 |
 |
Dan Savage, the brilliant and foul-mouthed sex columnist, has become one of the most important ethicists in America. Are we screwed?
By Benjamin J. Dueholm
The federal government is supposed to issue new rules about debt levels for students in for-profit colleges. In the meantime, the states are working on their own regulations.
By Daniel Luzer
Washingtons budget hawks want to decimate the federal workforce to shrink the deficit. It will have the opposite effect.
By John Gravois
There arent nearly enough counterterrorism experts to instruct all of Americas police. So we got these guys instead.
By Meg Stalcup and Joshua Craze
|
|
|
|
|
November 27, 2009
ROVE'S INTEREST IN AN 'HONEST APPRAISAL'.... When Karl Rove helped run the White House, he accepted certain beliefs as truths. He believed, for example, turning massive surpluses into massive deficits was entirely reasonable. He believed reckless tax cuts for the already rich were an example of responsible governing. He believed expanding the size of government, adding to entitlements, increasing the federal role in education, and putting it all on future generations' tab, was perfectly sensible. He believed fiscal responsibility was a punch-line.
And now that Karl Rove is outside the White House, he believes he's entitled to complain about deficits from his perch in the media establishment.
What seems to concern the president is not the problem runaway spending poses for taxpayers and the economy. Rather, what bothers him is the political problem it poses for Democrats.
Last year, Mr. Obama made fiscal restraint a constant theme of his presidential campaign. "Washington will have to tighten its belt and put off spending," he said back then, while pledging to "go through the federal budget, line by line, ending programs that we don't need." Voters found this fiscal conservatism reassuring.
However, since taking office Mr. Obama pushed through a $787 billion stimulus, a $33 billion expansion of the child health program known as S-chip, a $410 billion omnibus appropriations spending bill, and an $80 billion car company bailout. He also pushed a $821 billion cap-and-trade bill through the House and is now urging Congress to pass a nearly $1 trillion health-care bill.
Rove wants to see an "honest appraisal" of where we are. Good idea. The stimulus was necessary because Rove's old boss left the president an economy on the verge of wholesale collapse. S-CHIP expansion was necessary because Rove's old boss rejected a bipartisan measure to help low-income children go to the doctor. Rescuing the auto industry was necessary because it was a continuation of Rove's old boss' policy and the nation couldn't afford to cut off American manufacturing at the knees at the height of the recession. Cap and trade, Rove neglected to mention, wouldn't add to the deficit, and is necessary because Rove's old boss ignored the climate crisis for eight years. The health care reform bill would cut the deficit significantly, and is necessary because Rove's old boss fiddled while the dysfunctional health care system got worse.
That's an "honest appraisal."
Rove added, "When Mr. Obama was sworn into office the federal deficit for this year stood at $422 billion. At the end of October, it stood at $1.42 trillion."
Rove may not be smart enough to understand this, so I'll try to make the explanation simple for him.
The bulk of the $1.42 trillion deficit has nothing to do with the Obama administration's policies. The Center for American Progress' Michael Ettlinger and Michael Linden recently explained, "The policies of the Bush administration, which included tax cuts during a time of war and a floundering economy, are clearly the primary source of the current deficits." Specifically, 40% of the fiscal deterioration we're seeing -- the single largest contributing factor -- can be attributed to Bush policies. Another 12% comes from Bush's financial rescues, while 20% are the result of the economic crisis Bush handed off to his successor. What's President Obama's share? Just 16% of the total, most of which is the result of new spending that was necessary to prevent a depression.
There are some pretty sleazy pundits in the media, but when it comes to combining dishonesty, ignorance, hypocrisy, and misguided chutzpah, few are quite as offensive as the man George W. Bush used to call "Turd Blossom."
Andrew Sullivan added earlier:
I remember very vividly a heated argument with Karl Rove over eight years ago in which I worried about spending and deficits. "Deficits don't matter!" Rove kept repeating in that nasal world-weary tone he has. After a bit, I said, "What do you mean, deficits don't matter? Don't you remember the 1990s?" "No, no, no, no, Andrew," he replied. "What I mean is that people don't vote on deficits. That's why they don't matter."
I learned then that nothing beyond short term politics motivates Rove. Nothing. And I also learned: this fathomless cynicism is not just repulsive, it's invariably wrong. People sure did vote on deficits in 1992. And one small reason Obama won in 2008 is because many Independents and Republicans couldn't trust the GOP to stop spending and borrowing us into oblivion in an era of economic growth.
Now, Rove -- whose shamelessness is only matched by his incompetence -- is writing a deficit hawk column for the WSJ.... What Rove requires is what Palin requires: total amnesia of what they just said or did.
Update: Joe Klein added: "It's not surprising that the blinkered extremists of the Wall Street Journal editorial page would print this drivel -- any other mainstream op-ed page would require Rove to acknowledge, in passing, at least, his complicity in the current mess -- but it remains a scandal, nonetheless, and the sheer craven audacity of it needs to be pointed out, from time to time."
—Steve Benen 4:15 PM
Permalink
| Trackbacks
| Comments (24)
For Rove the 'rules' are:
Rules for thee, not for me.
And the 'rules' are whatever he makes up. Kind of like Calvinball (if you remember Calvin and Hobbes). No rhyme or reason, just what ever stuff he can make up to try and make other people look bad. Just another example of an alternate reality.
Posted by: nerd on November 27, 2009 at 4:32 PM | PERMALINK
"I learned then that nothing beyond short term politics motivates Rove. Nothing."
Everything else Mr Sullivan and Mr Benen said is perfectly correct. But this conclusion is dead wrong, and diametrically so.
Rove's earlier observation ("deficits don't matter") and his latest maneuvers (deficits are evil, a threat to the economy, and a generational betrayal) are both part of a long-running and long-term reichwing game plan in which high government spending on projects that enrich favored sectors (armaments and privatized military functions, insurance and finance, pharmaceuticals) and specific firms (Halliburton, Goldman) is radically increased, and the resulting fiscal shortfalls are used as an excuse to cut social spending (health, education) -- and with an attendant fringe benefit of lowering pressure (union-breaking, off-shoring employment, and delays on increases in minimum wages) on employers to share the wealth with their workers.
This has been blatantly the Publican plan (supported and furthered by far too many of "our" leaders in both the Congress and the White House) since at least the day of Reagan's budget cuts, as was blatantly admitted by his OMB director, David Stockman.
TurdBlossom's real belief, which is perfectly consistent over any span of time, is, "Republican deficits don't matter; Democrat deficits are evil, a threat to the economy, and a generational betrayal."
Posted by: smartalek on November 27, 2009 at 4:41 PM | PERMALINK
They just don't grow evil as pure Rove. He is a one-off compunction free demonic entity. How's destroying the world going for you Karl?
Posted by: Sparko on November 27, 2009 at 4:43 PM | PERMALINK
Karl Rove is a douchenozzle.
Posted by: Cameron on November 27, 2009 at 4:43 PM | PERMALINK
Karl Rove is a douchenozzle.
And the container that comes with it.
Posted by: Mustang Bobby on November 27, 2009 at 4:49 PM | PERMALINK
@ smartalek:
Your analysis is fundamentally correct, but please don't slander the good Publicans of the world, who provide a valuable service to the thirsty and overworked.
If you want to drop a syllable from Republican in order to sneer at them (and sneering at them is a worthwhile pastime), try dropping the last syllable, and add a new letter. Replicant describes these festering barstids much better.
Posted by: Cap'n Chucky on November 27, 2009 at 5:18 PM | PERMALINK
Rove doesn't know the meaning of "honest."
Posted by: Bonnie on November 27, 2009 at 6:21 PM | PERMALINK
They should probably be known as the Rapethepublican Party, and their activities as Rapethepublicagainism.
Posted by: Seems reasonable on November 27, 2009 at 6:49 PM | PERMALINK
Sincere apologies, Cap'n Chucky, for the apparent slam at the fine folk of the legal-intoxicant-delivery sector, but IIRC, that definition of "publican" is much more prevalent in the parts of the world that speak the Queen's English, than here among us 'Merkins.
I picked up the habit from a poster at 'kos (sadly, can't remember the name to confer proper credit) who was, I'm sure, implying the meaning which with the Teabaggers and Christianists would be most intimately familiar, and would thus trigger on instantly -- that meaning encountered most frequently in the context of "...and sinners," or "...and harlots," in the good ol' King James Version of the Word of our Lord.
Thus, the term is an evangelical dog-whistle, not unlike what the Rethugs do when they refer to "wonder-working power," or to Roe v Wade as the Dred Scot of our day, except of course in the opposite political/spiritual direction.
Since one of the greatest and most blatant (but least recognizable to the blindered and blinkered conservatroids) of the many betrayals of the American middle class by the Rethugs is the meme that the Rethugs always cut their taxes and LIEberals and Dim-ocrats always raise them (when as we all know, exactly the opposite is true for middle-class Americans), it's especially apt that the reviled publicans of the Bible were, literally, tax-collectors and tax-farmers.
Posted by: smartalek on November 27, 2009 at 6:50 PM | PERMALINK
Why don’t you mention that Lincoln Chaffee while a Senator mentioned that the Bush tax cuts were intended to impose on the next administration, the only option is to cut entitlement spending?
Posted by: dalivision on November 27, 2009 at 6:54 PM | PERMALINK
Hell will freeze over before anyone finds a Republican who is logically consistent. The mystery is why anyone would think that Karl Rove's opinion is worth publishing, much less listening to.
Posted by: PTate in MN on November 27, 2009 at 7:14 PM | PERMALINK
These people are "bullshitters." Bullshitters do not care about the truth and could care less if they are "caught out" on anything they say. They just make it up as they go along.
Every last Republican is a "bullshitter."
Posted by: TCinLA on November 27, 2009 at 7:43 PM | PERMALINK
...he accepted certain beliefs as truths. He believed, for example, turning massive surpluses into massive deficits was entirely reasonable. He believed reckless tax cuts for the already rich were an example of responsible governing. He believed expanding the size of government, adding to entitlements, increasing the federal role in education, and putting it all on future generations' tab, was perfectly sensible. He believed fiscal responsibility was a punch-line...
Actually its clearer and clearer that he doesn't and didn't believe a f*cking thing!! He and his partisans have no core beliefs at all. They believe in whatever will give them power: today ABC, tomorrow XYZ.
At least some of them pretend to believe something, but its clear from their actions that whether its the economy, politics or sex they really have no core beliefs at all.
Posted by: efgoldman on November 27, 2009 at 8:04 PM | PERMALINK
@smartalek:
Sorry to disagree with you, but Rove's real real belief is, "I'll say any damn thing to smear my enemies, even if I accuse them of my own m.o., and trust that the media will not call me on my lies and hypocrisy."
Posted by: filkertom on November 27, 2009 at 8:13 PM | PERMALINK
Rove's real real belief is, "I'll ... trust that the media will not call me on my lies and hypocrisy."
---------------------
God only knows how he could have gotten that bizarre idea.
Posted by: Seems reasonable on November 27, 2009 at 8:22 PM | PERMALINK
We need to remember that for the last 70 years Republicans have been trying to repeal Social Security and repeal Medicare for the last 40. The Bush deficits were a deliberate attempt to force massive cuts to the SS trust and the big health care programs.
This is why Republicans think Republican deficits are OK -- the GOP uses manufactured foreign threats to drive massive growth in security spending in order to force the inevitable choice between the military and dismantling of social services. Conversely this is why Obama's deficits are bad -- when Obama achieves budget surpluses once again we will still have Social Security and Medicare -- and our troops will come home. At that point the Republican vision of the world (they're all against us) and the economy(God helps those who help themselves) comes apart.
Rove and the rest of the GOP are so blatantly hypocritical they are as good at hiding their intent as they are at governing.
Posted by: pj in jesusland on November 27, 2009 at 9:14 PM | PERMALINK
Ever notice that vacant visage of Rove's? It is reminiscent of others' criminal photos - that vacant, remorseless gaze, neither understanding of morality or, for that matter, caring.
Money matters. Money for you and yours. That is power, and nothing else matters.
Posted by: smike on November 27, 2009 at 9:14 PM | PERMALINK
I wish that anyone who cites last year's and this year's deficits would mention the fact that the 2008 number is artificially low because of Rove's old boss preference for pretending that Iraq and Afghanistan were being paid for out of petty cash.
Posted by: Suzii on November 27, 2009 at 10:01 PM | PERMALINK
Not exactly on point but because Lee Atwater reminds me so much of Rove's character.
Lee Atwater:
1. 1981 interview in The Two-Party South on the Southern Strategy: You start out in 1954 by saying, nigger, and nigger. By 1968 you cant say niggerthat hurts you and backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states rights and all that stuff.
2. As 1988 campaign manager for Republican nominee George H.W. Bush and in reference to Dukakis, Atwater declared that he would strip the bark off the little bastard and make Willie Horton his running mate.
3. In a February 1991 (died in March) article for Life Magazine: My illness helped me to see that what was missing in society is what was missing in me: a little heart, a lot of brotherhood. The 80s were about acquiring acquiring wealth, power, and prestige. I know. I acquired more wealth, power, and prestige than most.
Posted by: M. Alexander on November 27, 2009 at 10:32 PM | PERMALINK
@filkertom
No need to apologize; yours is an entirely plausible alternative explanation. And even if it weren't, I still wouldn't be grievously injured by someone saying I'm wrong in terms much stronger than yours.
However, I would also suggest that in this case it's entirely possible that we're both right.
And while the fact that our two theories are mutually exclusive might pose an impediment in the real world, this is Karl Rove we're talking about, after all.
With Rove and all his ilk, logical inconsistency is not only no obstacle, it's central to their very existence -- as this thread and so many like it attest.
Posted by: smartalek on November 27, 2009 at 11:01 PM | PERMALINK
Didn't read all comments, so someone may have already pointed this out: my understanding is that Obama's deficit figure after taking office looks much bigger because he is showing Irag/War-Afghanistan/War costs on the books, rather than off the books, as Bush did. If this is the case I wish Dem talking heads would bring it up in their rebuttals. Dems are way too passive in letting Repubs control the narrative and apply their pejorative labels. They wrongly assume that voters are too dumb to follow this type of defense. Put out the facts in plain language and give the voter the benefit of deciding for himself. Bill Clinton used to be brilliant at simplifying arcane policy-speak. Other Dems need to follow suit. Howard Dean is pretty good at it, too.
Posted by: bos'n on November 28, 2009 at 12:25 PM | PERMALINK
What bos'n said. They changed the way they displayed the budget to include all the off budget crap that all previous administrations hid.
Posted by: wvng on November 28, 2009 at 4:57 PM | PERMALINK
Sorry. The aim of life is self-development. To realize one's nature perfectly - that is what each of us is here for. Help me! Help to find sites on the: Help me to quit smoking. I found only this - tips for quitting smoking. Quit smoking, most medications you are to be used for graduating your smokers on most luckily smoothen chantix anti-smoking handful physical to eat smoking website quickly. It's a hard hospital and i made some of the workers he got about no smoking in his people, quit smoking. Best regards :rolleyes:, Ayame from Zimbabwe.
Posted by: Ayame on February 18, 2010 at 8:50 AM | PERMALINK
Amazing! Your article has a lot comments. How did you get so many people to see your blog I'm jealous! I'm still getting to know all about article writing on the internet. I'm going to look around on your website to get a better understanding how to achieve success. Thanks for the help!
Posted by: Eustolia Maenner on April 9, 2011 at 10:22 AM | PERMALINK
|
|
|