Would Bunning consider moving to South Carolina.
I found a leader who's less coherent than he is.

He'd have a real shot.

I don['t mind disposing of debt... really, that's okay.

But Governor, why are you in debt in the first place? What did South Carolina buy that you wish it hadn't and won't have need to maintain or replace with the 700 mill?

Isn't it just a matter of going back into debt later? Maybe when unemployment is lower and labor is costlier?

Or do you plan to cut so much that your current revenues will maintain/replace those few things you deem worthy. Maybe it's none of my business, but I'm looking for some reason not to declare you a posturing moron.

Still, at the risk of punishing your great state's population for electing you, I'll be fascinated to watch the contrast between SC and comparable states that didn't embrace frugality amidst a depression. If you're right and the vast majority of economists are wrong somehow, we need to know.

"I'd love to see the Republican leaders grow up, come to terms with the seriousness of the times, and start trying to help the country for a change."

Don't hold your breath. Republicans are demonstrating with excruciating clarity that their allegiance lies with The Party, and not with America or Americans. What's good for The Party is all they care about; the success of Obama threatens The Party, so they are against it, even if that means they are against America.

The basic Republican position is that all the current economic problems aren't really that big a deal, that Democrats are just trying to panic everyone into enacting their favored policies. Since this is exactly what the Bushies did with respect to national security, it's not terrifically surprising to find Republicans believing that everybody does it.

Sanford added that his approach is intended to end the economic crisis quickly: "[L]et's get this thing over with, let's not drag it on."

I wonder if he has a plan for rebuilding once it's destroyed. Or, more likely, he's just parroting Wall Street wingnuts who have already taken their money out of the market, and want a sense of certainty so they can reinvest, not caring who gets hurt, or how much, in the process.

I have been to South Carolina many times, and each time I go, I am appalled at how tired and barren it is, especially outside of the city regions. It is as if the Reconstruction never quite made it to South Carolina. Yet here they have this Republican dolt who'd rather not spend almost a billion dollars to shore up things. He'd rather not take it for that purpose, thanks.

Indeed, people who live there need to recall this buffoon. But most people down there are not informed on the issues, and reflexively support those who 'sound right.' We had 8 years of that as a country, if you recall. And Sanford 'sounds right,' preying on the lizard mentality of the less-informed, which is unfortunately emblematic of the South (and I say this being a native North Carolinian, so I know what I'm talking about).

But don't expect the Republicans to start thinking rationally, or acting in good faith. They've had 8 years of total control, and are not used to 'enlightened' ways of doing things. They cannot grasp alternative worldviews. Or rather, they recognize what such worldviews and actions mean to those who provide their campaigns' monetary support. Not one of them will change, be it due to stubborness or to keep their pockets lined.

It seems we're heading towards a wingnut singularity. Don't stand too close -- you won't want to get any on your shoes.

Well, it's not his house on fire.

Anyone who wants a career in politics and is willing to act like a responsible grownup is no longer in the Republican party

Actually, Sanford's position is (for once) not completley insane. Paying down debt can actually be a stimulus - Why? - because the money goes to the creditors. They lent money to the state government, which they can not therefore currently spend as the government is in the process of paying it back, and they will get it back earlier. It is a legitimate question as to how stimulative it is relative to other potential actions - it depends on the marginal propensity to consume of those who receive the stimulus.

What I am saying is this: it may be less stimulative than the government directly spending it, but it is still stimulative. Whether or not it is a stupid idea depends on who South Carolina's creditors are, and how the state government is shaped up for future borowing. It might well not be crazy for the federal government to borrow money at a low interest rate when the debt being paid off is at a higher interest rate as state governments are not perceived as secure from default. Then again, I have no idea what the interest rate is on SC government bonds.

The moral of the story: Not enough information!

Ideology became more important than reality in 1994 for the GOP. They are mostly sociopaths now. The famous litmus test about wanting the President to fail like Limbaugh is revelatory in many ways. It defines them as people to whom pride is more important than goodwill. They lash out now because they cannot comes to terms with having utterly failed. They live in constant denial. They eroded the New Deal and the Great Society under the pretext of "conservatism." They had for years benefited from a rock-solid social structure that could stand a few decades of tinkering--but they wouldn't stop. They finally succeeded in making a total mess of everything. They have not had a valid, reality-based idea in years. And still they yammer on, borne back ceaselessly to the past.

With their close association with Bob Jones U and High School, perhaps, South Carolina should drop the Palmetto and use the "Preying, er, Praying Mantis", instead.

I keep hearing this talk about how it's the function of the opposition party to oppose. That has always been true.

What's changed is the assumption that the opposition would oppose by providing an alternative vision of how to deal with the country's problems and fighting for legislation that would implement that vision.

The contemporary GOP, it seems, would be happy to wreck the country (and the world, in the case of climate change) for its own political benefit. Their remedies, such as they are, have nothing to do with the actual problems we face.

Would be nice if the High Broderists would take notice of this change. Not holding my breath, though.

I am re-reading Ron Brownstein's great book The Second Civil War, which peforms an autopsy of America's descent as a polarized, hyperpartisan nation. In it he quotes Newt Gingrich as saying on the eve of the GOP's 1994 takeover of Congress: "The number one thing we had to prove in the fall of 1990 (when GHW Bush raised taxes to close the deficit) was that if you explicitly decided to govern from the center we could make it so unbelievably expensive you couldn't sustain it."

Tom DeLay is also quoted saying: "The only way we could take over Congress and be a party of prominence was to have a very clear distinction between the Democrats and the Republicans. The Bush (41) administration muddied that distinction. The Bush administration wanted to work with Congress rather than beat Congress. And so it was contrary to what we were doing."

Is it any surprise that Gingrich is once again leading the charge or that Republicans in 2008 are once again operating from the old Gingrich playbook. For Gingrich, political parties are an end in themselves, not a means to the end of good governance. Their prominence -- dominance -- is all that really matters to Gingrich. That is why he is such an evil genius and a great party tactician, but was a lousy House Speaker. And it's why displaced Republicans have once again turned to him to help lead them out of the wilderness.

Gingrich's very first rule for transforming a minority party into a majority has always been: Create as much distance as you can between yourselves and your opponents. Make the choice between you crystal clear -- even if choosing you is the wrong choice.

That's why House Republicans voted to a man and woman against the stimulus -- just as they did in the 1994 Clinton budget agreement that closed the deficit with a combination of tax hikes and spending cuts. The Clinton budget achieved what everyone wanted, a smaller deficit. But Republicans had staked their fortune on being the Anti-Tax Party and so refused to go along.

And this is why Republicans up and down the line today, from Congress to state houses, are offering nothing but spending freezes and tax cuts as alternatives to Democratic spending in order to restart the economy. Republicans may not even believe that their own proposals will work. I suspect they don't, or don't really care. Conservative intellectuals like David Brooks and David Frum, after all, have said that what Republicans are proposing is "insane" and nuts. All that matters is what Gingrich is telling them, which is that the road back to power begins by making Republicans the polar opposite of Democrats -- the public, and the public interest, be damned.

I take it even further, Steve. A non-moronic minority party is essential to political discourse, especially as long as we are chained to two-party rule.

President Obama's ideas, including the good ones, need to be challenged in intelligent, fact-based debate and discourse. Think of all the doctoral theses that have made no evident difference in your life or mine, that have been challenged and defended in a rigorous process. Why not policy, which most emphatically does affect our lives?

Wingnuttiness aside, can he do this? I know the Stimulus bill forced the state's gov. to spend the money or the legislature to weigh in, but did the legislation give unfettered discretion to state in who they spend the money?

Sanford didn't get the memo - ponzi schemes whether government sponsored or not are illegal. What a putz! -Kevo

"South Carolina -- too small to be a country, too big to be an insane asylum." -- Andrew Jackson

A - The GOP has nobody left in their legislative ranks who are capable of "growing up and coming to terms with the seriousness of the times, and trying to help the country for a change," and

even if there were anybody,

B- The Rush Limbaughs and right wing radio shock jocks in places like LA would subject them to the flames of their wrath for even suggesting taking such a course.

They are all firmly convinced that success depends on absolute adherence to the madness which got them where they are today. The only solution is freeze spending and cut all taxes on anyone making more than 250,000 a year.

I agree with algernon's remarks above. Much as I have loathed the Republican party in its ascendancy, I find it hard to delight in its implosion. I worry that the absence of credible opposition will lead to a slide into corruption by the majority--a sort of nationalization of the Chicago Democratic scene. The reason I like Obama's "bipartisan" overtures is that he keeps giving Republicans an "out" so that they can actually rebuild their credibility and make real contributions to government. Alas, they're having none of it.

Scott F. -- no, he can't. In addition to his other nuttiness, Sanford apparently believes he's still living in the Bush dictatorship, where the president ignores all the specifics in the law and just does whatever the hell he wants.

"Republicans are demonstrating with excruciating clarity that their allegiance lies with The Party, and not with America or Americans." That's right. Two of the mind-boggling paradoxes about this perverted "conservatism" are: it claims to be against government, and yet reduces everything to politics; it claims to put patriotism above all else, and yet puts party above country.

I was talking to some friends the other day who were pleased to see leading Republicans devolve into incoherent clowns in the midst of a crisis. As the GOP becomes a national laughingstock, it becomes less relevant and its chances of winning elections diminish.

Yes, the worst of it is that they're doing their best to make sure Obama's policies are weakened to the point of failure, and if they succeed, they'll say "your way didn't work, now do it our way" and try to enact more truly insane Bushian policies. (Creationist logic -- there are only two answers, and any evidence against yours is automatically evidence in favor of ours!)

If South Carolina doesn't need the money, I know just about 49 other states that do.

Tangential but important about what happened to the economy:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/03/11/business/11leonhardt.php

Banks counted on looting America's coffers
By David Leonhardt
Published: March 11, 2009

I think that the problem stems from the fact that most politicians, like most Americans as a whole, have never studied economic theory, beyond maybe some very basic high school course. And I doubt most people have had even that. Keynesian theory, which posits that government spending in times of recession will more quickly stimulate consumer spending than any other tactic (such as tax cuts or monetary policy), is very widely accepted in academic circles to be true, and proven true. There is dispute as to whether and how much fiscal and monetary policy can or should supplement government spending to stimulate consumer spending and, in turn, economic growth, but that government spending does do that is really not much in dispute.
The Republican adherence to paying down deficits as a means of stimulating an economy, or freezing govenment spending for same is the same kind of faith-based policy as abstinence-only sex ed as a means of keeping down the number of unwanted teen pregnancies. What they really want is no sex outside of marriage, so no other type of "sex policy" is appropriate for unwed teenagers, regardless of its efficacy.
People who know nothing about economic theory can claim with great confidence that tax cuts for the rich, or freezing government spending will end the recession because they simply don't understand that saying so is almost as silly as insisting the earth is flat.

"I keep hearing this talk about how it's the function of the opposition party to oppose. That has always been true."

AAAAAAAAAAAAGH! WE'RE NOT EUROPE! WE DON'T HAVE A PARLIAMENT! WE DON'T HAVE "OPPOSITION" PARTIES IN THIS COUNTRY! THAT'S NOT THE WAY OUR SYSTEM IS DESIGNED TO WORK!

If you want to change the system because you don't like it or don't think it works anymore with insane Republicans, knock yourself out. But the American government is built and meant to work in a particular way. Pushing it to behave in a different way without changing the underlying structure is just a recipe for yet another disaster 15 to 20 years down the road.

Mike

Seeking help from the Republicans in puting out the fire is about as helpful as asking for assistance from the Fahrenheit 451 fire brigade.

Ordinarily I'd be against the Feds agreeing to Sanford's proposal, because of the harm it would do to the citizens of his state.

But, the citizens of South Carolina have repeatedly elected such a collection of annoyances, buffoons and scumbags that I'm forced to conclude that they should get the government they deserve, and so clearly desire.

It wouldn't be the first time this 'last outpost of the Confederacy' did something stupid.

The GOP desparately needs a coup d'etat, but unfortunately the more sane elements are running state governments. It doesn't look good for them.

Being South Carolinian, it's in Sanford's DNA to believe that up is down, day is knight and black is white. Going back at least to the great moron and traitor John C. Calhoun, South Carolina has been nothing but trouble. If you go back to 1714 when their pirate ancestors arrived from Barbados, they're responsible for every bad attitude to be found in American mythology.

Sanford can't help himself.

Why is it that everytime we get an Illinois Senator as President South Carolina wants to revolt? And more importantly, why were they allowed to become full states after their last act of treason? Can't we replace them with some of the US dependencies, which at least haven't attacked America, unlike South Carolina and some other group of socially-backward religious ding-dongs I could name.

Once again, the trouble starts in South Carolina.

Guess it's time to dig up Sherman's bones and take him on another Carolina holiday. Maybe this time we'll finish the job.

Wanna know who else has a pre-recession mindset? Alan Greenspan. He piped up AGAIN touting the wonders of the economy he steered asking us to consider the "precrisis success". Which is a lot like bragging about how quickly you were getting to your destination by driving 120 mph before you lost control and ran over the cliff.

I think that calling even stupid ideas about the economy, insane, is to ignore the paradoxical nature of complex systems and their tendency to flip flop into unintended consequences. It's not like the whole stimulus effort is the perfect answer to this crisis. It seems to be the best, but not thinking so doesn't make someone insane.

Obama to Sanford: No.

Indeed, let's get this thing over quickly.

Last summer and fall it was suggested that the Bush administration do something to get the toxic assets out of the banks. The TARP funds were partially to remove bad mortgage based assets. He didn't do it.

It was suggested (by Bush's own person, Sheila Bair) the FDIC could fix some mortgages. Bush didn't allow it. [ Now Obama has Bair working on his team! I certainly hope she can fix a lot of mortgages. ]

Senator Dodd and Rep. Frank created a HOPE program to fix mortgages. The Bush administration really fixed that. They made a mortgage modification COST the homeowner instead of saving them. They raised mortgage payments and charged fees.

Indeed, let's get this over quickly.

First, we got Obama in office.

Second we've got the banks and economy (stimulus bill) stabilization plans in place.

Third, there's a spending bill (budget not passed last year) which will stimulate some and fix some problems.

Fourth, there will be health care reform this year -- Sen. Baucus says by this summer!

Fifth, there will be financial industry regulations!!

And, there will someday be an end of the Iraq war. All this combined will get this over quickly and get us moving into the future.

And, what do the Republicans have to say? "No. No spending on pig smell reduction."

Brilliant.

"...THAT'S NOT THE WAY OUR SYSTEM IS SUPPOSED TO WORK!" Mbunge @ 10:43 AM.
Perhaps not, but it IS the way our political system HAS worked since 1800.