright.
We can ramp up the uparmor kits immediately.
This has already been tried, the companies providing them needed to build new facilities and had backlogs of several years, as with MRAPs.
Unless you're suggesting nationalizing them? That seems out of character.
We can keep open assembly lines due to shut down immediately.
GM does not manufacture military vehicles on the assembly lines that have been or are about to be shut down, all of which will cost billions and take years to re-tool.
Other assembly lines are working on existing procurement orders.

Nurses - depends. Do you want an LPN? An RN? A BSN? I'm sure I've missed some, too.
It's much faster if they're about to graduate, having chosen to go into the field due to a pre-existing shortage - before the budget cuts caused by the downturn in the economy caused the hospitals and clinics they were hoping to work at cut or eliminate open positions and existing staff.
Or if they are currently out of work.
You are aware that a majority of the hospitals and clinics in the US are at least partially funded by states, which have been slashing services to avoid budget deficits, right?
The money has got to come from somewhere.
I am in favor of employing what is called "economy of scale".

Posted by: kenga on January 29, 2009 at 4:15 PM | PERMALINK
I am in favor of employing what is called "economy of scale".
And scale is important. The mere fact that the US government(and others around the globe) is seriously contemplating spending a container ship laden with cargo containers which each contain a SHITLOAD of money will have a bigger more positive effect on confidence than any number of tax cuts or increases in military spending. Posted by: kenga on January 29, 2009 at 4:23 PM | PERMALINK

Vehicles which are presently 8000 miles from the US, and in indeterminate shape. Those easily re-habbed can be done onsite. The others must be transported by non-US workers, often on non-US vehicles and vessels.
So specify they come home on US-flagged merchant vessels. I believe they do anyway. Vehicles aren't getting rehabbed on site, but they are getting repaired where it is easy.

Military acquisition for new programs is time consuming. Keeping open existing lines is easy...easier than closing them.

Nurses - depends. Do you want an LPN? An RN? A BSN? I'm sure I've missed some, too.

Idunno. It was your argument.

You are aware that a majority of the hospitals and clinics in the US are at least partially funded by states, which have been slashing services to avoid budget deficits, right?
Posted by: kenga

The stimulus bill contains about $180 Billion to states for medical and basic relief. Will they lead to increased spending?

There's a fair bit of infrastructure work in there, most of which appears to be long lead items that won't really ramp up until late 2010, yet we have immediate needs.

I think the need for repairing and replacing hardware worn out after 5 years of war, and the manufacturing base already in place to ramp up fast, suggests if you want immediate (months) impact there's a target.

As for tax policy, use reductions and credits on consumption to encourage immediate spending. Credits on energy efficient cars, HVAC, houses for example.

Posted by: red state mike on January 29, 2009 at 4:33 PM | PERMALINK

Shorter Halprin:

"The mechanic did'nt fix my car because he wasnt wearing a blue shirt, he's supposed to wear a blue shirt, oh why did'nt he wear a blue shirt."

"Because he did'nt wear a blue shirt my car was not fixed."

The pathology of "the village" laid bare.

Posted by: DonkeyKong on January 29, 2009 at 4:50 PM | PERMALINK

Did Halperin used to post here as "Mary"?

Posted by: short fuse on January 29, 2009 at 4:52 PM | PERMALINK

Red State Mike wrote: The stimulus bill contains huge payments to the states to help them remain solvent.

Including the Medicare payments you and your fellow liar painted as "contraception funding," and continued to do even after corrected.

Jackass.


Posted by: Gregory on January 29, 2009 at 5:44 PM | PERMALINK

Obo's outreach to republicans was a guise. Liberals always take credit for success, and if they thought this Stimulus Scam would be a success they would walk it right through.

When they think the scam might fail, they need someone to share the blame.

Now if it fails, Libs will have to blame bankrupt business, the unemployed, and broke citizens.

Posted by: Cogito on January 29, 2009 at 7:25 PM | PERMALINK

Really you cant satisfy everyone and there will also be disagreement because the republicans did not want President Obama in office because of the mess they put the country in.

Posted by: Dee Dee on January 29, 2009 at 7:33 PM | PERMALINK

I find it amazing that anyone who opposes or speaks the truth about obama and the democrats are immediately labeled as stupid and out of touch with reality. Yet, no one in the democrat party or the great one known as obama have explained how this stimulas package is going to help the economy. All they tell us is what we want to hear. It is going to create jobs. Yeah, right, and I have some ocean front property in Arizona I will sell you Kool Aid drinking fools. I never knew how gullible some Americans were until obama was elected. I mean stupidity is a right, but 58 percent of Americans abused that right on November 4, 2008. God Bless America, we need you now more than ever. The moral compass of our great country has been turned upside down by the great one obama.

Posted by: TLH on January 29, 2009 at 7:46 PM | PERMALINK

TLH,

From your disjointed rant, I have to assume that you're a republican and think the last eight years have been wonderful and the U.S.A. is stronger than ever. I'm sorry, but you ARE stupid and out of touch with reality.

Posted by: bdop4 on January 29, 2009 at 7:53 PM | PERMALINK

It never fails those who are critizing the most now, said absolutely nothing against the previous political majority party as they allowed Wall Street, Banks, etc to drain our country's economy thus causing our current economic collapse.

Posted by: marsha gilliam on January 29, 2009 at 7:55 PM | PERMALINK

Who cares what Republicans have to say? If this plan is the end all to the nations economy you should all be dancing in the streets people on the Republican side are opposing it. If it works it will mean the end of the Republican party for decades, But could it be that the annointed one is looking for some bipartisan cover so when it does fail, and it will, he can say " it was a bipartisan measure. They are as much as fault as us?" I couldn't be more proud of the Republicans in the house who said no to this nightmare that generations will be paying for and creates not one permanent job. The amount of financial stupitity shown by these comments amazes me but I guess this is what years of public education has wrought. Most of you have no clue about how this country works other than the few years you have been alive and think that is the sum total of history. C'mon be happy and proud your party has done this with no Republican support. Can't you just wait to show us how right you all were?

Posted by: J Ward on January 29, 2009 at 8:35 PM | PERMALINK

OK folks, Republicans deserve their fair share of blame for a number of different things. However, since democrats took control of the Congress in 2006 nothing has been done, as they were obviously willing to take their chances and muddle through to the general. For those who want to blame ONLY Bush and Republicans for the current financial mess one really need to look at folks like Chris Dodd, Senate Banking Chair, and Barney Frank, House Financial Services Committee Chair. These guys are neck deep in this mess and get a virtual free pass because well...it is easier to pin the blame on Bush and his crew and the media as a whole is all too willing to accommodate. Hell, even I can�t blame the strategy but that does not make it right or in the interest of the country.

The abundance of mortgage foreclosures started the financial mess and I commend POTUS BO for actually laying some blame on hyper consuming Americans and their complete and utter lack of any and all fiscal restraint and responsibility. My words not his but at least he said it. Yes, the financial institutions made it easy for people to get in over their heads and were greedy too but is that an actual legitimate excuse? That is like blaming the store instead of the thief for stolen merchandise because it was out in the open and not under lock and key.

And what about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?

Chuck Hagel sponsored legislation in 2005 (co-Sponsored by McCain) about mortgages as he predicted the current mess as it turns out, spot on. In fact, you can go back as far as 2003 for some regulatory legislation introduced in the house by GWB�s Sec of Treasury only to be opposed on a party line vote by house Democrats and similarly opposed by the Senate Democrats in 2005 and 2006. Legislation never even came to a vote. Democrats were against it because they feel that home ownership is a right not a privilege, as it would unfairly restrict lower income Americans from the dream of home ownership. Does anyone remember this quote from Barney Frank in 2003 that touches on the above point?

"'These two entities Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Funny how John McCain can get crucified for saying the fundamentals of our economy are strong during the campaign but Barney Frank a banking chairman could not see the runaway locomotive that was Fannie Mac and Freddie Mac because he wanted people who could clearly not afford a home to have the ability to do so anyway? But it is only GWB and the Republicans that are responsible. If you say so!

Bottom-line, our entire Congress, nay government has failed us. I support the party currently in the minority and will take the blows accordingly for my parties� failures, but Democrats should not get too comfortable, Americans have short memories and the time of Democrats shitting roses will soon be at and end. Then again, continue the welfare and entitlement spending and you just might buy another election. My bipartisan criticism can only go so far.

Posted by: onetimeuser on January 29, 2009 at 9:53 PM | PERMALINK

Halperin is the genius that declared that McCain's "I don't know how many houses I own" gaffe was the worst day of the campaign for Obama, shocking even Cokie Roberts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jO2dScuNnDI


Posted by: Pepe on January 29, 2009 at 11:19 PM | PERMALINK

Bdop4. You should change you name to be a dope 4 obama and democrats. You bunch of Kool Aid drinking fools are the true definition of STUPID. Of course, the smart ones know who created the crisis. Things were fine up until a couple of years ago until Prince Reid and Princess Pelosi took over. Have you Kool Aid drinkers forgotten who has been in charge for the past couple of years. The dumb o crats I mean democrats, same thing, have been in charge ever since the financial crisis began.

Another good example of democrats for STUPID are Chris Dodd and Barney Frank. Those two idiots knew the housing market was getting ready to crash because of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but they turned their heads while crooked executives filled their pockets with cash. Then they tried to push the blame off on President Bush. What hipocrisy. Another good name for obama and the democrats is the Stupid Squad. You bunch of loser democrats can sure dish out the criticism to President Bush and Republicans, but when someone critizes your great one obama (only great in his own mind) and the immoral Kool Aid drinkers, I mean democrats, same thing, you idiots go crazy with the name calling. Kool Aid drinkers would follow obama to the ends of the Earth. I wouldn't follow him across the street. He is nothing but another thug from Chicago. Just look at his cabinet, full of thugs including Clinton.

You democrats brag about being in charge now, but you are always looking for someone to blame for your screw-ups. I know the drive by media is helping your cause by portraying obama as the solution to the world problems. The media will protect obama's screw-ups with all their influence. However, there is good news are the horizon. I talk to middle class Americans every day. The ones who had previously supported obama are losing faith. They can see clearly now and understand the days of hope and change are over. Actually, hope and change never really existed except for in the minds of the Kool Aid drinkers. You idiots need to get a grip, being popular and stupid doesn't make you right.

Posted by: TLH on January 29, 2009 at 11:26 PM | PERMALINK

It's funny watching the Swaggering Jingoistic Goon calling himself Red State Mike suggesting that what we need is more money for sociopaths like him to be able to murder innocents. I guess when you have dedicated your life to the pursuit of death, when your every joy is premised on the slaughter of those who have done nothing to you, to yours, and pose no threat to either you or yours, it is impossible to imagine doing anything that might be good for any human life.

Trillions for murder, not one red cent for quality of life.

Posted by: the on January 29, 2009 at 11:32 PM | PERMALINK

The phrase "Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac" is a clue that the person talking has no idea what caused the collapse of the financial industry.

Posted by: RickD on January 29, 2009 at 11:34 PM | PERMALINK

HALPERIN IS RIGHT AS OFTEN AS WILLIAM KRISTOL FORMERLY OF THE NEW YORK TIMES. IF I WERE WRONG IN MY JOB AS OFTEN AS HALPERIN IS, I WOULD BE POUNDING THE STREETS FOR A JOB
RCARR

Posted by: rich carr on January 30, 2009 at 2:11 AM | PERMALINK

Why do idiots like Halperin rise to the level of national pundits? Because they serve the interests of the corporate plutocracy? I guess so.

Posted by: racetoinfinity on January 30, 2009 at 4:28 AM | PERMALINK

"Of course, the smart ones know who created the crisis."

Why yes, we do. Alas, you are not among our number, as your fact-free and wholly delusional rant conclusively demonstrates.

Free clue: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had jack shit to do with the current crisis.

Posted by: PaulB on January 30, 2009 at 5:41 AM | PERMALINK

red state mike: The bill is as much about pork and pet projects, many which are anathema to republicans, as it is about stimulus.

rsm....get ready to be pwned...

again..

"Once limited to the most senior and powerful lawmakers, or those on the Appropriations and Transportation committees, earmarking pet projects and grants mushroomed after Republicans took over Congress in 1995.

The new speaker then, Newt Gingrich of Georgia, saw earmarks as a way to help endangered Republicans keep their seats and to reward lawmakers loyal to GOP leaders.

Estimates vary, but earmarks went from more than 1,300 projects worth nearly $8 billion in 1994 to a peak of nearly 14,000 projects worth more than $27 billion in 2005, according Citizens Against Government Waste, a watchdog group that opposes the practice."

- A.P. Managing Editors

http://www.apme.com/earmarks/mainbar.shtml


fyi...the article says..that in 2008...the dems got it down to more than 11,000 "earmarks" worth nearly $15 billion..

which even a math-impaired republican can see is considerably lower than 2005..

so..

...mike....

anathema doesn't mean what you think it means..

lol...

Posted by: mr. irony on January 30, 2009 at 7:46 AM | PERMALINK

We've dropped below the fold, but I'll respond for posterity. My emphasis below...

red state mike: The bill is as much about pork and pet projects, many which are anathema to republicans, as it is about stimulus.

rsm....get ready to be pwned...

The family planning and STD dollars as they are to be spent are anathema to many repubs. Do you disagree?

anathema doesn't mean what you think it means..

It means...

anathema [an-nath-im-a]
Noun
a detested person or thing: the very colour was anathema to him [Greek: something accursed]

As usual you lose. Thanks for playing, better luck next time.

Posted by: red state mike on January 30, 2009 at 10:51 AM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly