The Passion Of The Rupert

A typical News Corps son of a bitch.

I have not posted on the Rupert Murdoch/News Corps hacking scandal, because it felt like one of those stories that was moving so fast anything you said on Tuesday would be irrelevant on Wednesday.

Plus, my own bias leads me to view this as a "dog bites man" story.  Rupert Murdoch is a bully, a thug and a criminal?  Say it ain't so!

Today I read this summary of events.  So now I feel a little more plugged in.

Here's my takeaway for what it's worth.  

They are guilty.  Due process and presumption of innocence notwithstanding, their behavior and the trail of evidence is overwhelming.  The mass resignations, the stream of new allegations and the fact that normally cowed or co-opted watchdogs are now snarling all tell me that this is not only 100% true, but there's a lot more unsettling stuff out there.

The broader question of what this all means seems to be this: Rupert Murdoch is the Cornelius Vanderbilt of the New Gilded Age.

Vanderbilt cagily started as a shipping magnate and then moved into railroads.  Murdoch started with tabloids and then moved into cable television.  Vanderbilt was a renowned SOB.  Murdoch is certainly coming into the light as the same.  Vanderbilt once said, "What do I care about the law?  Ain't I got the power?" and "You have undertaken to cheat me.  I won't sue you, for the law is too slow.  I'll ruin you." Once, Vanderbilt cut off all rail and ferry traffic to New York City to force a concession.  

Vanderbilt is - along with his hated nemeses Gould and Fisk - the archetypical "robber baron" of the First Gilded Age.  He saw his opportunity, took it and then made sure that no one could challenge him.  He died one of the wealthiest men in the world and one of the most influential in the United States.

Few people better represent the "capitalism: red in tooth and claw" better than Vanderbilt.

Murdoch is an archetype of the Second Gilded Age.  This Gilded Age is not about railroads and steel, but rather it revolves around the control and distribution of information.  In this, Murdoch excelled.  He has become "content provider" for large swathes of the English speaking world.  In addition to Fox News and the myriad newspapers that he owns, Murdoch owns part of DirectTV, Dow Jones and Fox Broadcasting Company, which runs FOX, FoxSports, F/X (one of my favorite channels) and a bunch of other "little" cable niche networks.

But what really ties Murdoch to Vanderbilt in my mind is their contempt for the idea that the law applies to the rich.

The law is a slow, ponderous thing that seeks to create a legal equality among all.  Theoretically, when you stand before the bar, you are equal to the Murdochs and Vanderbilts of the world.  While I think we know that this is not technically true, the law can still level the mighty on occasion.  Therefore, the super-wealthy just go around it.

They hide their income from taxes.

They hire lobbyists to insert loopholes into laws.

They hire lawyers to exploit those loopholes.

When F. Scott Fitzgerald said, "The rich are different than you and me" he meant that they were almost like a different species.  But today it seems more that the Rich are their own nation.  They exist apart from "America" or "Australia" or "Britain".  They make their own rules, their own laws and their own way in the world.

Like the original Gilded Age, this eventually provoked a backlash - first from the Populist farmers, then from the Middle Class Progressives.  It remains to be seen whether the modern American is too numbed, too ignorant and too indifferent to be rallied to another great movement of reform.  

But a hundred years ago, Americans broadly realized that these "Malefactors of great wealth" - as Teddy Roosevelt called them - were a threat to democracy.  They understood that they existed outside Jefferson's America.

Today, it is apparent that those days have returned.  

Murdoch is just the latest example of this.

The Brutaful Game

You shall know Abby Wambach by the trail of her dead.

What a game of soccer today.

The US played their most complete game of the tournament and lost on PKs.  Having beaten Brazil and France despite trailing in possession and looking somewhat ponderous in attack, they look dynamic and in control for much of today's Cup championship.

But two dreadful defensive lapses cost them.  That and their inability to finish off goals early in the game.

Congratulations to Japan's legitimate Cinderella run and easily one of the best feel-good stories of the year.  The fact that it was the WOMEN'S team that gave hope and inspiration to a nation that sorely needed it is just a wonderful statement of how far we've come on issues of gender.

Still, I feel bad for the siege tower that is Abby Wambach.  She deserved a Cup.

Required Reading

The GOP caucus at work.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/16/995059/-Congressional-Republicans-failing-to-grasp-the-concept-on-the-debt-ceiling?via=blog_1

Once you read this, you can understand why we should take nothing for granted on the debt ceiling.  While the McConnell-Reid plan might have some hope of working to avoid default, it's shoddy governing.

The reason why the GOP can't agree to what they likely would have done if they had control of the White House and Senate is because many members of the GOP caucus are either willfully evil or blindingly stupid.

There just isn't any other way to spin the comments from that piece above.

The Fierce Whininess Of Now

Can't we all just get along?

I listened to the President's presser this morning.  It was reasonable, moderate Republican stuff about sharing the pain and balancing the books.  Predictably, the response from Manic Progressives has been intensely negative and frankly there is a lot to recommend in their criticisms.

Social Security is not in a crisis.  It needs minor revenue tweaks to stay solvent beyond the fiscal horizon.

Medicare should not be "means tested" into a poverty program like Medicaid that will allow future politicians to kill it.

The middle of a terrible jobs recession is not the time to be cutting spending.

The President's plan - according to a neat graphic whipped up by Nate Silver - is actually slightly to the right of most Republicans (who aren't Teatards or Congressmen).

It has been easy to see Obama is either a feckless negotiator or a traitor to the Democratic party for those inclined to do so.  I certainly have criticized Obama's negotiating skills in the past.

But why is it so easy to label him a traitor to Democratic ideals?

I think we have entered a period where feedback is both immediate and insular.  The internet has - mercifully - punctured some of the sanctimony of "conventional wisdom" by bringing facts and different viewpoints to the fore.  But it has allowed for groups to talk to themselves and no others.  FDL and DailyKos are pretty good examples of this.  So are Red State and Fox News.

But the immediate passions are not new.  I'm wrapping up a book on the election of 1912, and it was striking to me how fervently Teddy Roosevelt believed that Woodrow Wilson would be a disaster for the country.  Actually, Wilson passed some critical legislation that had eluded Teddy when he was in the White House.  Similarly, Roosevelt advocated in his Nobel Speech for an "international police force", yet he roundly derided the League of Nations.  The two ideas were very different in philosophy and approach, but they were largely similar in intent.

And yet this drove TR and his supporters bonkers.

We tend to take up inflexible positions and then fight to the death to defend them.  The GOP has certainly done that with their stance on the debt ceiling.  But I fear that we in the reality based community are also too quick to defend our positions with absolutist positions.

It's absolutely not frakking fair that Obama has to try and balance the budget.  George Bush passed those reckless, irresponsible, incredibly damaging tax cuts.  George Bush passed Medicare Plan B without paying for it.  George Bush launched two wars without paying for them.  George Bush oversaw the emasculation of the regulatory system that led to a collapse of the global economy.

And if we elect Mitt Romney president, Boehner or Cantor Speaker and McConnell Majority Leader, we will see the same damned reckless, feckless budgetary evil all over again.

It's not fair that Obama has to clean this up.

But he's trying to do it.  And he's trying to do it in ways that make me angry.

But not nearly as angry as I am at the other side for threatening to crash the global economy to preserve the carried interest tax cheat.

Cry Babies

Obama reassures Eric Cantor that there will be pie.

Following up on John Cole's post below, we can add immaturity to the various flaws manifested by the GOP, especially Eric Cantor.

Apparently, he kept interrupting Obama to bring up something Obama had already said no to three times, namely a short term increase in the ceiling to keep things going.  (It's interesting that the closer we get to the deadline, the more the advantage seems to shift to Obama.  The GOP are clearly piddling their shorts.)

Obama ended the meeting and hurt Eric Cantor's fee-fees.  The response of Democratic leaders has been telling:

Schumer: "If Eric Cantor decides everything, I fear we'll be in default."


Reid:  "House Majority Leader Eric Cantor has shown he shouldn't be at the table and Republicans agree he shouldn't be at the table."


This tells me that the Democratic team has focused on Cantor as the obstacle to getting a deal done.  As the spokesman for the Teatards, he holds a veto power over the deal.  If they get him to cave, presumably they get a deal done.


With the markets increasing the pressure on these children to get a deal done, it will be interesting to see what happens next.  Do we get an "clean" extension?  A set of deficit reduction measures in the midst of a recession?  A "grand bargain" on both deficits and entitlements?


Again, this would be entertaining if so much wasn't at stake.  Bob Woodward will need to channel Shakespeare for his next book.


UPDATE: Fair and balanced: "He lost a lot of credibility when he walked away from the table … It was childish," said one House Republican with close ties to Cantor who spoke on condition of anonymity to preserve their friendship. "This is his time to perform."

Required Reading

I should post a link, but I'm just going to cut and paste Cole's piece.  I'll mail him a royalty check...

Of Course They’re Crazy

by John Cole

Why the hell are we still having this fucking debate:

The more we find out about the House Republican caucus, the more obvious it becomes that they’re not just trying to maximize their leverage by pretending to be crazy. They’re crazy.

Of course they are crazy. Ross Douthat is just a hack who does his best to run cover for his dumber compadres, but they are all crazy. There is really no reason to debate this anymore. They deny evolution, many of them think the earth is only several thousand years old, they don’t believe in global climate change and adamantly don’t believe humans have anything to do with it, they think being gay is a choice and I guaran-god-damned-tee that at least half of them think you can pray it away, they think stem cells are tiny babies, they think Saddam Hussein had a role in 9/11, they think you can cut taxes indefinitely and government revenues will always increase, they think Sarah Palin is qualified to be President and Joe the Plumber has keen political insights, they think Obama may be a Muslim and might not be a citizen, they think the solution to gun violence is more guns, and that dijon mustard and arugula are elitist, that the President who appointed half of Goldman Sachs to his administration is a socialist, and so on. And I’m not attributing to the GOP made up stuff, these are things in their fucking platform or that they state regularly on camera and in print. Michelle Bachmann was just on tv all wild-eyed asserting that even if we default, seniors will still get their social security checks and that Obama is a big meanie for suggesting otherwise. How will we pay them? Who the fuck knows? They aren’t dealing with reality and haven’t been for a long, long time.

There simply is no reason on earth to have this debate any more, except that it serves the needs of assholes like Ross Douthat and David Brooks and other members of the conservative “intelligentsia.” If we all recognize that the conservatives are nuts and their ideas are disastrous, they would lose their respectable media/beltway credibility, and you can’t have that happening. So they spin all this bullshit and pretend that it is just another conservative viewpoint when what it actually is is batshit crazy being normalized by sociopaths like the aforementioned Times columnists.

So yes. They are crazy. Batshit, bugfuck crazy. Anyone who treats them as a serious party is either a wingnut welfare recipient or just plain stupid

The Can Win Elections, But They Can't Govern

You can try and hide from the truth, but in the end, the ugly just comes through.

Said before, I'll say it again.

The GOP is not fit to govern the country.  The reason they are not fit is because in order to win elections, they have to advocate for pony-based policies that are impossible to implement.

Take the debt ceiling debate.  Usually, the debt ceiling is passed fairly easily and uncontroversially.  The GOP,  beholden to its Tea Party members and rhetoric, decided to use the debt ceiling to double down on the politically disastrous Ryan plan to attack entitlements.  This, despite the fact that most Americans would rather see revenues increased than benefits cut.

Obama then doubles down and decides to try and create a plan that will extend the life of entitlements out to the budgetary horizon, rein in spending and raise revenues.  The GOP walks away.  Because their rhetoric - or if you're being charitable: beliefs - precludes them from... well, making hard choices and compromising.

The result is the McConnell plan -  a capitulation disguised as a 30 second attack ad.  The McConnell plan would avert the policy disaster of default, thus making happy the Wall Street wing of the party.  It would also create attack ads about how many times the Democrats raised the debt ceiling - and since most Americans are too fascinated by whether Casey Anthony will date OJ Simpson - it might work.

It's terrible governing, but it might help them win an election.  Classic.

And then we also have this.  Click through and read the damn thing.

Mandating more efficient light bulbs is an easy way to save energy and save money in the long and short run.  Opposing that is Level 68 stupid.  In fact, it would seem to be a completely necessary action to insure uniform application across the country under the commerce clause.

But, no.  If you're a GOP politician, then by definition nothing the government does - besides killing dusky hued foreigner - is legitimate ipso facto.

In other words, the "modern" GOP simply does not believe in the act of governing.

The House of Representatives has been taken over by anarchists and no one has noticed.

GOP=Accountability Free Zone

Boehner and McConnell plan their escape.

First, we had Orrin Hatch, now we have the Escape Hatch.

Yesterday, Orrin Hatch made some predictably asinine statement about taxing Gilligan's Island or something.  I was too bored to click through the link.

Today, Sherwood Schwartz, the man who created Gilligan's Island, died.  Coincidence?  I think not.

Now we have Mitch "The Human Banana Slug" McConnell coming up with a ridiculous plan to raise the debt ceiling without restrictions.

Basically, it creates a series of three debt increases that can be voted on by Democrats alone.  It goes something like this: They vote for a series of three debt increases that come up for votes at various times over the next year and a half.  But these increases in the debt ceiling are effectively pre-approved and can only be defeated by a two-thirds majority AGAINST.  So the GOP can - their thinking must go - label the Democrats as Big Spenders every time they vote to keep the government solvent.

First, it's stunningly cynical.  In fact, it's so transparently cynical, I bet even the DC press corps can see it.

Second, it's capitulation.  It's capitulation to the Teatards (though they won't be fooled).  And it's capitulation of their responsibility to govern responsibly.  The GOP is effectively ceding the debt ceiling argument to the executive branch.  They are effectively walking away from their duties to be a partner in governing the country.  And don't think for a moment all those glibertarians and Teatards will consider this a victory for "small government" conservatism.

On a policy level, this would be pretty good.  Debt ceiling gets raised, no dramatic cuts in spending.  Politically, I think this makes the GOP look like chumps, and it would certainly vindicate O'Donnell's Rope-A-Dope thinking.

It still has to happen, but for the moment, I think the GOP just blinked.

UPDATE: This is a good take: http://www.balloon-juice.com/2011/07/12/all-over-the-map/

Debt Ceiling Part 7.0

Don't drink slaughter the Kool Aid.

The political debate is starting to heat up over the debt ceiling.  Despite that, the majority - or at least a plurality - of Americans still don't seem to understand what the debt ceiling is or why it's absolutely essential that it be raised.  You have idiots like Paul Broun (R-GA Moronia) actually talking about lowering the debt ceiling.  While he's at it, maybe he should repeal the law of gravity.

Anyway, as the debate increases in intensity, it seems obvious to most sentient people that Obama has been much more flexible than the GOP in considering a deal for raising the debt ceiling, including embracing some ideas that are frankly stupid, counterproductive and a betrayal of his constituents, such as raising Medicare eligibility to 67.  

As any economist who isn't employed by some think tank subsidized  by the Koch Brothers will tell you: You don't cut spending in a recession.  We have a demand problem that is keeping unemployment untenably high.  When Obama agreed to cuts in the last negotiations with the GOP, they were mostly bookkeeping changes and phased in cuts over time.  Some of the cuts proposed right now would likely lead to a true double dip recession.

Lawrence O'Donnell seems to think that Obama has played a brilliant Rope-A-Dope on the GOP.  He's publicly accommodated a ton of their insane suggestions, knowing that in the end they would walk away from the table when he laid his marker - revenue increases on the richest Americans.  Sure enough, Cantor walked away and now any increase in the debt ceiling is likely going to require House Democratic votes and will not, therefore, include major cuts to entitlements.

I have no idea what will happen or whether O'Donnell is right.  But it does seem to me as if we could wind up with a clean debt ceiling increase, or at least it seems more likely than it has at any time up until now.  

I've always felt that Boehner was a shallow pol but not a stupid one.  He understands - as he has said - that the debt ceiling must be raised.  He is also trying to accommodate his batshit insane Teatard members.  Obama has cemented his position as the reasonable one, and Boehner knows this.

I have no idea what happens as the endgame here.  Perhaps they introduce another "clean" debt ceiling bill and enough Democrats and enough Republicans pass it.  

But in my recent readings of the Great Depression, it occurred to me that intelligent, well-meaning men made disastrous choices for all the "right" reasons.  Their folly was to be captured by outmoded ideas about monetary policy and macroeconomics.

What worries me is that we have a momentous decision ahead for the world economy. and we don't even have intelligent or well-meaning men and women who ultimately hold the power to make this crucial decision.

And that scares the poop out of me.

Summer Day

Safety first... think of the children.

It was hot and humid here in ol' Connecticut.  So naturally I spent the day mowing the lawn and gutting the downstairs half-bath.  Because really what could be better on a hot day than dealing with the smell of sewer gasses and the disgustingness of the wax ring that seals the toilet to the sewer pipe.

But at the end of the day, tired and drenched in sweat, the boys playing soccer (nicely, amazingly) having come home from a good day of scout camp.  The smell of mown grass and a cold beer in hand... not a bad day.

The Beautiful Game

I watched the US-Brazil WWC match today.

It is impossible for me to believe that if Americans watched that game they wouldn't be drawn to soccer.  But I went to ESPN and a few commenters were issuing the usual predictable "even the highlights are boring"... "too much drama"... "too much diving".

Isn't that what makes sports great?  Isn't the narrative as important as the outcome?

Eleven Dimensional Chess

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2011/07/my_way_or_the_highway.php#more?ref=fpblg

Boehner pulls out of the $4 trillion deal that would include entitlement cuts and revenue increases.

One of the options all along was that this was Kabuki by the White House to make the GOP look like nothing was good enough for them, and thus blame the economic collapse on them.

That option is looking frighteningly real right now.

The View From The Plantation Porch

The family and I have been on Nantucket this past week and a half.  It is an important place for the Wonderful Wife and me.  We were married here, our kids were baptized here, we spend as much of each summer here as we can.

But it is a place swarming with the rich and kinda famous.  At the Fourth of July festivities, we walked by Joe Scarborough and David Gregory.  For some reason, if you work at NBC, you have to have a place here.  We see multitudes of people who are obviously doing great economically right now, whether they be the factotums from NBC or the myrmidons of Wall Street.  From the intricately carved and sculpted faces of aging matrons to people plopping down $32 for kids boxer shorts from Vineyard Vines, this is one of the seats of the new Gilded Age.

When the jobs report came out Friday, it should have scared the crap out of everyone in the country.  It should have stampeded a deal to get the debt ceiling raised - cleanly - so that we can remove this great cloud of uncertainty from the world economic stage.  It should have created a clarion call for a legitimate jobs bill.

Obama said the right things in his Twitter conference and his presser Friday.

But he should have been saying them for the past year.

I'm not an FDL nutjob, who thinks Obama's awful.  But I worry about the capture of his vision by the Washington Bubble.  I think he tries to remain connected to average American concerns, and he certainly comes from a perspective of middle class Americans more than most of our Presidents.  And maybe he's obsessed by the debt because he really thinks it's more important long term.

He admitted in his Twitter conference that he underestimated the depth of the recession, especially in the job market.  The stimulus bill did a good job of saving the auto industry, creating a bump in demand to halt the tumble and bridging state government budgets until 2011.  In other words, it would have been fine if this was 1991.

But it's not, and it wasn't enough.  And he's not going to get a job's bill through the Congress.

But he has to appear to be fighting for one.

The people out here in Nantucket don't give a damn about 9.2% unemployment.  All it means to them is they can pay their landscaper less.  These powerful and wealthy people don't need to worry about 2012, because no matter who gets elected, they will still be rich.

But at some point, there will be a breaking point.  At some point those 9.2% and the 16% underemployed are going to find a leader who will speak for them.

By temperament and inclination, Obama should be that guy.

I've been saying ever since I started this blog that Obama needs to find his inner populist.  The new media are going to keep searching for new Casey Anthony, the new Chandra Levy, the new Natalie Hollowell.  He has to change the conversation.

Obama has to pierce the disregard we have for the New Serfdom.  He has to lead the middle class to a new economy.

It will require him to get out of his comfort zone.

Which is as it should be, for millions of Americans haven't been comfortable for years now.

The World According To Bleh

I'm not coming out of this box until the world is sane again...

So it does look like Obama is endorsing a change in COLA to reduce Social Security payments over the long run.  In return he wants revenue increases.  So to recap: Obama wants to piss off older voters so he can raise taxes on the rich - who also vote.  He will reap political rewards by.... Hell if I know.

And then we have today's job report.  It is beyond sucky and is likely partially tied to uncertainty surrounding the debt ceiling.  If you were hiring would you take on the training of new workers when we are staring at a new Dark Ages?

Obama was largely right in saying that the collapse in hiring can be attributed to four things:

1) Uncertainty surrounding the immediate economic conditions, especially the possibility of default.

2) Persistent unemployment in the construction sector.

3) State lay-offs as the "Fifty Little Hoovers"* reduce state payrolls to balance their budgets.

4) Natural disasters like the Japanese earthquake that have disrupted global supply chains.

What's amazing is that looking at those top three causes, it would seem that the last thing we should be doing is cutting spending at the federal level.  I can't imagine someone is deciding not to open a small business because of the federal deficit.  But they might be because they don't know if America will be solvent in three weeks.

Similarly, Obama has  - rightly - proposed infrastructure spending to get people working in the construction trades.  All the while buying in to the BS fallacy that federal debt is somehow inhibiting job growth.

At the state level, one of the benefits of the stimulus bill was that it kept states solvent and allowed them to avoid laying people off.  That money is gone.  There is no way in hell the Tea Party controlled House (and it does seem to be controlled by the Tea Party) will appropriate money to states to keep state employees on the job.

Krugman, Stiglitz and others noted in 2009 that the stimulus was too small and too short in duration.  Obama admitted that he underestimated the power of this recession.  And yet he seems to be following the advice of the same people who advised him poorly in 2009.

I also understand that Obama likely couldn't have gotten a bigger stimulus through Ben Nelson's Senate in 2009.  I understand he will not get more spending from Louis Gohmert and Michelle Bachmann's House in 2011.

But the White House political team should have looked at William Howard Taft's disastrous endorsement of the Payne-Aldrich tariff.  Taft ran for office on lowering the tariff, but reactionaries in the Senate and House leadership took a tariff reduction and turned it into a tariff increase.  Then - and here was Taft's mistake - he called it "the best bill the Republican Party has ever passed".  This set up the Progressive flight from the GOP party to the Bull Moose party and eventually to the Democrats under FDR. It also insured Taft's defeat in 1912. (I am not prepared to offer an exegesis on early 20th century tariff policy right now.  I haven't slept well in about five nights.)

Sometimes circumstances serve you up a big old steaming Poo Sandwich.  And while you may have to eat it, don't pretend it's delicious.

* The appellation "Fifty Little Hoovers" isn't really fair to Hoover.  He did embrace modest deficit spending, albeit primarily in a "trickle down" effect through the RFC.  Sorry, Herbert.

Required Reading

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/07/plus-a-change-twitter-town-hall-dept/241542/

My dear mother was appalled at President Obama taking questions via Twitter.

But as Fallows points out above, average people tend to ask better questions than our professional journalist caste.

Shocker.