One of the Karl Rove tactics that worked so well in past election cycles is to bombard the media and the blogsphere with lies and innuendo in order to fortify their candidate; Bush, then, and McCain now. Today an army of professionals and volunteers have "hacked" the code by organizing coordinated campaigns against the mainstream media when views and stories appear that are bad news to their candidate. The pressure has its effect, but can only continue so long as the public is susceptible. Reverse what they say, and the meaning becomes clear.
In Miami, the right wing attacked publishers of The Miami Herald with an incessant barrage of letters, threats, and garbage. After anonymous letters swamped the publisher's office, advertisers too called and complained. (Those advertisers were mostly from the development industry and lobby, from the big downtown law firms who wanted to "help" the publishers calm the public.)
Pressure in Miami had other aspects too: the domination of Spanish language radio by builders and lobbyists who used the Cuba issue as a weapon in the hands of paid-for commentators who routinely violated FCC license requirements without penalty. The model continues to work to enforce political hegemony in Miami Dade in single-member county commission districts. And it was a model studied by the national political machinery of the Republican party, lead by Karl Rove.
The use of public pressure on the media here predated the rise of the internet and the blogsphere, but the point is relevant: the Miami model for steering political discourse was proven out in the hegemony of election results in specific districts and municipalities. Hialeah comes to mind, where opponents of Natacha Seijas were beaten down by the application of selective law enforcement.
Today, the right wing has a problem: the destruction of the economy on their watch. Two years ago, when we began this blog, I predicted that the credit crisis would be the main issue of the campaign. And so it is.
How do you elect a president from a candidate, John McCain, whose record against regulating the financial sector is clear: he came to the rescue of Charles Keating, a banker who took millions of dollars from shareholders and applied them to the deregulation of the Savings and Loan industry; the last great implosion in the economy?
The right wing has no grounds to defend their mismanagement of the economy; the one consistent thread from mortgage origination to the multiplication of debt that rained commissions, fees, and untold millions on Wall Street managers is a willingness to destroy government regulation in order to advance greed.
John McCain says so himself: the economy is fundamentally sound. He is against regulation of the financial sector: let the hedge funds "diversify" risk without supervision or collection of data, let short sellers pummel financial institutions into dust, let builders and developers have their way with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. John McCain can't represent reform because his long Senate career is on the side of the politics that brought us to the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression..
So when you hear the right wing trolls in the blogsphere parrot the vitriol of Fox News or Rush Limbaugh, but in a meaner way, just reverse the meaning, the way an image is reversed in a mirror. It is not that difficult. Try it.
9 comments:
Just so. Psychologically, it sure looks like classic projection (accuse the other guy of what you are doing).
I'd also mention the other favored tactic: respond with an off-topic distraction.
Maybe we should teach voting 101 in the schools so that everyone wouldn't be so easily bamboozeled.
NY Times
September 18, 2008
OP-ED COLUMNIST
The McCain of the Week
By GAIL COLLINS
VIENNA, Ohio
“The people of Ohio are the most productive in the world!” yelled John McCain at a rally outside of Youngstown on Tuesday. Present company perhaps excluded, since the crowd was made up entirely of people who were at liberty in the middle of a workday.
Folks were wildly enthusiastic as the event began. That was partly because Sarah Palin was also on the bill. (With Todd!) And when McCain took the center stage, they were itching to cheer the war hero and boo all references to pork-barrel spenders.
Nobody had warned them that he had just morphed into a new persona — a raging populist demanding more regulation of the nation’s financial system. And since McCain’s willingness to make speeches that have nothing to do with his actual beliefs is not matched by an ability to give them, he wound up sounding like Bob Dole impersonating Huey Long.
Really, if McCain is going to keep changing into new people, the campaign should send out notices. (Come to a rally for the next president of the United States. Today he’s a vegetarian!)
“We’re going to put an end to the abuses on Wall Street — enough is enough!” this new incarnation yelled, complaining angrily about greed and overpaid C.E.O.’s. Slowly, people begin to peel out of the crowd and drift away. Even in these troubled times, there are apparently a number of Republicans who think highly of corporate executives and captains of high finance.
The whole transformation was fascinating in a cheap-thrills kind of way. It’s not every day, outside of “Incredible Hulk” movies, that you see somebody make this kind of turnaround in the scope of a few hours.
On Monday in Jacksonville, Fla., McCain made his now-famous reassurance that the fundamentals of the economy were still good. It’s a longstanding line of his, but this was perhaps not the best week to dredge it up. So the handlers went to work, and by the time McCain arrived in Orlando a few hours later he was reprogrammed. And angry!
“We’re going to put an end to the abuses on Wall Street! Enough is enough! We’re going to put an end to the greed!” he told a town hall meeting crowded with Hispanic Republicans. It was a rather jumbled message, but the new story line was firm. The fundamentals were not things like employment rates or trade statistics. The fundamentals were the workers.
We are the fundamentals!
And, naturally, the humble, hard-working fundamentals are good. Who could doubt it? Was Barack Obama trying to say that he didn’t think the American working man and woman was good? Was this the sort of thing they talked about at those fancy-schmancy Hollywood fund-raisers? Which, of course, John McCain hates. Give him some hard cider and a log cabin, and he’s happy as a clam.
But wait! The fundamentals are in danger! At risk because of “greed.” Which John McCain was shocked to discover has been running rampant in the canyons of Wall Street.
Now in an election like this, you expect a certain amount of tactical reimagining. McCain used to like reporters, and now he treats them as if they were carrying the Ebola virus. Fair enough, although given the fact that he’s terrible at speeches, and the famous town halls have now become Republican-only lovefests, the campaign really should invent some new method of communication. (And remember, the man doesn’t text.)
It is also disconcerting, of course, to hear the Republicans rail against Washington as if the Socialist Workers Party had been running things there for the last eight years. But really, what would you do if you were McCain? There aren’t a lot of options, and he never did like George W. anyway.
This new tactic is different. McCain has always, genuinely, believed in dismantling government regulations, and there he was, vowing to create new “comprehensive regulations that will apply the rules and enforce them to the fullest.” It makes you think that he’s trying to impersonate something he’s not. Or wasn’t. Or might not be. The image is getting fuzzy.
This week, while McCain’s chief economic adviser was telling reporters that it was wrong to “run for president by denigrating everything in sight and trying to scare people,” McCain’s ad people were unveiling a new spot announcing “Our economy in crisis!” and calling for “tougher rules on Wall Street” along, of course, with more offshore drilling. Mournful unemployment-line music swells.
I have absolutely no idea of how John McCain would handle a financial crisis if he were president. But on behalf of all the nation’s fundamentals I would like to say that he now has me ready to stage a run on the first bank in sight.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company
I passed the Fox News office in Manhattan and took a photo. I would like you to explain one thing for our readers Gimleteye:
Maybe in another post--
I had lunch with a Republican friend (yes I have them). The conversation went to: "Well the Democrats have controlled the Congress so why didn't they change anything". I said it has been only for two years --however I am not clear on how, even if you have a majority, it is pretty much meaningless unless you have a super majority, to get real change. I need this explained to me...Is it because Bush can veto? If so, why don't the damn democrats keep forcing him into vetoes? I would think see the logjam would be good for the idiot voters we have in this country.
Republicans in the House and Senate can still block legislation; there is nothing that the Democrats can do until they have the necessary majority to move legislation.
What Democrats have done--with success--, is to use the power of committee chairmanship to bring some sunshine into the most secretive White House in modern history. Hearings on the war in Iraq, on global warming, on the suppression of science and government operations are areas, for instance, that have allowed some sunlight-- and media coverage-- where only sand-bagging had been evident for six long years. (Note: Senator James Inhofe, who had been chair of the Senate Public Works and Environment Committee and repressed science and discussion of climate change now has to ask Barbara Boxer for time to speak.)
The fact that there are Democratic majorities has also given some backbone to the GAO and Inspector General, to do investigations that have revealed the extent of mismanagement of federal responsibilities by the Bush White House. (Notwithstanding the fact that some senior officials have resigned in protest.)
People who blame Congress and the Democrats are mostly unaware that there is a huge amount of government work that doesn't occur in Congress at all: it is at the level of staff in agencies who have been appointed and positioned to represent Bush White House and Republican priorities; ie. the anti-regulatory fever that gripped Washington since 2000 and is in no small part responsible for todays market and economic meltdowns. (I mean really! this is the party of fiscal prudence that has turned the Federal Reserve into a fiduciary for private ownership??? @#$@#%@%)
The neoconservatives are pushing McCain so hard in order to protect access to policy where the rubber meets the road -- not in Congress, but at the upper echelons of staff appointments--, and there is nothing that Democrats in majorities in Congress can do to change that, until the White House passes to Obama.
And of course, that leads to the matter of the judiciary... but there, the evidence speaks for itself too.
Claiming that the fundamentals of our economy are NOT strong is simple pandering. It's just telling people what you think they want to hear.
The fact is, the fundamentals: Capitalism, Freemarket, and supply vs. demand, are the most democratic of all fundamentals.
The government should have the sole responsibility of providing a fair feild of play and ensure safe products. Outside of that, get out of the way and let companies that cheat fall by the wayside, which they do. Enron, Countrywide, etc...
The best regulation is the failure of companies that play fast and lose and the people that do the same. Don't bail these companies out. Doing so just prolongs them from getting shaken out of the system.
But make no mistake, the system is fundamentally sound.
Who really wants the government to control any market?
Do we think the government won't squander, mismanage, and waste our money?
m
Excuse me, but Isn't Miami-Dade heavily Democratic, and you can throw in Broward County as well. Looks like the Democrats really handled everything perfect. LOL!
Both groups are organized crime syndicates who receive tribute from those they protect. Right Wing Trolls? You are clueless!!
Aren't Barney Frank and Chris Dodd both career Democratic politicians who run their respective Banking Committees in each House of Congress? Go to opensecrets.org for a clue.
to the village idiots:
James Moore
Posted September 18, 2008 | 12:46 AM (EST)
HUFFINGTON POST
Don't let them tell you this economic meltdown is a complicated mess. It's not. Our national financial crisis is readily understood by anyone who has seen greed and hypocrisy. But we are now witnessing them on a profound, monumental scale.
Conservative Republicans always want the government to stay out of business and avoid regulation as long as they are making lots of money. When their greed, however, gets them into a fix, they are the first to cry out for rules and laws and taxpayer money to bail out their businesses. Obviously, Republicans are socialists. The Bush administration has decided to socialize the debt of the big Wall Street Firms. Taxpayers didn't get to enjoy any of the big money profits on the phony financial instruments like derivatives or bundled sub-prime paper, but we get the privilege of paying for their debt and failures.
Let's just consider the money. The public bailout of insurance giant (becoming a dwarf) AIG is estimated at $85 billion. According to one report, that's more than the Bush administration spent on Aid to Families with Dependent Children during his entire time in office. That amount of money would also pay for health care for every man, woman, and child in America for at least six months.
How did we get here?
That's pretty easy to answer, too. His name is Phil Gramm. A few days after the Supreme Court made George W. Bush president in 2000, Gramm stuck something called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act into the budget bill. Nobody knew that the Texas senator was slipping America a 262 page poison pill. The Gramm Guts America Act was designed to keep regulators from controlling new financial tools described as credit "swaps." These are instruments like sub-prime mortgages bundled up and sold as securities. Under the Gramm law, neither the SEC nor the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) were able to examine financial institutions like hedge funds or investment banks to guarantee they had the assets necessary to cover losses they were guaranteeing.
This isn't small beer we are talking about here. The market for these fancy financial instruments they don't expect us little people to understand is estimated at $60 trillion annually, which amounts to almost four times the entire US stock market.
And Senator Phil Gramm wanted it completely unregulated. So did Alan Greenspan, who supported the legislation and is now running around to the talk shows jabbering about the horror of it all. Before the highly paid lobbyists were done slinging their gold card guts about the halls of congress, every one from hedge funds to banks were playing with fire for fun and profit.
Gramm didn't just make a fairy tale world for Wall Street, though. He included in his bill a provision that prevented the regulation of energy trading markets, which led us to the Enron collapse. There was no collapse of the house of Gramm, however, because his wife Wendy, who once headed up the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, took a job on the Enron board that provided almost $2 million to their household kitty. And why not? Wendy got a CFTC rule passed that kept the federal government from regulating energy futures contracts at Enron.
If John McCain gets elected and chooses Phil Gramm as his Treasury Secretary, which many politico types see as likely, they will be able to talk about the good old days when Gramm was in congress and McCain was in the senate and they were in the midst of the Savings and Loan crisis.
The S and L scandal, which may look precious when compared to our present cascade of problems, isn't hard to understand, either. But it is impossible to take John McCain seriously on our current financial Armageddon since he was dabbling in the historic collapse of 747 S&Ls that occurred during Ronald Reagan's era. In the early 80s under the Republican president, congress deregulated the savings and loan industry in much the same way that Gramm made sure there were no laws hindering our current financial malefactors on Wall Street. S&Ls simply lobbied until they had less regulation and then began making rampant, unsound investments.
The guy who was going the wildest with financial freedom was Charles Keating, who headed up Lincoln Savings and Loan of California. Because the S&L industry had managed to get congress to increase FDIC insurance from $40,000 to $100,000 on deposits, the irresponsible investing of people like Keating began to put taxpayer insurance funds at great risk of loss. Keating placed money in junk bonds and questionable real estate projects and because so many other S&Ls started acting the same way the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (FHLBB) began to push for a regulation that limited these dangerous speculative "direct" investments to 10% of an S&L's assets.
And Keating didn't like it; he called on a private economist named Alan Greenspan, who promptly produced a study saying that there was no danger in "direct" investments.
But that didn't convince the FHLBB and as further scrutiny showed Lincoln Savings and Loan was making even more historically bad investment decisions, a federal investigation was launched.
So Keating called his home state senator John McCain.
McCain and four other US senators (known to history as the Keating Five) met with Edwin Gray, then chairman of the FHLBB. McCain had been hesitant to attend but had reportedly been called a "wimp" behind his back by Keating. The message to the FHLBB and Gray from the Keating Five was to lay off Lincoln and cool the investigation. Gray and the FHLBB did not relent but Lincoln stayed in business until 1989 when it collapsed with the rest of the S&L industry. The life savings of more than 20,000 elderly investors disappeared with the failure of Lincoln. Keating went to prison for five years.
Charles Keating was John McCain's pal. They met in 1981 and Keating dumped $112,000 in the McCain campaign bank accounts between '82 and '87. A year before McCain met with the FHLBB regulators, his wife Cindy and her father, according to newspaper reports at the time, invested about $360,000 in one of Keating's shopping centers. The Arizona Republic reported McCain and his wife and their babysitter took nine trips on Keating's private jet to the Bahamas to stay at the S&L liar's decadent Cat Cay resort. The senator didn't pay Keating back for the plane rides until years later when he was under investigation.
McCain wasn't found guilty of anything but bad judgment, which is an historic understatement. Republicans, who led deregulation of the S&L industry, delayed the bailout until after the 1988 election to make sure George H. W. won the White House. The cost to taxpayers for helping these 747 bad actors in the S&L industry was finally estimated at $1.4 trillion. If the bailout had begun in 1986 instead of after the presidential election, the cost would have been contained at $20 billion.
And now the Republicans who engineered our present crisis and got us into the S&L debacle of the 80s are before us saying the markets need regulation. No, actually, they don't need regulation. Why don't you Republican capitalists who believe in the free markets get out of the damned way and let them work and allow these various financial nuthouses be crushed by the weight of their own stupidity? When it is all over, we'll have sane and sober people create laws to make sure it doesn't happen again, assuming we survive this chaos.
Also, while you are handing out our tax money to idiots on Wall Street, save a little of the long green for the unemployed auto and construction workers and all of the other people who have lost their jobs because you were too stupid to notice what Phil Gramm was doing and you were convinced everything was going to be just fine because the markets work.
These, then, are the people -- the Republicans -- who want to run our government for four more years. John McCain isn't just one of them. He rides their jets. He takes their campaign donations. He makes them his campaign advisors. And he tells us to trust him.
He must think we are a nation of village idiots.
Hell, maybe we are.
Okay I got it now. The senate needs more than just a majority - what is it 60 votes and the Dems have only about 50 (Lieberman the idiot is an unknown and there are those pesky independents). Without the 60 you can filibuster. Thanks readers I am learning a lot from this post and the comments. Now I got the argument down for my pub friends.
Who really wants the government to control any market?
Apparently Bush, Paulson, & Bernanke: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/top-AP-stories/story/692175.html
Post a Comment