Tuesday Trivia and Open Thread

- I watched the President, but did not watch Boehner -- really couldn't bear the thought of it.  The President was fine I suppose -- sober, reasonable, and thoughtful -- the qualities that may well allow him to be re-elected despite the awful economic climate.  But I am not sure that this sort of thing moves the needle at all at this point in time.  It's all been said before and one can easily switch the channel, which I suspect is what all of the low information voters -- the ones who will probably decide the 2012 contest -- did.

- There has been a lot of back and forth in liberal circles about how Obama is not FDR or even LBJ when it comes to the art of getting things accomplished.  I suspect, as our friend KN posits in comments below, that this reflects an absence of or dimming of memory in many respects -- even when they were racking up historical victories, both FDR and LBJ were found wanting by the the left wing of the Democratic Party (which, in economic terms, was far more of a left wing than anything we have today).  I would, however, suggest that there is a major temperamental difference between Obama and his predecessors with respect to the art of political battle.  One gets the sense that Roosevelt and Johnson relished the fight and took great pleasure in besting their opponents.  They both enjoyed politics -- I think from opposite ends of the socio-economic divide -- FDR enjoyed slumming it and being better at it than even the most notorious ward heelers, while Johnson liked to outdo those who had been his social betters.  I am pretty confident that both Roosevelt and Johnson would have found the notion of taking politics out of politics to be absurd, a self-definitional impossibility, whereas one gets the sense that Obama, in many respects, longs to govern in a world without petty politics.  One can understand this impulse given the nature of his opposition, but for someone who enjoys being the "adult" in the room, he ought to be the first to see that this is never going to happen.

- I was pleased to see the addition of a dedicated labor page to daily kos.  I am also enjoying the writing of Erik Loomis over at Lawyers, Guns & Money, who is focusing a lot on labor issues as well.  It's great to have additional voices focusing on a topic that continues to be neglected outright by the mainstream press.

- Interestingly, Loomis, who, like me, is a frequent critic of Yglesias's forays into neo-liberal contrarianism, linked approvingly to Matt's sober message on how to move politics to the left in this country.  I concur as well -- it's difficult work that will require an enormous amount of energy and patience, two forces that often work in opposition to one another. 

- I probably write less about labor stuff than I should -- in large part because I get enough of it at work.  But I am in the midst of a battle with a small employer looking to bust his union and I remain amazed at the brazenness of the employer class in this country and their legal lackeys.  In this case, the employer has fired all of his employees who were union members -- one guy he fired twice when he continued to support the union after being rehired -- and hired hand-picked non-union guys.  (There is no strike ongoing and the union just settled with other employers in the same industry for a wage freeze for one year, and two years where the wages will be re-opened for bargaining.)  An NLRB election was held at the employer's the other day -- for complicated reasons we need to get the union certified by them even though the union has been recognized by the company for decades -- and the rule is that the union and employer representatives need to vacate the voting area.  My guys complied, but the employer and his attorneys just stayed there, daring an impotent NLRB to do anything about it.  That is what labor law is like now in this country -- lawlessness by employers is virtually a given and there are almost no remedies available for such intransigence.

Alright, time to head off to the office -- God bless the five minute commute -- and see what you all have to say. 

Comments

[MR Bill]

Well, I watched Boehner, and it was ugly: "Obama spending outta control" and the same old obfuscations.
And please keep talking about Labor...
I go for more Facebook arguments with folks who think Obama is a communist, and the deficit is only his...

[Morzer]

I don't think Obama's personality has much to do with his record as a fighter. Both FDR and LBJ had more to work with in terms of votes in Congress and the Senate, and they could also count on "liberal" Republicans doing the right thing as well. Obama has a weaker starting position, further weakened by the Blue Dogs, and there are no "liberal" Republicans left. Nor did FDR and LBJ face such a tightly unified and viciously orchestrated right-wing propaganda machine. I would add that FDR's successes in creating the safety net owed a great deal to the way in which it was essentially reserved for white people.

Incidentally, did a post of mine simply vanish a couple of days ago? I posted a link to an article by Elizabeth Drew, with some comments, and when I woke up the next day it has vanished. Now, I know not whether I dreamed of posting it, or whether it was somehow deemed unworthy/commercial. Anyway, here it is again, since it fits in with the general topic of what Obama is doing and how he does it:

WhatWereTheyThinking

[MR Bill]

Steve Benen list top 10 lies in Boehner's speech.

[Sir Charles]

Morzer,

I think you raise legitimate points here, but I still think that Obama has a professorial disdain for some of the more hardball aspects of politics, while FDR and LBJ genuinely enjoyed them. (It may say better things about Obama as a person, but I think it's a bit of a handicap as a leader.) FDR certainly benefitted politically from the fact that a huge chunk of the white population of the country was desperately poor -- this is not nearly so true in the current environment.

Not sure what might have hapened to your comment. I know that from time to time I write one and then forget to fill out the "captcha" number. It makes me want to weep.

I want to read that article by Elizabeth Drew.

[Joe S]

Obama has actually done a number of good things, especially in the area of gay rights and making moves to reregulate the marketplace where regulation is/was sorely needed (healthcare, financial industry). His problem has not been a lack of fight. His problem is that he hasn't done anything to work to move the country to a place that it needs to be on economics. FDR saw the need for intervention in Europe and Asia despite a deeply isolationist public. Roosevelt kept moving the country towards a position where intervention became a possibility (Lend-Lease, the embargo against Japan, etc.) Roosevelt kept hitting the issue from different angles, getting a toehold here and there and climbing the mountain until he provoked Japan into declaring war.

Obama doesn't seem to be doing that as to the need to run deficits and have government pick up slack demand in the economy. Obama doesn't seem to want to/ be able to move public opinion to a place where it needs to go. He's better on global warming and immigration reform, but even there, he doesn't seem to want to work the angles to get where we need to go as robustly as maybe he should.

[Sir Charles]

Joe,

I think that's a fair assessment for the most part.

I actually think though, that in some respects, the public is potentially further along -- on taxes for instance -- than Obama thinks. Polls would seem to consistently show this.

I think the problem there is for him to break free of DC's notoriously conservative conventional wisdom, where it is always 1994.

[kathy a.]

bloomberg notes that the republicans now blaming obama for debt actually voted for the major drivers of that debt.

more on the dishonesty in boehner's speech.

in a refreshing change from the typical US reporting ("both sides refuse to budge"), the headline in australian press is that obama appealed to voters to tell their representatives how they feel about the debt ceiling situation. and i think that is what we should do. even if our senators and reps are already rational people, it cannot hurt for them to trot out the numbers on constituents concerned about the issue.

i agree with morzer that obama is facing an unprecedented problem with the opposition tightly controlled and refusing any reasoned, legitimate discussion or compromise.

so, what ever happened to jobs jobs jobs? wasn't that the issue that the house republicans ran on in 2010? they have turned out to be singlemindedly opposed to what working families need -- including jobs with decent pay and benefits, health care, protections for seniors and disabled persons, adequate funding of public education, etc.

[kathy a.]

SC, i also agree that obama is not tempermentally inclined to the political equivalent of streetfighting.

he is the anti-shrub -- no smirks and swagger, no "mission accomplished," no branding large swaths of the nation as anti-patriotic if they disagree with his vision. (do you remember that? it offends the living hell out of me to be called unpatriotic.) obama likes to listen, to think things through, to talk problems out -- this is what has worked for him in the past. it is something that should work, if the people he was trying to negotiate with were operating in good faith.

you're absolutely correct that the vast majority of citizens do not mind increased taxes, particularly if they are focused on the very well-to-do -- who have racked up even greater fortunes with their tax breaks, who will not need to worry about the rent or food or health care if their rates go up, whose luxurious lifestyles are ever more distant from that of an ordinary worker.

[Paula B]

kathy---haven't you noticed they changer the agenda every time Obama accomplishes something? It happens within minutes of the announcement of a troop pullback, new regulation, stimulus program or any other initiative Obama completes. It's so obvious, it's almost laughable. He really counts on voters vigorously maintaining their state of uninformation.

It's unfortunate that Boehner's lies are the very things the uninformed voters hang onto. Their the same "facts" that crop up in every viral anti-Obama email rant I get from cousins living in underdeveloped states.

[Paula B]

make that they're, not their.

[kathy a.]

obama is, too, in a uniquely vulnerable position as a president because of who he is. there is still profound, ugly, dangerous resentment about the color of his skin, and because lies continue to circulate about his legitimacy as a citizen, about his alleged marxism, about his alleged islamic background. between the loaded history of racism in this country, and undifferentiated hatred of muslims, the rise of politicians and pundits arguing this is a christian country, the public platforms for those spewing hatred and lies -- it's a powder keg out there. obama in particular cannot afford to come across as out of control, overbearing, vindictive, punitive. he cannot, for reasons beyond his personality, engage in LBJ style politics.

i remember when JFK was assasinated; i worry. just this week, there was a horrific set of mass killings in norway, by a right-wing christian fanatic who felt things were getting too multiculural. we all still remember oklahoma city, an apparent inspiration to the guy in norway; the unabomber may also have been an inspiration. one also thinks of columbine, of gabby giffords being shot and 9 people killed. part of what the tea partiers and right-wing pundits have been doing is fanning the flames of outrage and hatred (not that they take any credit for the violent outcomes). frankly, that scares me to death.

the mainstream GOP has lost control of the party's fanatic branches. virtually all of teh possible GOP presidential candidates this cycle make john mccain of 2008 look like he leans left. that's pretty damned scary.

[big bad wolf]

i particularly liked the responsiblity is not enough paragraph of this talk of the town

[kathy a.]

good article, bbw, but extremely depressing.

[Sir Charles]

bbw,

I liked that article too -- in a wrist slashing sort of way.

[Paula B]

i second that, kathy. Again, the folks who need the most help will get the least, thanks to those who want to teach Washington a lesson about how much power they hold in their hands. Fine! What are you going to do when thousands of poor and angry people are in the street, clamoring for help, your blood or both? I'll have to remember to be in France that day.

[Joe S]

@Paula- What are they going to do ?-- Point the mob at immigrants, gays, people of color, secular liberals, nonchristians, and feminists-- it's worked for centuries, what's going to change about this time ?

[Joe S]

@Paula- I'd also make sure that you check your calendar regarding France, as they are in the midst of developing a powerful movement to blame their problems on Muslim immigrants and their descendants. So make sure to avoid the selected dates for rioting in France (either by the immigrants in the banlieus or by the National Front in opposition to the immigrants in the banlieus).

[Paula B]

Good point, Joe. The mob is always faulted. And as for France, I was thinking of staying far from the banlieus, preferably in the Mediterranean. But, you're right, we know how this will turn out, there's no stopping it and no place to hide.

[big bad wolf]

the future is unwritten. the heroes are unknown.

we never know. we can speculate and reason and mourn prematurely, but we cannot know.

[kathy a.]

joe adds to the joy of the moment, with the freaking truth regarding tactics, dammit. he forgot blaming the poor for their conditions -- lazy, lacking in entrepreurial strengths, weak-willed, poor financial planners, etc. and that women can be taken out, feminist or not, by calling them sluts or bitches.

[Joe S]

For anyone who's interested, Timothy Burke over at Swarthmore blogs has a great post on how Obama seems like a James Buchanan- a smart man who had no idea how to navigate the times.

[oddjob]

Absolutely unrelated to discussion thread, but I think it's cool!

[kathy a.]

will look there, joe. but i have a question -- who the hell would know how to navigate these times?

[Sir Charles]

Joe,

I enjoyed aspects of that post, although I feel it overstates -- by a lot. Where I think it shows wisdom is in the sense that we are at a moment where the Republican Party has suspended all of the normal rules of political practice in the country -- a phenomenon that had been building since the 1994 election, but really came to full fruition with the Obama presidency. People in the Administration and the media continue to play as though the old rules apply and are surprised to find that they don't. Although they can't quite accept the results of what they see.

I do not think though that Obama is quite Buchanan material. Buchanan is not really a neutral figure as Burke posits -- although a northerner, I think it much more accurate to describe him as a slavery sympathizer, one who actually welcomed the Dred Scott decision. He essentially permitted the country to fall apart and thus has earned his ranking at the very bottom of the presidential rankings.

Obama, notwithstanding his flaws, has managed significant accomplishments and has retained a level of popularity that is pretty solid considering the times in which he is leading. He would still rank near the top of presidents in my lifetime in my opinion. I think our problem is more the sense of disappointment that something much greater could have been achieved -- and that we could be looking at the ascension of some really disastrous people and policies should he fail to get re-elected.

[nancy]

In addition to the inability of policymakers to get back to jobs, jobs, jobs, I think we should start to be concerned about this looming situation, as municipalities face down empty coffers. WA state, for example has one of the highest minimum wage rates [stalling job growth], no state income tax, generous welfare, and a very high combined state and local sales tax (mine is 8.7%--Seattle's is 9.5%); the insolvencies are coming and most especially to small towns fighting to stay afloat. Cities and counties are up against the numbers and the debt ceiling game of 'chicken' (two cars but as Josh Marshall put it, one is without a driver) isn't helping at all.

[Joe S]

Well, Sir C, there's another issue here thats related to the 1850's. The country, near as I can see, really is being cleft in two relatively equal portions. On one side is urban, multiracial, tolerant of secularism and modernity (many urban Democrats are quite religious, but their religiosity isn't politicized). A lot of these people (myself included) see this way of life as the future and are looking at change as a matter of time.

On the other side is an exurban and rural core of people as well as older suburbanites who see their way of life slipping away and who are growing fundamentally more reactionary at the loss of power. The Rural/exurban group is the majority in the South and on the plains, but there are huge liberal pockets in the South (New Orleans, Austin, Atlanta, the Black Belt of MS and GA). The cosmopolitan group is a majority on the coasts, but there are huge conservative pockets there (think many Italians in New York and the tea party types in upstate New York and New Hampshire, as well as the exurbs of Milwaukee which are as conservative as anywhere in Texas).

There's a generational, economic, racial, and cultural shift going on thats unmooring the country. It won't be like the Civil War, but it could be like the paralysis of interwar and postwar England. A sort of constant, grinding tension about where the country is going. That's not a situation where fealty to procedural niceties or methods of deliberation are going to work. People are too locked in by their tribal affinity. It feels like the 1850's and, even more, like the late 19th and early 20th Century (especially when you look at global instability). Obama's biggest problem is that he'd be a superb president in calm times. He hasn't really been able to cope with the tectonic shifts we're all experiencing in the culture though. His deliberative style doesn't match the moment.

[Sir Charles]

Joe,

I do agree with a lot of that.

I meant to make some comment on this as it relates to what Krugman, I think, described the other day as a cold civil war.

The difference I think is that this old order could well be swept away on a demographic tide relatively soon, if -- and this is a huge if -- the Democrats can retain the loyalty of a majority of younger generation whites. That's why I found that poll that I believe you and Morzer and I were discussing the other day so concerning.

The exurban, rural, born-again, older, and suburban demographic -- one might call it the Fox Demographic --that has formed the backbone of the 21st Century Republican Party is heading into eclipse absent some new blood.

I am somewhat astonished that the Obama people don't see this and the urgency (and opportunity) it creates, but they really don't think that way.

[Paula B]

>>style doesn't match the moment

I disagree, and am truly appreciative that Obama has not raised the decibel level of the perpetual rant one iota. A president's self-control is a plus, in my book.

On the other had, where are the locals, the Democratic members of Congress who should be matching the volume of the Tea Party types, and they're not. I've written to all three (Olver, Kerry, Brown) of my Congress critters in the last few days, but think they should have been writing to me, just as they do right before elections. I guess they're letting Obama take all the heat while they keep a low profile until next fall.

[Sir Charles]

nancy,

This is a problem that only the Feds --- through deficit spending -- can alleviate.

Eventually I think you are going to have to see more rationalization of local government spending as well. There are too many small cities and towns in America supporting their own schools, police, and fire departments. I know that this is very true where I grew up in Massachusetts and in places like New York -- where county government kind of withered on the vine.

[Joe S]

@Paula, you don't have to raise the decibel level to understand that the Repubs are not going to cooperate. Things like the debt ceiling could have been defused in the lame duck session. Rooting around for bipartisan votes on health care or immigration could have been avoided as hopeless. I'm not suggesting vitriol or aggressiveness. I am suggesting that dealing with the Repubs is pointless. In this type of situation, you had to rally your base to sway the Dems. OFA and Obama didn't do that and hasn't done that until last night.

@Sir C, it's clearly a problem. But my guess is that things will snap back with the antics of Congress and/or the next Repub. President-- They don't have any ideas either.

[nancy]

Here's a lovely little break from the GOP summer 2011 farce. Always the children to bring us back to ground.

[MR Bill]

And the left loses a bete noir: Ga. Rep. Senator Bobby Franklin found dead, at home..

He tried to ban all abortions, put the state on the Gold Standard, and was the go to guy for crazy. Bills introduced this year would get rid of drivers' license, treat all reported miscarriages as possible murders, and change state law so the word 'accuser' would replace 'victim' in rape cases. Running from a safe Republican seat in Cobb county, he was often alleged to have 'militia' contacts, and was called 'Dr. No' by his caucus members.

RIP.

[nancy]

Morzer--Thanks for the NYRB link. Drew certainly sums the situation up well.

I really miss seeing the likes of Elizabeth Drew and Jack Germond every Friday night. Agronsky and Company was always quite the half-hour. I used to switch from English Lit seminar paper-writing to those weekly roundtables. Quite the transition and bold relief. I don't remember any loud voices. Positively civilized in hindsight, Reagan years or no.

[Sir Charles]

MR Bill,

Was there a wet suit and a dildo involved?

nancy,

Germond and Drew were way too soft-spoken and articulate for today's meathead television.

[Sir Charles]

Actually I believe two wet suits would be the Standard Operating Procedure.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/dead-reverends-rubber-fetish?page=1

[MR Bill]

Nah, Bobby pegged out at home with a standard heart attack.
With his intransigence, and penchant for introducing wildly offensive legislation probably raised more money for Georgia Planned Parenthood than any other politician.