25 Sep 2018

There is a long list of pervasive problems in the political press, and we'll go into different facets in future posts, but two false stereotypes related to centrists and pragmatists in the Democratic Party have gotten to the point where they've become a problem in need of a fact check and thorough debunking. Some in the media have been spreading the blatantly false narrative that, in the Democratic tent, you're either a progressive, or an establishment centrist. The problem with this is that the proverbial map doesn't match the territory - the reality being that the Democratic Party leadership struggle is between liberals and progressives, with the shrinking minority of moderates left in the party not having nearly enough votes to have any chance of leading the party. Dem Power Struggle Not Centrists vs Progressives This misconception is bizarre, as centrist observers and activists - many of us being ex-Democrats because of things like this - kno...

17 Mar 2011

Apparently there is an internal Cold War going on inside the Obama administration, over those who would actually do what the President was elected to do, namely lead, and those who want to continue to punt our problems down the field. So far it seems that our President has, as he has done with so many other things lately, decided to punt, rather than join in the effort to fix the long term solvency problems of Social Security. From The Hill: “There are two camps,” the source added. “One camp wants to be able to throw a bone to Republicans and some [centrist] Democrats. “The political people would prefer not to be accused of being the party that cuts Social Security in those ways. Some political people would like to see the president out there defending the program and making the case that it has nothing to do with the deficit.” A second Democratic source, who has pushed to reform Social Security by increasing the flow of revenues to the tr...

04 Jan 2011

I wrote a similar post about this recently, but it bears repeating. From a post at The Hill, discussing Republican rule changes in reference to deficit spending: But Democrats say the package features "enormous loopholes" that "deliberately make it easier to help the super rich at the expense of everyone else," according to Vincent Morris, spokesman for Rep. Louise Slaughter (N.Y.), the top-ranking Democrat on the Rules panel. As a central feature of the Republicans' proposal, increases in federal spending would have to be paid for with cuts elsewhere in the budget, but tax cuts would require no similar offsets. The discrepancy marks a sharp break from the rules adopted by Democrats, which required offsets for most tax cuts if they increased deficit spending. Cutting the deficit was one of the major campaign platforms that helped Republicans win control of the lower chamber. "Their plan replaces the 'pay-as-you-go' principle adopted by ...

30 Dec 2010

I do try to find examples of agreement with those who I diametrically oppose philosophically. It doesn't happen often with hard core Libertarians, but a post by Larry Elder (found via Booker Rising) on Townhall just caught my eye. In his book Wingnuts: How the Lunatic Fringe is Hijacking America, John Avlon comes up with the term of Bush Derangement syndrome for a list of strange beliefs that the left invented to attack George W. Bush and his administration. Much of this has died down since Obama took office (making way for the rise of Obama derangement syndrome on the right), but there are still signs that it is still alive and well in the minds of lefties everywhere. Elder points out the hypocrisy of the left assaulting Bush and company for supposedly being behind a nefarious plot to inflate oil prices. Obama even suggested the FTC investigate oil companies to see if price manipulation was going on. But low and behold... when prices rise to ...

15 Nov 2010

I stumbled across this fantastic blog post at some paper called The Livingston County News... the following quote struck me as something that could have been ripped right out of my own head: Neither party will stand up, look the citizens in the eye, and tell us the truth. Both sides have just spent billions in campaign ads telling us that the other side is little better than a coven of witches or a howling pack of socialists. Would that they would have talked about issues in 2010. Talk about Nero fiddling while Rome burned! Who is going to tell us that Social Security is unsustainable and that if it is not fixed (not fiddled with but fixed) soon, we will not be able to fix it so that it still is worthy of its name–providing old folks in our society with security? Who will say that the system that made post-World War II folks comfortable in retirement, a system of pensions in both private and public sectors, is dead and not coming back to life...

10 Nov 2010

(Part 1 of 3 - see post on Republicans HERE and Centrists HERE) To folks who watch politics closely, no part of the spectrum is without culpability for the fiscal situation we are in. The remaining moderates from years of ideological purification bent too far and let both parties overspend and under-tax our way to where we are, and its not like moderates are invulnerable to the all too easy urge to give more and ask for less... its been a long time since we had a major politician say anything near JFK's adage that we shouldn't just selfishly look to what the government can do for us. Democrats would do well to look to that great figure for inspiration in these times. On the left, those who refuse to even consider trimming any spending from entitlement programs refuse to see that without evening out our debt situation, when (not if) the debt starts squeezing money out of spending and forcing it towards debt repayment, it is the poor, elderly an...

09 Jul 2010

In a stereotypical example of how both parties filter the facts and only present fractions of the truth that fit into their narrow ideological talking points, we're hearing a lot of spin over what the government should, or shouldn't do about the potential stagnation in the economy and job market. What the Democrats have right is that people would like the government to do something to create jobs. Polls are clear on this point. This Gallup poll, for instance, shows that 60% of respondents support legislation that would "Approve additional government spending to create jobs and stimulate the economy". And why wouldn't we? We can look back into history and see some amazing accomplishments of the depression era job creation programs, that worked on infrastructure that quite literally paved the way for the economic boom that came later on. Looking closer, we can see that some stimulus spending does create jobs quickly, and can produce what they ca...