Most Popular This Week
- Eve of Destruction (or How to Destroy a Planet Without Really Trying)
- 'Beyond Orwellian': Outrage Follows Revelations of Vast Domestic Spying Program
- The World Economy Is a Ticking Time Bomb (and The Fuse is Burning)
- The Bill of Rights Exists: An Open Letter to Dianne Feinstein
- 'We Are Movement, Not a Moment': North Carolina Peaceful Uprising Continues
- Eve of Destruction (or How to Destroy a Planet Without Really Trying)
- The World Economy Is a Ticking Time Bomb (and The Fuse is Burning)
- Is Enbridge Building a Secret Keystone Pipeline?
- 'Beyond Orwellian': Outrage Follows Revelations of Vast Domestic Spying Program
- The Bill of Rights Exists: An Open Letter to Dianne Feinstein
Popular content
Today's Top News
Don't Blame Bunning
How convenient that seemingly everyone in the liberal blogosphere, and even at many points to the right, got to use Jim Bunning as a scapegoat. The venom of the attacks suggests that the maverick Republican senator from Kentucky provided a welcome alternative to the real villains: bankers much closer to the centers of power. As if Bunning's denial of unanimous consent to a stopgap extension of unemployment insurance-easily overcome, as was demonstrated Tuesday night-is at the root of our economic crisis.
It isn't, and it is vicious nonsense to transform Bunning, who has a long record of opposition to the bipartisan policies that caused America's financial mess, into a poster boy for economic heartlessness. The issue was not one of extending aid for another month to those whose benefits had run out but rather holding the government accountable for the means of payment.
Bunning's action was a sideshow, a boneheaded symbolic gesture that backfired with slight consequences. Yet the senator was made to look the dangerous fool in media accounts while many of those who enabled the financial catastrophe continue to be treated as reasonable experts after being rewarded for their folly with the highest posts in both the Bush and Obama administrations.
The real issue here is the banking bailout, a bipartisan swindle that Bunning opposed and that has led to a dangerously spiraling deficit without providing relief to ordinary folk. It is the same issue that carried Texas Gov. Rick Perry to victory Tuesday in his state's Republican gubernatorial primary, in which he defeated U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison in part because of her support of the bank bailout.
As with the January defeat of the Democratic candidate in the Massachusetts election for a U.S. Senate seat, the message from voters is loud and clear: The political establishment cares only about the fat cats and not the people who are hurting. Bunning's gesture was not intended, as his critics insisted, to increase that pain but rather to hold the government accountable for the money it is spending. He has consistently blasted the bailout as a shameless gift to the Wall Street hustlers and urged that the money being wasted on them instead be spent to aid homeowners and other victims of their greed.
This is not the first time that Bunning has stood alone in Congress. He was the sole member of the Senate to vote against the nomination of Ben Bernanke to be head of the Federal Reserve. That appointment came from Republican President George W. Bush, and yet it was Republican Sen. Bunning who warned that Bernanke as a Fed governor had been allied with then-Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan in his disastrous policymaking.
That was four years ago, when Greenspan was still being lionized by most Democratic and Republican politicians as well as by much of the media. On Jan. 28 of this year, Bunning once again rose in the Senate to challenge Bernanke, this time after President Barack Obama had nominated him for a second term:
"Chairman Bernanke ... bowed to the political pressure of the Bush and Obama administrations and turned the Fed into an arm of the Treasury. ... Instead of taking that money and lending to consumers and cleaning up their balance sheets, the banks started to pocket record profits and pay out billions of dollars in bonuses. ... So if you like those bailouts, by all means vote for Chairman Bernanke. But if you want to put an end to bailouts and send a message to Wall Street, this vote is your choice."
He is right to point out that enormous sums always seem to exist to aid Wall Street but that assistance to average Americans has consistently been only an afterthought. And he does have a point in noting that if the latest spending extension was felt to be so important, why wasn't it funded in a timely manner or in an orderly procedure by his congressional colleagues from both parties who are now trouncing him?
The money is always there when they want it, as we have witnessed throughout the banking bailout when enormous sums have suddenly been made available to those who least need it. The Treasury Department managed to find $200 billion last week to deposit with the Fed to increase the purchase of toxic mortgages to $1.25 trillion to make the bankers whole.
But the level of vituperation unleashed against this senator is so disproportionate to his role in the economic catastrophe as to raise questions of motive. The overreaction to Bunning's protest was never anything more than a ploy for Democratic and Republican leaders to profess great sorrow for the folks on Main Street while they continue to coddle Wall Street.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


54 Comments so far
Show AllWhy shouldn't we characterize Bunning as a dangerous fool?
Would that most of the senate could be seen that way.
Scheer just likes to be too clever by half...
I agree. It has been in the public knowledge for some time now the Bunning suffers from Alzheimer's Disease. To oppose unemployment benefits along with bank bailouts indicates a knee-jerk response of "how are we going to afford this?" The fact that the benefits protest hurts his own constituency didn't seem to dawn on him. I just think he was unable to think this all through because of his dementia.
Fortunately, he will be retiring down the road, probably another indication that he knows his mind is going.
The media controls public opinion. The truth is buried under mountains of lies. The u.s. government is beyond repair. All this talk is meaningless.
Buck,
Don't give up on speaking out about what is truth, because that is the only thing that is not meaningless.
This author's viewpoint does have some merit. If Bunning had not been one of the only ones demanding accountability, then TARP might not have happened the way it did in favor of the corporate masters, and the nation would not be in serious debt.
Just like "liberal" should not automatically be a dirty word, "conservative" should not be coopted by right wing extremists who are anything but conservative, or fiscally responsible.
Back to you Buck, let's keep on taking the language back.
That said, issue #2 is that it's TOO BAD that funding for immoral wars were not held up this way. My post does not mean that I am okay with funds for the unemployed being held up or their benefits lost, which I hope they will not be.
I want my country back, to live in peace coexisting with all the residents on this planet. Talk won't make it happen.
Yep.
So you want to live in peace through violence? In case you haven't noticed, the ballot box hasn't been so reliable either.
q
Who said anything about using violence?
If discussing and voting cannot change the situation then what other peaceful means would you employ?
q
civil disobedience,
refusal to pay taxes,
rejection of material goods,
total disruption of the system
Ask yourself; what has voting done to improve things?
Talk is cheap, that is why so many do it.
this is real close...I'm even hoping we could do it globally, unanimously...
I keep suggesting September 22, 2012, because we would have a bit of time to plan and plant beforehand...
the key to me will be transitioning the land away from the bankers...
transitioning...ideally, I imagine a global exhale, almost a sigh of relief...
then, maybe, joy? and then work...
joyous work...
the problem, of course, is if things aren't so unanimous...
that is where the vote of the planet becomes deciding...
Sen. Bunning is a bad joke most of the time. But just perhaps not ALL the time. Somebody needs to speak up for the people who are hurting and do so from the conservative side of the aisle. Maybe this time my Senator has got something right. That's quite a shock. If so, go Jim.
Too bad it is probably wasted effort and it has to be the unemployed that are the bargaining chip here.
Gary
"Yesterday I dared to struggle. Today I dare to win."
-- Bernadette Devlin
Robert,
Thanks as always for minding the ramparts and speaking truth to those who fear it.
A look backwards shows that, soon following the German sinking of the Lusitania, newspapers reported that some fools were expressing their anger by stoning Dachshunds. This is one of the lost footnotes in American history I was sad to discover.
President Obamageddon is starting the process to privatize Social Security. Which is another way of saying that the government money in the Social Security Trust Fund will be given to Wall Street to speculate.
Next thing you know, Obamageddon will take money from Medicare to give to the health insurance companies. Oh, he is doing that, too.
Bunning is a side show, how true.
Bunning's action was a sideshow, a boneheaded symbolic gesture that backfired with slight consequences.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Hundreds of thousand families without income support and thousands of workers sent home without pay is not a slight consequence.
This is indeed a strange commentary.
I thought that Bunning and others supporting the fillibuster said in so many words that they opposes unemployment insurance even in concept - that it "kept people from looking for work" - a laughable notion for anyone who has been out of work and collecting unemployment. So how in the world does Sheer feel that we should consider him practically a Bob Lafollette style prarie-populist?
"So how in the world does Sheer feel that we should consider him practically a Bob Lafollette style prarie-populist?"
That statement is a grotesque mischaracterization of the article.
The author is not trying to make Bunning out to be a hero. If you feel that he in fact is doing so then please point out the specific passages which reflect more worship than analysis.
The article simply says that the mainstream media's characterization of this incident is not so simple as has been described.
q
less than a billion for education, 13 trillion plus for Bankers.
The left needs to strategise the almost universal populist anger against Banker Welfare into systematic governmental change.
What Summers, Bernanke and Geithner did to the economy reminds me of what Moe, Larry and Curly did to the house when they were plumbers. Why were they rewarded for their incompetence? The Stooges by contrast usually sympathized with the working class.
Scheer is wrong. Bunning is an asshole and maybe he did vote against the bank bail outs so what, even a broken clock is right twice a day. Its what Bunning and his pals in the Goper represent a kind of meanness of spirit that most people of good faith find obnoxious. I just got a e-mail from a guy I grew up and he echoed to me Bunnings meanness and told him to basically STFU and that he was rude.
-"He was the sole member of the Senate to vote against the nomination of Ben Bernanke to be head of the Federal Reserve"
Democrats and Republicans, often are given leave to vote against the corporate party line, when public opinion dictates it before a looming local election, so long as there are enough votes to ensure that the lobbyists get what they want regardless.
-"He is right to point out that enormous sums always seem to exist to aid Wall Street but that assistance to average Americans has consistently been only an afterthought"
If he truly believes this then I for one believe he is right. Too bad he feels it is more important to serve the corporations than actualy act on these, supposed, convictions.
Bunning voted against while Obama voted for the initial TARP bill, which was opposed by a large majority of citizens, http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/
roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=2&vote=00213
He also opposed Bernanke's re-appointment, as noted in the item, and voted against further TARP monies in early 2009, http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/01/which-dems-vote.html
However, his voting record proves him to be a hypocrite regarding most everything, including support for Wars and the extension of Bush's budget-busting tax-cuts, http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/b001066/key-votes/
So, while there is merit in Scheer's saying the story is more complex than what's being reported, the fundamental basis for criticizing Bunning stands.
Look I think we all get what Scheer was trying to say. I just personally think it's a creepy argument. If Bunning wants to make a provocative political statement, then let him do it in a way that doesn't hurt innocent people. It's hypocritical of a conservative, who would slam a public workers' union, like a transit union for "victimizing" the public as a means to punish their employers, yet this is exactly the same thing. So **** Bunning!
Sorry Scheer, I know you were going for an attention getting provocative headline but you are showing a disturbing lack of empathy for those people who suffered in all this. Have you ever tried to live on unemployment? Do you have any god damned idea how close to living on the edge these people are? I have a friend whose solar energy company closed (a story in itself) and after his three months severance ran out on his 150,000 USD job, the Great State of California gave him 300 bucks a week! He had to scramble so hard to keep his life together he couldn't even look for a job. So he should not blame Bunning when one week or two that's Zero?! Screw you!
But no problem. This "controversial" position you've taken on Bunning's shameless tactics, describing them as merely "boneheaded" instead of contemptuous, just reveals your own amoral "vanguard party" leftist thinking that the lowly are just fodder in your agenda and proves again why the "people" no longer have any affinity at all with your "left." Elitist? Indeed.
Scheer, I'm sure you're not reading this, but what Bunning did is reprehensible and for you to fail to condemn it as such is despicable. But I'm equally sure you don't care. Anything for the cause, huh Chairman Bob? What's your income again?
Christ we're looking to scum like Bunning to make our political points. Nader writes a book about how billionaires are the only ones to save us. The (liberal) world's gone freaking mad. Anyone for Sweden?
"... Nader writes a book about how billionaires are the only ones to save us ..."
I know this will make me unpopular, but Nader is a tool and a fool and has been for 50 years...
I realize that young "progressives" think this 70+ year old man is the way to go... but what make you think he's any different than the other 70 year old men?
Nader hasn't been taken seriously by anyone (other than a few "progressives") for his entire life. He's Don Quixote tilting at windmills.
C'mon folks! Let's quit retreading these ancient old men and has-beens and find someone new to run for office...
"I know this will make me unpopular, but Nader is a tool and a fool and has been for 50 years... (sic)"
Precisely whose tool has Nader been for 50 years? Do you understand what it means to call a person a 'tool'?
You clearly came to this thread to disparage Ralph Nader based, apparently, on his age. You have obviously done so at the behest of those who detest what Nader represents.
In other words, you are a tool.
q
The US Auto Triumverate, Congress and the Bureau of Reclamation sure took Nader seriously, to name just a few. Then there are the many non-profits working for We the People he started and that continue to work--Public Citizen being perhaps the best known, although seemingly not known to you. And I could go on for quite some time. You also completely misrepresent the message of the book you cite--which you clearly haven't read. I can state with 100% certainty that we wouldn't be in the mess we are today if Nader had become president. And I know of ZERO other "70+ year old" men being anywhere near as proactive as Nader. Is there anyone on the political landscape that can supplant him, take up his banner? Do you have any suggestions instead of "retreading" tiresome, invalid critiques?
The United States requires more than change; it requires a total overhaul. Your Nader bashing goes counter to that goal and suggests you're not even remotely serious about it.
Like Nader's running mate in 2008 Matt Gonzalez.
This is just ageist. Who do you want Eric Cantor or Rand Paul they're young idiots. Its not the age its the ideology.
Homeless Bob, I've agreed with and admired some of your comments, but you don't know what you're talking about here. "Nader hasn't been taken seriously by anyone (other than a few "progressives") for his entire life." I don't know how old you are, but GM took him pretty seriously after he wrote "Unsafe At Any Speed" and tried to take him down. He won a $1 million lawsuit against them and a public apology from the GM CEO on the Senate floor. He used the money to set up Public Citizen, and is credited with the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, seatbelt laws, OSHA, and numerous other consumer protections. His nickname has been Mr. Public Citizen. For many years now he has been railing against our broken political system, and ran for President because he wanted to bring attention to the hopelessly corrupt beyond redemption Democratic Party. Indeed, they showed their dark side with the illegal extremes they went to keep him off ballots and out of debates.
With all his accomplishments, he is a giant, and one of my few heroes.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
"Christ we're looking to scum like Bunning to make our political points."
Well-stated, walt; the entire comment nails it.
Despite the criticisms in the article, in order to make his point Scheer's tone wrongly suggests that Bunning is more to be pitied than censured because Bunning's action is rooted in a worthy principle.
I'm not impressed by Scheer's strained attempt to mitigate the reprehensible actions of Bunning, who is proud of being a vicious prick and a bully to boot. Contrary to Scheer's interpretation, which implicitly suggests that the end ALMOST justifies the means, Bunning's "boneheaded" cruelty in no way advanced the "principle" that allegedly motivated Bunning.
Bunning himself stepped into the frame of "poster boy for economic heartlessness" as enthusiastically as he stepped to the mound during his pitching days-- except these days the bean ball is the only thing he's got left.
· Yr Obd't Servant
Hold it. I just reread this several times and I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Are you using the wealthy executive of an energy company who made $150,000/year as an example of the needy people who are being hurt? If so, I could not care less about someone who made $150,000/year and lost their job. Sorry, but that is enough money to have saved some and there are a lot of poor people in this country who could use some of his money. I don't think your friend needs a penny of state money if that was their salary. You sound like you're describing another rich executive looking for a bailout from the government. Spare me your lame sob story. With that example, don't you prove the point that the left only uses the needy as fodder for their own agenda and are selfish elitists? And if you aren't aware that $150,000/year is wealthy and elitist, then you must be also and have no clue about the real world and real poverty. Frankly, I find your example completely absurd. As I said I had to read it several times to be sure I was understanding it. Are you really using a wealthy executive as an example of someone who we need to sympathize with because they aren't getting enough taxpayer money? I'd rather have no government support for anyone than have a system that people like your friend and you are exploiting and asking for more.
Bunning is a whore and Robert Scheer just became a pimp...
Everyone in government... elected "representatives", bureaucrats... everyone ... needs to be removed from D.C.
Removal will eventually occur... the question is, will it be done orderly and peacefully... or violently at the hands of a pitchfork wielding mob?
History seems to has taught us nothing... look back and read about how tyrants and oligarchs have been dealt with.
History seems to has taught us nothing
History has taught us everything. It is the vast majority who has learned nothing.
WOW THERE, TRIGGER! Don't shoot the messenger just because we all share in being hoodwinked and hustled by the newest " change agent " to settle in at The White House. The pain for most everyone, while real, is just another example of the shell game playing out in Washington, D.C. Sheer is not praising Bunning: he is damning our collective marksmanship. We need to more clearly identify the targets instead of the fire, aim, ready approach the MSM almost always directs us to.
the old rules, summed up by human lives spent working to buy things, are passing away as planetary changes render them impossible to continue...
we are in the beginnings of a period of transition...
how we handle this transition is critical, and the right to freely exist upon the land, and share in the use of the resources upon it, is the ultimate hurdle...
we have very little time left, as circumstances are converging that will quickly result in the eviction of many...
whether this battle for the right to exist can be won or not will have to do with the way in which engagement occurs...
individuals, going one at a time, will be nothing but victims of the financial and law enforcement machine...
everyone, together, however, engaging en masse, might not only win the battle, but might avoid it altogether...
welfare, like health care, is a product of the current system, based on the private ownership of land, and lifelong indebtedness...
quite possibly, the future will contain neither, at least, not in currently recognizable form...
anger is understandable, but only briefly...realization must turn to personal, individual action...the defending of the right of all to exist, and the growing and managing of edibles...
Global Start Date: September 22, 2012...is that too late? Let's get those gardens growing...
I don't know. Your heart seems to be in the right place, dubet, but your prophetic tone and new agey line of argument are intellectually unconvincing.
how would you suggest we proceed from here?
"The venom of the attacks suggests that the maverick Republican senator from Kentucky provided a welcome alternative to the real villains: bankers much closer to the centers of power"
The liberal bloggers are trying to dodge the grand-daddy of all conflicts, the class conflict, by focusing their rage on Bunning, implicitly for his positions on the social issues, the great camouflage of the classist oppression these liberals quietly support. Liberals' stealthy support of the class hierarchy has always been a key barrier to the people's organizational unity toward ending it. The functions of the liberal and conservative wings of the elite establishment have always been to divide/conquer the people for their enslavement.
Of course, Sheer is one of those "liberal bloggers are trying to dodge the grand-daddy of all conflicts, the class conflict,..."
The problem lies with the unconstitutional rules that the Senate operates by.
Nowhere does it give the right of one man to determine the outcome.
Until the Senate begins using the Constitutional "majority rules" method of passing legislation, we will always be at the whim of egos - no matter how well intentioned.
But I could be wrong !
I couldn't find a good job in KY so I had to move to Indianapolis after finding a good one there. Bunning was correct to say no to Bernanke but anyone can do that to score points. Bunning is just another member of the flock keeping the anti-job, anti-worker policies intact. It's government meddling for the corporate interests.
spin spin spin spin spin
bunning said "unemployment is paying people to do nothing we should not be doing that "
what I would like to know why this spin is here at common dreams
rob 1956 said "spin spin spin spin spin
bunning said "unemployment is paying people to do nothing we should not be doing that "
what I would like to know why this spin is here at common dreams"
I think the point of the article was to remind people to keep their eye on the ball, not the ballplayer. In other words, main issues become obscured when too much emphasis is put on an individual's behavior. Scheer may have gone too far in trying to make this point by seeming to rehabilitate Bunning, but I think his main idea is valid and valuable.
I totally agree with this article! I just posted something along these lines on a different thread and am glad to see Scheer on top of it.
jlocke123: Bunning is not running again. He, unlike Dodd and Dorgan, seems to be standing for his principles, such as they are, on his way out. Indeed he's not running again because the GOP powers that be, the no tax and spend Republicans, are forcing him out.
I don't really know anything about it but it also seems possible that extending benefits for the group of folks who happen to have benefits right now indirectly hurts those that may need it even more, for example those who were let go before the newly extended benefit packages kicked in.
While I do not oppose all deficit spending especially during an economic downturn, it really is taxation without representation on our children and unborn grandchildren since they cannot vote but will have to pay.
Until the banksters are regulated and the ongoing bailout (in it's many forms) is ended, other discussions about what costs how much mean very little.
I'm glad Bunning got hammered on this. Maybe next time UI extension comes up it will make the righties think twice about delaying tactics.
The unemployment Check is Necessary to continue the cover-up of the scandal, "Nafta." The loss of our industrial base to China is an attribute to Kennedy, Kerry, Dodd and Lieberman.
They all voted to shift our industrial base to China.
Both Parties were involved. This fact must be kept secret and under-cover. All Hell will break loose when the working classes run out of unemployment checks.
The unemployment Check is Necessary to continue the cover-up of the scandal, "Nafta." The loss of our industrial base to China is an attribute to Kennedy, Kerry, Dodd and Lieberman.
They all voted to shift our industrial base to China.
Both Parties were involved. This fact must be kept secret and under-cover. All Hell will break loose when the working classes run out of unemployment checks.
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
Yeah, old colon polyp Bunning is NOT at the root of our economic crisis, but his mindset sure as hell is and that's all beside the point. The point is Bunning chose to make his point not at the expense of the monied interests who created the economic crisis but at the expense of some of the most vulnerable to it.
I used to think TruthDig featured some pretty astute writers but with Scheer as its editor I may have to delete it from my bookmarks.
I think the uproar against Bunning was understandable, but I also think Robert Scheer is telling us an inconveninet truth. In fact, he gets my vote for nomination as 'Brave Thinker of the Year.'
error