Republican Party

Some people's only exposure to nihilism comes from the German gang in The Big Lebowski who said things like "We are nihilists, we believe in nothing" and "Tell us where the girl is or we cut off your johnson, Lebowski." Or the nihilist humor of comedian Brother Theodore, who liked to say things like "I looked at the void, the void looked back - and neither of us liked what we saw."

That's exactly how I feel when I watch the Republican Presidential debates.

The void that looks out through their eyes is the absence of any underlying principle, ideology, or ideas, especially on economic issues. It's not that their beliefs are different than yours or mine. It's that, as now seems clear, they don't actually believe in anything - anything, that is, except greater power for themselves and greater wealth for their financial backers.

Nothing in nihilism's long intellectual history has prepared the world for its latest incarnation as the 21st century Republican party, or in its ultimate flowering in the likes of Mitt Romney and Herman Cain.

Void, Meet Void

ni*hi*lism a: a viewpoint that traditional beliefs and values are unfounded and that existence is senseless and useless.
- Merriam-Webster Online

More »»

The Republicans have opened another front in their neverending war against regulations, those tools that help government protect us from greedy corporations. Leading the charge once again is Sen. Richard Shelby, the willing servant of Wall Street who weakened the regulations in Dodd/Frank during negotiations with Sen. Dodd ... and then refused to vote for it anyway.

After that little bit of procedural treachery, Sen. Shelby attacked the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Protect consumers? How dare they?) with outright falsehoods about the extent of that organization's power.

Now Shelby's fighting urgently-needed regulations by proposing something called the "Financial Regulatory Responsibility Act." It would, according to the Senator, "determine the economic impacts of proposed rulemakings, including their effects on growth and net job creation."

Sen. Shelby added: "My colleagues and I are simply proposing that each financial regulator determine whether the economic cost of a new regulation exceeds its economic benefit. If it does, then the regulation should not be implemented."

More »»

This is not your father's (or mother's) GOP. During a time of national crisis, the President has submitted an urgently-needed jobs bill that is well within the mainstream for Republicans as well as Democrats. But today's Republicans are a new breed, dedicated not to their country or even an ideology. more »

More »»

The media have portrayed Governor Rick Perry’s description of Social Security as a “Ponzi scheme” at a recent Iowa campaign event as the latest extreme statement of an unconventionally candid, conservative presidential candidate. more »

More »»

History books record an empire's fall as a series of dates and events. Battles are fought, people resist, elections are called, arrest warrants are issued. But those are just details. An empire really falls in that moment when people stop believing that it's invulnerable. Whenever the spell is broken, whether it's by anger or just by awareness, the end becomes inevitable. It doesn't matter what happens to Rupert or James Murdoch now. They may return to positions of relative wealth and privilege or their lives may take unpleasant turns. Either way, the Murdoch empire has already fallen.

There's a lesson here for anyone who thinks the safest and surest path to success is by serving the seemingly invincible. Sure, it may lead to riches and power, at least for a while. But you may also wind up like those powerful people in Great Britain who now find themselves struggling with scandal, hiding in fear, or facing terrible legal consequences - all because they believed in Murdoch's invincibility and served him accordingly. As Martin Luther King often said (and we've often quoted), "The moral arc of the Universe is long, but it bends toward justice."

And since the Universe is our home, the Murdoch scandal reminds us of another principle too: "Never bet against the house." more »

More »»

How broken is today's political debate? The only politician standing up for most Republican voters on today’s most burning political issue is. … a Socialist.

The question is whether we reduce the deficit only through spending cuts, or also by raising taxes on the rich. This should be an easy issue for Democrats to stand on ... and run on. A recent New York Times/CBS News poll showed that 72% of of those surveyed agreed that federal taxes should be raised for households making more than $250,000 - including 55% of Republicans. Yet even with the GOP leadership far to the right of the country on this issue, Democrats haven’t taken an unequivocal position.

Who's speaking for this Republican majority (and most everybody else) in Washington? Only Sen. Bernie Sanders, Socialist from Vermont. Sanders has unequivocally said that he won't support a deal to raise the debt ceiling unless it includes higher taxes on on the rich. Where are the Democrats? Nancy Pelosi's been marginalized from the discussions, even though a deal won't be possible without the support of Democrats in Congress. The White House and Harry Reid have refused to take a firm stand. more »

More »»

Retiring U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-No Shame, TX) today unveiled a plan to steal Social Security from Americans by cutting their benefits and lying to them about it. more »

More »»

I participated in an MSNBC panel discussion with Cenk Uygur, Sam Seder, and conservative Matt Lewis. We discussed Cain, Mitch McConnell's insistence on Medicare cuts as part of a budget deal, and Eric Cantor's insistence on no disaster relief funds for Missouri unless they're taken out of the budget somewhere else.

My overall point was then all of the GOP's policies make sense if you assume that their overriding goal is to protect tax cuts for the wealthy at all costs. Video of the discussion is here.

More »»

Apparently the august and statesmanlike Mr. Rush Hudson Limbaugh III (his real name) was a little displeased by our piece in the Huffington Post this weekend, "Why Progressives Keep Losing and the Right Keeps Winning."  He read it out loud on his show this morning, and I'm about to say something about that which might shock and surprise you:

He was neither as courteous as one might hope nor as well-informed as once might expect. Disappointing, I know.

Rush spent nearly ten minutes of air time reading my piece and commenting on it. It wasn't all bad: After initially mispronouncing my name, he corrected himself and said it correctly. The man's a pro; gotta give him that. Almost nobody gets my name right.

You'll notice that he does change my words in one way: Whenever "Democratic Party" appears in the text he says "Democrat Party" instead. Oh, and he calls the Huffington Post the "Huffington Puffington Post." Très drôle, no?

Rush was furious at the suggestion that the Right won this weekend's negotiation. Do you feel like you won? he asked his listeners. Who cares? Judging by the hate mail I've received since the show aired, I doubt his listeners can feel their toes.

More »»

I think Alonya was suggesting at the end that I was being a downer about those job figures ... I believe the current slang term for that kind of thing is "buzz kill." Oh, well!

For a change, all of the political negativity coming from my general vicinity was directed at Republicans - and only Republicans.

(This was last-minute, hence the unshaven look.)

more »

More »»