EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- 'The Gilded Age' Statistics Corporations Don't Want Workers, or Anyone, to See
- As Death Toll Rises Beyond 500, Garment Factory Disaster 'Worst in World History'
- Report: Toxic Chemicals Found in Thousands of Children's Products
- Pregnant Anti-War Soldier Sent to Prison
- The Sick Madness of Tom Friedman's Culture
Popular content
Today's Top News
Newt’s Tax Plan, and Why His Polls Rise the More Outrageous He Becomes
Newt Gingrich has done it again. With his new tax plan he has raised the bar from irresponsibility to recklessness.
Every dollar estimate I’m about to share with you comes from the independent, non-partisan Tax Policy Center – a group whose estimates are used by almost everyone in Washington regardless of political persuasion.
First off, Newt’s plan increases the federal budget deficit by about $850 billion – in a single year!
To put this in perspective, most forecasts of the budget deficit cover ten years. The elusive goal of the White House and many on both sides of the aisle in Congress is to reduce that ten-year deficit by 3 to 4 trillion dollars.
Newt goes in the other direction, with gusto. Increasing the deficit by $850 billion in a single year is beyond the wildest imaginings of the least responsible budget mavens within a radius of three thousand miles from Washington.
Imagine what Standard & Poor’s or Moody’s or Fitch would do if it became law. We’d go directly from a triple-A credit rating to triple X – the veritable porn star of fiscal mayhem. Interest on our debt would become larger than most of the rest of the budget.
Most of this explosion of debt in Newt’s plan occurs because he slashes taxes. But not just anyone’s taxes. The lion’s share of Newt’s tax cuts benefit the very, very rich.
That’s because he lowers their marginal income tax rate to 15 percent – down from the current 35 percent, which was Bush’s temporary tax cut; down from 39 percent under Bill Clinton; down from at least 70 percent in the first three decades after World War II. Newt also gets rid of taxes on unearned income – the kind of income that the super-rich thrive on – capital-gains, dividends, and interest.
Under Newt’s plan, each of the roughly 130,000 taxpayers in the top .1 percent – the richest one-tenth of one percent – reaps an average tax cut of $1.9 million per year. Add what they’d otherwise have to pay if the Bush tax cut expired on schedule, and each of them saves $2.3 million a year.
To put it another way, under Newt’s plan, the total tax bill of the top one-tenth of one percent drops from around 38 percent of their income to around 10 percent.
What about low-income households? They get an average tax cut of $63 per year.
Oh, I almost forgot: Newt also slashes corporate taxes.
I’m not making this up.
This might be amusing if Newt were just being old Newt – if this were another infamous hot-air bubble emerging from an always provocative, sometimes clever, often bizarre mind.
But it’s the tax plan of the leading candidate for president of one of the two major political parties of the United States.
And it comes at a time when America’s super rich are raking in a larger portion of total income and wealth than at any time over the last eighty years, and when their marginal taxes are lower than they’ve been in three decades; a time when the nation’s long-term budget deficit is causing cuts in education and infrastructure which will impair our future and that of our children, and when safety nets and social services are being slashed.
Can Newt get away with this?
Probably — because his plan also comes at a time when Americans are so cynical about the major institutions of our society that someone who offers huge, outrageous plans holds a special fascination: The whole system is so awful, people tell themselves, why not just jettison everything and start from scratch? Let’s throw caution to the winds and do something really big – even if it’s colossally stupid.
This is why the more outrageous Newt can be, the better his polls. The more irresponsible his bomb-throwing, the more attractive he becomes to a sizable portion of Americans so fed up they feel like throwing bombs.
History is full of strong men with dangerous ideas who gain power when large masses of people are so desperate and disillusioned they’ll follow anyone who offers big, seemingly easy solutions.
At times like this a nation must depend on its wise elders – people who have gained a reputation for good judgment and integrity, and who are broadly respected by all sides regardless of political affiliation or ideology – to call out the demagogues, speak the truth, and restore common sense.
The great tragedy of America today is the paucity of such individuals when we need them the most.
Robert Reich, one of the nation’s leading experts on work and the economy, is Chancellor’s Professor of Public Policy at the Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley. He has served in three national administrations, most recently as secretary of labor under President Bill Clinton. Time Magazine has named him one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the last century. He has written thirteen books, including his latest best-seller, Aftershock: The Next Economy and America’s Future; The Work of Nations; Locked in the Cabinet; Supercapitalism; and his newest, Beyond Outrage. His syndicated columns, television appearances, and public radio commentaries reach millions of people each week. He is also a founding editor of the American Prospect magazine, and Chairman of the citizen’s group Common Cause. His widely-read blog can be found at www.robertreich.org.
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...
61 Comments so far
Show AllGingrich is a classic sociopath. He will say anything at any time to gain short term advantage. He believes in nothing. Does anyone (outside of the illiterate) actually think he cares one wit about abortion or god or anything at all that he espouses? It is not possible. He is a soulless predator.
"stevep"
Substitute the name "Obama" (or most any name from the Congress) for Gingrich and you have also said the truth.
And why is Reich calling them "the temporary Bush tax cuts" since Obama extended them to become the permanent Bush/Obama tax cuts in December 2010 ?
"Does anyone (outside of the illiterate) actually think he cares one wit about abortion or god or anything at all that he espouses?"
No, he they don't care about those things but we do, and That is the brilliance of how our two party system is set up. Despite what everyone here says there ARE real differences between the two parties. These differences are allowed to exist because they mean nothing to the 1% are very important to the 99%. They are issues like abortion, and women's reproductive rights in general, gay rights, and religious issues to mention a few.
These are obviously important to average people so it helps to keep them engaged in a system that in many other areas offer them no real choice at all. Now these social issues mean nothing to the 1%ers because for example, the women of the 1% will still be able to get an abortion, out of country if needed, should it become illegal.
If they have gay family members they'll be able to write up legal agreements to be sure their rights are protected. And finally, they could care less about religious issues because they are quite sure there is no god no matter what they say, because if they really believed in a god with heaven and hell they would never act the way they do.
Thank you NC Tom.
NC: You've described symptoms, not the roots. Why do you suppose it is that sizable demographics identify with these particular items? Every one of them centers on the issue of GENDER. The right wing and its fundamentalist Christian multitudes have been taught to believe in strict rules, and absolute adherence to authority. This authority is almost always that of a white male, substitute for "god" in their lexicon. The extreme emphasis on a male father figure given supreme authority leads this group to think it has the right to determine how other people live, mate, and govern their own sovereign BODIES. They are the ENEMIES to freedom.
The rest of us believe in things like liberty, and we understand the basic ethos: that when you do unto others fairly, they generally reciprocate in kind. In other words, we believe in peace, diplomacy, and the rule of law when the law holds everyone to the same precepts.
I agree with your thesis, that issues considered tangential to the financial control of the empire are important to many of its citizens. I just thought I'd fill in the blanks as to what makes the bifurcated condition what it is. These roots go WAY back.
Everything you've mentioned as being important are merely wedge issues used to divide the 99% and keep us distracted so that the 1% can manipulate the monetary and legal system to their benefit.
I am not saying that these things are not personally important. They are, and they should all be left to each individual to determine. Being that they are personally important, they make for terrific theater - puppet theater.
The 1% expect us to stay focused on the puppet stage. Their is no real action their but it is wonderful theater. Keep your eyes on the puppets and the puppet master owns the universe.
Want to make a difference? Look behind the curtain. If enough of us look behind the curtain and stop beating each other up over who controls whose personal life, maybe there is hope.
That is the diabolical beauty of the system. Yes, these are wedge issues, meant to dived, but like you said yourself they are important. If enough of us on the left stay home and don't vote women like Siouxrose could loose their reproductive rights, for example. And I personally don't want some right wing religious hack pushing his sky daddy crap on me either.
Of course I know you need to look behind the curtain, I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday, but the crap that gets peddled here on a daily basis that there is ABSOLUTELY NO difference between the two corporate parties is too simplistic. Obviously if there was absolutely no difference between the two parties the men behind curtain wouldn't be pumping millions into one or the other. They would just keep those millions for themselves. Why spend that kind of money for nothing? "There's no difference between the two parties" is the left's version of; "You're either with us or against us."
What we REALLY need is a third party to start, then a fourth, so a Democrat or a Republican doesn't just have to wait for the only other choice on the ticket to get voted out, to get the office back. But the way the system has been corrupted by money this is not going to be easy
Let me give a perfect example of what is happening - a snake, depending on the type - gives birth too or lays a minimum of 10 baby snakes/eggs - some as much as 50. In this case, you can cut off the head of the mama snake, but, you still have the baby snakes on the loose!
In this case, you can change one or two, meaning one party (GOP/DEM) or office meaning Senate/House/White House, it won't make a difference when the others are still left unchanged. You can't change the SCOTUS, these are appointed positions for life, and with conservatives dominating the number of seats on the bench, from chief justice to associates - here's the question for you - what can you do? They are the law of the land! And once Congressman Issa gets his way of trying to impeach, and lord knows what else, to Atty Gen. Holder, who do you think is going to get his position if worse becomes worse case scenario? The GOP won't approve any of Obama's appointments!
Do not underestimate Gingrich or the wave he is riding. This is an anti-establishment election, not an anti-democrat or anti-republican, but an anti-establishment election.
Don't listen to the republican establishment or the media who fear him, look at his actual record. That is the real reason to fear him.
It will not be out of character for US voters to cut their noses off to spite their faces.
True enough, but the malignant duopoly couldn't thrive if these Tweedledum voters weren't abetted by the Tweedledee voters resolved to cut their noses off to spite their feces.
Feces? Are you being facetious? Odd metaphor...
Good one, Siouxrose, I almost missed it.
No, he's being "fecetious".
Somewhere, in some invisible database in the sky, someone is keeping a record of all the newly minted expressions created by haste and the internet.
(Or maybe it's just GoogleVerizonFacebook.)
"This is an anti-establishment election..." ?
SO why oh why is NEWT leading the Republicans, for the time being? He is THE quitnessential INSIDER, and has the distinction of being ousted by his own corrupt congress for being TOO corrupt. He should still be in jail from the Clinton years, but instead he became and remains even now a totally-corrupt Washington "lobbyist" (just like Casino Jack Abramoff) who now has the Egomania to even think he should be president! No, he is NOT anti-establishment... he Embodies the establishment.
But he gives the Right the Red Meat the Right craves. If his tax plan is implemented, the National Debt will start ROCKETING upwards at a rate of $10 Billion PER DAY! Including interest on loans to pay the interest on loans for the interest on the interest, compounded, in a vast Transfer-of-Wealth UPWARDS! But hey, at least the stupid, duped Republican-voting masses will save $63 each! And that's why all his multitude of mortal and venal sins are forgiven by the "family values" party. Money.
And then, after Newt's sabotage of the United States government, Republican Grover Norquist, the left-over criminal troll from the dastardly Reagan years, will have his wish. Decent government will be drowned in the debt bathwater, until the Only fuctions remaining for this nation's government will be Policing the nation and the world to make sure the Debt-slavery Interest is collected and paid to the Banksters.
Birdbrain
I know you speak the truth. Gingrich is just so slimy. Obama at least slimes with eloquence. Oh, look at what we've come to.
"stevep"
I hope you are joking. Gingrich and Obama (and their parties) work for the same owners.
They are equally hopeless and must be equally shunned.
" The whole system is so awful, people tell themselves, why not just jettison everything and start from scratch?"
The problem with this point of view is that there is no general agreement about what "the whole system" is. Many people - the Tea Partiers and Libertarians, for example - believe that all problems originate in Washington.
Those of us with a broader view understand that Wall Street is the real culprit but we don;t sem to be able to find a national voice to propound that issue.
Sadly, for too many people, "the whole system" is unidentifiable, a shapeless, nameless force that has wrecked their lives and destroyed their children's future.
They just want change without understanding what needs to be reformed. These are the people who are most likely to listen to a demagogue like Gingrich.
jj
It seems to me that your distinction between Wall Street and Washington is as misguided as the distinction between the Democrats and Republicans.
Your post suggests that you believe there to be no distinction at all, that the financial sector and our national poltical structure are one and the same. In truth, the financial sector controls the political structure because the electorate allows it to do so.
In your world, there is apparently no difference between the boss and the hireling, between the slave and the master. Your view serves those such as Gingrich who want to keep peoples' attention focused on Washington as the source of all evil when, in fact, it's merely the conduit.
jj
Maybe, but I see it entirely the other way around. People like Gingrich love to make the distinction between corporate interests and Washington because they benefit from polarizing the two. If they say Washington is the problem, then the teabaggers et al. lash out at Washington, ignoring Wall Street. It's worked pretty well.
Not so quick on this one:
"Those of us with a broader view understand that Wall Street is the real culprit but we don;t sem to be able to find a national voice to propound that issue..."
You've blamed the victim in a sentence like this one. You allege that Truth Tellers have been unable to find a national voice... how about telling the truth: that the only voices heard on Media generally march lockstep with the Official Narratives. I mean, it's no joke that only comedians like Colbert or Jon Stewart get to, on occasion, "sneak one in."
Stop reinforcing the Right Wing Meme that the Left lacks message, or lacks leadership. There IS NO LACK... apart from access to the film media, microphones, radio shows, and TV spots.
It's about control! It's about who STOLE (or abducted) the air waves; and it was Clinton who handed over Those Goods... paving the way for the all-out control of content, i.e. the way to Manufacture Consent and fully marginalize Dissent.
THAT is a truer explanation for why the voices necessary appear to be missing. It's like Obama closing the door to people in the know, like Dr. Flowers. (Wasn't that her name?) Or refusing to HEAR any arguments for Single Payer. It's about Wall Street's insiders being "tasked" with managing the problem they invented. It's about warriors supposedly drawing up the path to peace, etc. AD NAUSEUM! It's rule by lies, obfuscation, innuendo and marketing: the supreme way to place an imprimatur of decency over that which NO civil society should EVER countenance!
"Stop reinforcing the Right Wing Meme that the Left lacks message, or lacks leadership. There IS NO LACK"
Hmmm. Interesting. Kindly name the 3 or 5 or 10 individuals you think represent current "leadership" on the left. Dollars to donuts others here will challenge the legitimacy of every one of those names. (If the True Left in the U.S. is good at one thing, it is forming circular firing squads.)
A resistance to identifying specific "leaders" may be a good and natural one. However at some point the street protests and challenges to existing authority need to get translated -- by some body or by some entity -- into actual changes in policy. That's how the world runs, whether in Cuba, Brazil, Finland, or the United States.
Which is why I'm demoralized to realize that the current disarray of the U.S. Left will be its downfall, again, in 2013. And 2014. And 2015. And as far as my eye can see. It's not that the facts and the issues aren't on our side. It's that there's too much in-fighting, too few alliances with other progressive interests.
Unless or until the perfectionists are willing to swallow their pride and settle for getting something less than 100% of what they want 100% of the time.
See my comment to Ephraim, one-trick-pony boy.
Just trying a little tough love on my peeps. I'm not really interested in wandering through the political wilderness for another 40 years while we await the miraculous arrival of some Messiah who will come save us. We either start making things happen now, or we continue to wander forever ...
Donny-Don,
Wow! Now that was a powerful way to say it. 100% accurate! I've posted quite a few times on this blog about the name-calling, and bashing of elected officials. First off, the tea party had a common alliance with other elected officials/corporate America. It was Bachmann that registered the Tea Party as an official political party. When the Tea Party first came into power - they were a bit aggressive and wanted to control certain things, but they eventually fell in line. Although now, there are still some things they won't bulge on - but you do need alliances. You can't even get close to getting what you want if you 'piss' people off.
As far as the media, I will use the old saying, 'he who controls the media, controls the message.' Is it any wonder that, even though the GOP complain that Willard Romney is no conservative or not conservative enough, it is alleged that he owns Clear Channel Communications. This company owns 1,100 AM & FM radio stations and short wave radios. It is further alleged that this is the same company that broadcasts Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Dr. Laura and others. So, please, someone please name at least 2 Dems that FOX news will interview as candidates everyday and follow them on campaign events with the intent of giving them good coverage - instead of using it to bash that candidate/incumbent. I think what people should be looking for is WHERE is PAT BUCHANAN - this is also an alleged political analysis, and let's not forget about Bay Buchanan, his sister? Seems they are MIA! And why did Romney hire an ex-blackwater exec. to advise him on foreign and national issues?
It appears to me that left lacks leaders only because the left recognizes complexity. The left, or progressives, see problems in the environment, finance, social justice, racism, global politics, consumerism and other nebulous areas such as ethics and morals. The right sees profits/ economy as the problem. Fix the economy and everything else falls into place, people have jobs and opportunity thus disparities disappear, equality grows, race becomes a non-issue etc. This makes an easy rally cry and easy talking points. It is of course a charade as any serious progressive understands. The economy will never create equality because it is controlled by a small cadre of influential people. Growing the economy requires ever increasing inputs from the environment and exploitation of people and on and on.
There are to me stand out voices on the left. Chomsky, Hedges, Klein are a few that readily come to mind. To me these people seemlessly blend ideas regarding all of the above issues in coherent ways.
The problems the left faces are all difficult and difficult to prioritze, so leadership becomes difficult.
Corporate interests are running Mr. O for president. He has accomplished above and beyond their expectations. He is the only candidate that can minimize opposition. Barry is their boy.
The way to re-elect Obama is to terrorize the population with an even scarier alternative. The plan proceeds.....
Iowapinko: I'm inclined to agree with you on the plan. I don't think that the voters are ready to vote for the most obvious lame pony in this entirely orchestrated lineup of horse's asses. I don't trust poll numbers. I may be wrong, but it seems that the overall strategy is to make the slithery sellout, Obama, appear to be the lesser evil.
That's my belief as well. I almost wonder whether Gingrich has been promised vast riches to make himself completely unelectable, but he finds that no matter how hard he tries, he has difficulty offending or repulsing the dumbed down FOXified masses.
Hey Iowa! Your observation is the Central Truth of this campaign. Little else need be said, little else need be discussed. "Course, that means you'll never hear it whispered on MSM.
"Corporate interests are running Mr. O?"
Listen, I know corporate interests, I know stockbrokers who make over a million dollars a year, even still. They ALL really, really HATE Obama, the "Socialist"! Though for the life of me, I don't know why. He saved THEIR bacon, for sure. But no gratitude does he get from these dogs. They will bite his hand for sure.
And Obama has disappointed the rest of us, including me. And I didn't think he was going to be even close to another FDR to begin with - too close to the Clintonista camp, too obsquious to his campaign pledges to "get along" with the Republicans, and to "make government work better Together"(hahahaha)!
But the greed of corporate insiders knows no bounds... even $50 billion Each is NOT ENOUGH for them! They want to WIN it ALL! They have no humility or gratitude or sympathy, as these emotions are seen as weaknesses. And, in the dog-eat-dog world of Corporate and Wall Street Politics, these are. Which just goes to show you how really mean capitalism as a political system is, and how it embeds the worst elements in people, as the meanest and shrewdest hustlers rise to the top.
No, believe me, the Wall Street and the Bankster crowds really HATE Obama just as much as the Limbaugh/Beck hoi-polloi and the rightwing-military crowds HATE Obama. The elite may finance him, in order to hedge their political bets as they do their financial bets, but they don't really want him. They want the mega-millionaire Hedge-Fund Operator, Mitt Romney. (Though the "pagan-cultist Northerner" Romney cannot get the Southern Xian fundamentalist vote at all, which means he can't be nominated.)
That doesn't mean I don't wish for a better candidate, a better champion from the Left. Someone arising from outside the fold, but who can take hold of the people's aspirations in a significant way.
Obama has tried to please everyone, and has wound up pleasing no one.
FVHorn, your analysis seems totally correct in my opinion.
Let us remember who is in charge of these "polls". It is the same media that is interested in seeing those "Tax cuts to the wealthy and Coporations" . I am going to suggest these polls are a crock.
They are intended to imply to the sheeple that the guy next door thinks tax cuts a great idea and if you want a beer drunking buddy in that guy next door you best be in favor of those tax cuts you THINK your buddy in favor of.
They are intended to give the politician ammunition to use for more "tax cuts" using these polls to say "It is what Americans want".
The underlying problem is this. The people will not THINK for themselves. They are being told what they should be thinking by PR firms and polling firms and are afraid of being left out of the crowd so nod their head in compliance when some talking head comes on the screen and says "This is what you want".
Folks will line up 500 deep and wait in line for a limited edition toy made out of plastic in China that is a piece of JUNK all because they have been told it is what they really need and want. We can not expect those same people not to go along with the crowd when it comes to these polls of manipulation.
This is NOT Newt getting more popular the more outrageous he gets in the strictest sense of the terms. It is the media TELLING people that these idiotic ideas are brilliant and are popular with their neighbors.
Amen, GW NORTH! Brilliantly stated! I was thinking along similar lines and posted accordingly, having not yet read down the thread. Some days I am so incensed by what passes for law and/or leadership that as soon as I finish reading an article, I just want to let my reactions RIP before checking to see if another person has already made mention of The Item gripping at me.
It could be that those who still play into the alleged presidential horse race, following the alleged play-by-play moves haven't viewed "Century of the Self," or come to recognize the degree to which Bernays-style programming deeply impacts the masses. I think a pretty good case could be made that the intelligence of the electorate has gone downhill in direct proportion to how many hours are "invested" in watching television, the supreme programming device that does the viewer's thinking for him. (Along these lines, there have been poll numbers published which demonstrate that Fox "news" viewers head the list on those misinformed about issues like holding Saddam Hussein responsible for 911.)
GW:" I am going to suggest these polls are a crock ". I agree with Sioux Rose below, as I have also expressed the same thought many times in the past.
How about this: What if all Presidential polls were outlawed the last year of any Presidential election? We all know that will never happen, but since this site is called Common Dreams, it is a nice dream.
GwNorth,
You are correct. Only thing, we are watching a slow death of the media. We've already lost most newspapers, and most people don't have television, but still have radio and internet. I guess when people are tired of being told what to think, what to buy, who to like, who to hate...it gets a bit old. Journalism is now gossip, character assassination, relationship-marriage busters (such as Demi and Ashton, Tiger and his ex-wife) and other forms of journalist hitmen/women - they control what they want for as long as they can, for instance, Mark Foley, they knew he was doing the wrong thing with the young interns at the Capitol. Former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, they knew he was sleeping with the household help which resulted in a child - and the housekeeper continue to work there until the secret was let out last year - can you believe it, this woman in Maria Shriver's home, laughing and grinning in her face with this type of secret, then have the audacity to tell Maria that she loves her and respect her. But yeah, I truly do respect Maria. Yet, this is what PR firms and media can do!
Paul/Nader 2012.
Anti establishment? Check!
Genuine and not afraid to speak truth to power? Check!
Crazy ideas? Double Check!
Thing is, Paul will never be able to eliminate the DoE, FDA, or EPA but, Gingrich can very possibly get his tax cuts. The destructive things that Gingrich (and the other Repugs) want to do will be encourgaed by the powers that be and therefore are relatively easy. Pauls big (and destructive) ideas don't have a snowballs chance, but his other ideas (bring home the troops, dismantle the bases, even End the Fed) have a chance and would do more to strengthen the moral and economic might of the USA than any other contenders.
We have a choice of many evils, the up side is one of them is not a lying, corporate schill who will self destruct the whole country for his MIC/Hedgefund buddies. I dare say the only one who cares about the countrys future.
(Please don't bring up the 'he cheered people dying for not having insurance'. If you believe that please read this:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2037066/Ron-Paul-GOP-debate-Tea-Party-fanatics-say-let-uninsured-people-die.html)
In the article he is named the most liberal cabdidate and it states, "Mr Paul, a physician ... disagreed with just letting sick people die"
Only one candidate in the field has a track record like Paul (or Nader) and only one of the two party candidates has run as an independent. Paul is a pragmatist, he has said he can't do all the things he wants but, he will start with the ones everyone wants! Regulate wallstreet, let the banksters face the rule of law, close the bases, end the Fed, stop corporate personhood. Who else will support these things?
I don't think I need to espouse Naders qualities, a true and proven champion.
Paul/Nader 2012! That is a ticket that can bring in a diverse group of people and has little chance of falling into partisan/party line battles for the sake of ideology.
Mr. Reich says:
"The great tragedy of America today is the paucity of such individuals when we need them the most."
I try to give Reich the benefit of the doubt, but it gets harder by the day. Perhaps he's such a Beltway insider that his entire perception of reality is based on the narrow confines of that environment.
There are LOTS of intelligent voices and thinkers, the problem is they get NO media access of air time! The very fact that Reich confuses Newt's alleged popularity (or supposed capacity to speak to The People) with the way he is being SOLD as brand, is farcical. The elite can't help but like Newt since he's willing to serve to them, on a silver platter, what's left of Amerika's assets. Furthermore, since they've lionized him with a reputation for being an "intellectual," the fact that he's now so prominent in media circles reinforces the idea that this guy is just FULL of big ideas.
This bastard would do for the rich, what John Yoo did for the American Justice system. Both have NO principles. They are shells of human beings able to go through the motions, articulate enough "intelligent-sounding" lines to hold some credibility, while their essential purpose is to deliver unto their paymasters WHATEVER these entities desire. Law, justice, decency, fairness, empathy... be damned!
A society that rewards savage acts is one that allows the moral shit, instead of the cream, to rise to the top.
Good points, SR. Reich reminds me too much of all the pundits on MSNBC, like Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz, Chris Matthews et al. who never cease analyzing and tearing apart the Republican ship of fools, but never utter a discouraging word in the direction of the Democrats. There is so much material to keep them busy for the next 10 months, with guaranteed gaffes and idiocies pouring forth from the moron mouths of Newt, Mitt, Michelle, and the others, that they never have to give a moment's attention to all the atrocities generated by Team Obama.
Reich, like Nichols and Solomon, and a host of others, clearly consider themselves among that band of happy few, the "wise elders", who can lead us to the progressive promised land. They're all Beltway insiders, one way or another. They've played the game according to its rules all their professional lives, and they'll back Obama for another term. They simply cannot imagine going outside the familiar political boundaries cordoned off by the duopoly, as Chris Hedges, and possibly Michael Moore can. They're finally just promoters of the Democratic Party. Anything else is unthinkable.
Thank you. This is precisely the point that a Demo-apologist like Donny Don won't allow his mind to grasp. He prefers to identify with The Establishment in only lending credence to those "inside the beltway" names that have already shown their willingness to bow to the existing status quo.
There ARE leaders on the Left. Chris Hedges qualifies. Ralph Nader qualifies. Heck, I'd opt for a Michael Moore. But to Donny Don, only those who have received their bona fides from the Established Powers are considered "viable."
Note how this Frame consigns everyone to the very limitations that would thwart real change, and continue to flatter the 1% Owners of Society. They like a good wrestling match as much as the next guy. Therefore, without the appearance of a good electoral race, where's the money to be made from all those commercials? And all those greasy deals across both sides of the aisle?
Well thanks for at least advancing some actual names. (But, um, Michael Moore -- a "leftist leader" .... really?)
I like Ralph Nader. I voted for him at least once, in 2000. But you can't just run a leftist presidential candidate every four years and expect to see some sort of meaningful change. It takes the hard, everyday, down-in-the mud cultivation of organizations and institution-building that (to use your terminology) establishes the right 'Frame' through which people can understand the issues.
Listen: we can't even get 5% of people to vote for the Green Party candidate in my "safely Democratic" Congressional district ... where there is NO fear of electing a spoiler Republican candidate by default. I submit that if that can't be done in an already reliably left-leaning district, then leftists still have a hell of a lot of very basic organizing work to do. (There seems like too much eagerness to try to win marathons, when most Americans don't see leftists as being able to walk.)
Meanwhile, the Tea Partiers continue to take over our country because, well, as Woody Allen once noted, 80% of success is just showing up for work. And if nothing else they do show up for work. More importantly, if they don't get 100% of what they want now, they settle for 50%. They get their nose under the tent, and they exercise the patience to chip away at the other 50% one bite at a time. The Reagan Revolution wasn't built in a day.
Do you disagree with that characterization? Do you seriously think that a step-by-step effort to take back our country can't possibly work for progressives? How long are you willing to wait around for a friendly media and a suitably-enlightened population to suddenly see the light and miraculously go from casting 0.59% of the popular vote for Nader (2008 results) to 50.59%? How well has the vote Nader strategy of the last five elections worked out for you in terms of changing the dialog in America?
It's great to wait around for the Revolution to change everything, but I've been waiting around for 40 years, and am not holding my breath for the Soccer Moms and NFL Dads to rise up against The Man in 2012.
"At times like this a nation must depend on its wise elders.."
Like who, Mr. NAFTA? Bill Clinton? You? Who?
Whether its Newt or some other slug that wins the presidency in '12, it won't make any difference. (With exception of Ron Paul. Despite the fact he's not perfect, I'll easily settle for him since he'll chop the nads off the Pentagon and the Fed.)
Robert's wet dream of a return to the economic glory days are futile. Its over.
I think you are an agent, Moon pie. Seldom to never do your posts do anything but substantiate the dominant narrative while pretending to challenge it. Here, you're basically mocking the PREMISE of "wise elders" while narrowing the playing field to include only those who already have been anointed by the make-war state.
You do this continuously when it comes to the influence of the OWS, and I've also watched you subtly decimate the credentials of many who are on the front lines, trying to make a difference. What is your telling claim to fame, Mr. Monday Morning Quarterback, and/or official site embed?
Your role apears to be that of making sure that NO alternatives to what IS might be seriously considered. Just like the moral midgets who still pretend that global warming remains unproven, anyone who stands in the way of Truth is an enemy to the Human Race at this point in time when the lies used to bind us are what will end up killing so many. That's some status quo to argue for. Hence: J'accuse!
Ron Paul's positions on the MIC, foreign policy, and the Fed are certainly laudable, but don't you think that if by some miracle he were elected that the PTB would offer him a great compromise -- they would go along with virtually all his ideas on the domestic side, except for those about the Fed, and disregard all his foreign policy and MIC stands.
Kivals: " Ron Paul's positions on the MIC, foreign policy, and the Fed are laudable". Even if you give Ron Paul the benefit of the doubt and that he is a man of integrity and means what he says about American foreign policy, only the most naive of fools, believes he will be able to implement what he says about American foreign policy. Because we are talking trillions of $$$ that would be devastating to the super, wealthy, elite that determine American foreign policies. The same 1% Wall Street banksters that ran American foreign policy in 1963 are still the same people administering American foreign policies today. That was tried in 1963 and was not allowed then..... and it will not be allowed to be tried again.
I agree, except that, as I stated above, I think the PTB would not need to JFK Paul. He would almost certainly accept the great compromise they would offer, as they would agree with him in implementing almost all his domestic ideas, e.g., cutting taxes on the rich, gutting the social safety net, eradicating important federal agencies, and removing regulations, but they would not go along with his ideas on the MIC, the Fed, or foreign policy.
Haven't you all been paying attention these past almost three years now, or does everyone have their collective heads up and locked. Do you think Obama has obstructed everything he has attempted to accomplish? You mean to have completely blotted out the fact that the republican party has obstructed (EVERYTHING)? I don't give a good crap what any of these politicians are saying during these clown shows called debates... Whitout a congress that is willing to do the People's Work and turn this chaos around, none of what you all are discussing makes a hill of beans worth of sense. People: "Rome Is Burning" and the culprits are in your congress, your supreme court, your justice department, Wall Street; not to mention all the corporate money pouring in to destroy the democratic process and what they are doing to bring this nation down. Funny, I never see anybody writing about what Boehner, Cantor, McConnell, and that cabal are doing or have done to dismante this nation. All the obstruction and all you can blame is Obama, Really? No president can get anything done without the consent of Congress, they are two different branch's of government, the executive and the legislative. respectively. If your legislative branch does not look out for the people's business then you have what you see now. And if "WE THE PEOPLE" allow them to do nothing, and don't vote these elected officials out of office then we get broken government... but don't worry about that and let's not do anything except call the 99% (OWS) stink and not go out and get "STINK" along with them and stop this broken machine, go on, blame Obama... I gotta go, and do something to help... I gotta stop the machine...
The Republicans passed pure evil when Reagan swore his oath to destroy the middle class, completely trample the poor, and increase the use of the US military to plunder the world, and they have continued to move further and further away from sane, sensible, and humane policies ever since. No real news there. What bothers me and many of the others here is that the Dems have been following them to compete for corporate cash, getting closer and closer all the time (while the rhetoric stays miles apart, the actions have become almost indistinguishable), to the point that now Barry appears to be the preferred puppet for the corporatists.