Contributors

Wednesday, June 01, 2011

The Big Lie Crumbling?

The subject of the comparison regarding the right and Nazis has come up again in comments. How serendipitous then is this opinion piece from Walter Rodgers.

Let’s recall the herculean tasks Obama has already accomplished:
  • He stabilized the worst economy since the Great Depression. Though unemployment remains stubborn, the stock market is basically back to where it was before the global economic meltdown. His stimulus bill kept America humming and saved hundreds of thousands of jobs, while his rescue of General Motors saved an industrial icon.
  • His administration kept thousands of over-extended Americans from losing their homes by laboring mightily to forestall foreclosures.
  • In spite of ferocious opposition, he passed long-overdue reforms of our health-care system that had eluded the reach of many past presidents.
  • He signed into law a bold package of regulations to boost consumer protection and restrain Wall Street’s greed.
  • He negotiated a historic nuclear-arms reduction treaty with Russia’s Dmitry Medvedev.
Forgetting these and other accomplishments, the public has regrettably bought into the corrosive and dishonest campaign to degrade Obama. Goebbels-style nihilism that rejects anything Obama does as odious remains a powerful narrative.

Add in killing bin Laden, repealing DADT, increased gun rights, increased security at the border, increased immigration arrests as well as a whole host of other things and any rational person would say he was a good president.

Sadly, we are not dealing with rational people.

35 comments:

juris imprudent said...

Let’s recall the herculean tasks Obama has already accomplished

Well let's see, one of the labors of Hercules was cleaning out the Augean stables - whereas Obama seems to cause a never ending stream of horseshit from his devotees.

Anonymous said...

Republicans.... Nazis... I stopped reading....

Haplo9 said...

Lets see, of all the possible reasons that some of Obamas policies might not be popular, Mark chooses.. a propaganda campaign reminiscent of the Nazis.

You should bookmark this post Mark; if you're ever wondering why you are treated as the intellectual equivilent of a 21 year old who took his first social justice class in college and, like, totally *gets* the world now, this would be a good example of why.

Mark Ward said...

If you don't think the comparison fits, demonstrate how. Rather than personally insulting me, illustrate exactly how the vitriol we see from the right is NOT like the tactics we saw in the 1930s. It's actually pretty frightening when you start to look at it.

Cutting up on me is pretty weak, dude. Pretty much makes it a confirmation, no?

Anonymous said...

"The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed,
for the vast masses of a nation are in the depths of their hearts more
easily deceived than they are consciously and intentionally bad. The
primitive simplicity of their minds renders them a more easy prey to a
big lie than a small one, for they themselves often tell little lies,
but would be ashamed to tell big lies."
by:
Adolf Hitler

Anonymous said...

You win this round Mark. All Republicans are secret Nazis.

Now that you have found us out, we will be forced to relocate to another blog.

Heil!!

last in line said...

Yeah you guys - demonstrate how you are all not like the Nazis right now!!

The president signed a law to restrain wall streets greed? I thought wall street had all the power and the govt had none? That's been the meme on here for some time.

Kept thousands of over-extended Americans from losing their homes by laboring mightily to forestall foreclosures? The lesson here is - go ahead and overextend yourself, govt will bail you out if you do.

His stimulus bill kept America humming and saved hundreds of thousands of jobs? In other words - he kept the overhead on place because they support him.

This economy is not stabilized.

last in line said...

I mean, on April 16, 2011, an opinion piece was linked to on this blog that said -

"The resulting squabble is not only deepening the fiscal stalemate but also bringing us dangerously close to class war."

followed by Mark saying

"Hmm...who else has been saying these same things? Me."

and

"Overall, Stockman's piece states the obvious."

Soooo in April, we were on the verge of class warfare...and now in June, the economy has stabilized. Thanks for the updates!

Investor said...

Being new to this blog I perhaps don't yet have an understanding for what the point of a posting like this is. To characterize Republicans as Nazis? I'm not sure I understand what that accomplishes.

@Markadelphia
I think your list of Obama's accomplishments is more accurate than Mr. Rodgers's list. I anticipate some negative unintended consequences of the policy for "forestalling foreclosure", one of which is cited by last in line above. Another being that the root cause of the impending foreclousre is not necessarily solved. No doubt the immediate effects of the health care insurance reform legislation are noble, but I look at the rosy financial projections of the Democrats with a healthy dose of skepticism (so to speak). I wouldn't characterize anybody who is apprehensive about potentially serious negative financial consequences as irrational. Exactly the opposite, actually. If anybody ignores concerns in those areas and pretends they don't exist that strikes me as irrational.

I have no problem characterizing Obama as at least an adequate President. But Mr. Rodgers's piece strikes me as a ridiculous caricature that doesn't do justice to legitimate areas of concern/criticism. The same Politifact site that you referenced also has a rather lengthy section on broken promises and areas where the jury is still out, and those strike me as legitmate criticisms. With all due respect I would recommend that you not throw your support behind such a position. Or is your purpose in doing so to accomplish something that I just don't understand?

Mark Ward said...

Well, I think you will agree that stable is a relative term. The actions that he and President Bush took before him were the only options. If any of you would've done something different, I'd love to hear it. Include what you think would've been the results.

Haplo9 said...

>If you don't think the comparison fits, demonstrate how.

Sure - just as soon as you identify how the comparison has meaning. All you've done is labeled disagreement with your preferred policies as Goebbels style nihilism. Oh, and you said "big lie." That's not a comparison, it's just name calling.

>It's actually pretty frightening when you start to look at it.

Right. Belief that policies preferred by Obama and you don't work and stand a good chance of making things worse is really scary. In fact, it smacks of something that.. every single president for the last 30 years has had to deal with.

>Cutting up on me is pretty weak, dude.

Not when you've earned it. On to Social Justice 102?

Mark Ward said...

Hap, I've demonstrated it extensively on this site several times for several years. The anger, hate and paranoia machine of the Nazis is similar to the anger, hate and paranoia machine of the right today. It's jingoistic nationalistic chest thumping and we see it every day. The "otherism" we saw in the 1930s is the same otherism we see today with the right accusing Obama of not being born here, not being a "real" American, or liberals being communists. The hyper insanity over communism/socialism/liberal fascism is another parallel that is so obvious I'm completely at a loss as to why you don't see it since you seem like a smart person to me.

Obama's policies have made things worse, huh. How can that be with the massive private sector profits and job growth we have seen in the last two years? I would think you would be happy at the public sector job losses, no? The problems we have weren't created nor made worse by Obama. The causes are found in the private sector in this country and how we our society is constructed.

rld said...

Job growth in the last 2 years?

Haplo9 said...

>jingoistic nationalistic chest thumping

So hrm. Since jingoism essentially means acting like a great big national bully, are you concerned that the right wants us to take over all of North or South America? (Something similar to Germany going after Europe.) Oh, you must mean Iraq. But wait, how is Libya the right's fault? Is the right agitating to exterminate a certain minority group? Seems to me that the best you've got here is: "The right seems angry. The Nazis were angry!!! They are the SAME!!!"

>The "otherism" we saw in the 1930s is the same otherism we see today with the right accusing Obama of not being born here

Hrm. Even granting that birtherism is nonsense, wouldn't the "otherism" in Germany have been directed at entire classes of people, rather than just one person? Doesn't that imply that it's kind of .. you know, different?

Haplo9 said...

>or liberals being communists.

Since every right leaning person was a bloodthirsty warmonger for the years 2000-2008, you'll have to forgive me with being rather underwhelmed with this one. Much of politics today is namecalling, from both sides. You might try to be better than that though. Just a thought.

>The hyper insanity over communism/socialism/liberal fascism

Damn that Joe McCarthy! Those witch hunts! Oh. He's dead? What, then, is this insanity you speak of? Are there show trials? Are you in danger of being killed because you are an empty headed communist? Wait, why was the right accused of being fascist for the Bush years? It's almost like a lot of partisans simply try to use any pejorative terms they can lay their hands on. Once again - you might try to be better than that. Just a thought.

Haplo9 said...

>nor made worse by Obama.

Guess what - a lot of people disagree with you on that one, and they aren't all mouth breathing troglodytes like me. Sorry to break that to you. Even if they are wrong, you might try to have the capacity to realize that this sort of disagreement is pretty normal. Seems to me that Obama is in the same situation as Bush I - his reelection will depend almost entirely on how the economy is doing. If prices continue to rise, and job growth is anemic, Obama will likely not get reelected, regardless of whatever other accomplishments he can point to. (And regardless of whether it is fair to blame it all on him. Such is American politics today, and for as many years as I've been paying attention.)

juris imprudent said...

Are you also so proud of Obama's continuation of Bush policy? Are you all in love with the Patriot Act now? Where is the criticism for politicizing science?

And you are reaching way beyond your grasp to assign any major gun rights victory to Obama. He allowed a minor extension of concealed carry (into National Parks within a carry state). Big whoop. If he had pushed for national reciprocity on concealed carry (like with drivers licenses issued by each state) - that would be something. As it was, his Justice Dept argued against Heller and McDonald - so don't tell me his admin is some great supporter of the 2nd Amdt.

Mark Ward said...

but I look at the rosy financial projections of the Democrats with a healthy dose of skepticism (so to speak).

I agree. In all honesty, we've never really been in this type of economy before so I think some of what the Democrats say regarding the future is more positive than normative.

also has a rather lengthy section on broken promises and areas where the jury is still out, and those strike me as legitmate criticisms

They sure are. As I say quite often, if the Democrats were any more disappointing they'd be relatives. President Obama is not perfect and he's maybe barely in my top ten at this point in his presidency. I'd be happy to discuss any of those broken promises, why they happened, and hold the president accountable for them.

What I took away from Rodgers is the caricature of Obama is so ridiculous now given what he has accomplished that it makes no sense to me and is, quite frankly, counter productive to solving problems.

Mark Ward said...

Hap, I think the big difference between Obama and Bush I is most Americans don't think the GOP can do any better. Even if we are sitting above 7 percent unemployment, voters won't necessarily pull the lever for a Romney or whomever because they don't really have faith in them either. Back in 1992, they had more faith that the Democrats...namely Clinton...could solve their problems. Bush I seemed out of touch with the middle class and actually was...Obama isn't at that point.

And that doesn't even get into the base not being enthused about Romney (the likely nominee). They stay home and the (literally) millions of Latino voters turnout and Obama wins. The question is this-if the election were held today, would he win? It's pretty clear to me that he would even with the bad economy which he did nothing to cause.

The main issue here is the hoarding of money by the private sector. Why they are doing this depends on where you shake out ideologically, right?

Haplo9 said...

>is most Americans don't think the GOP can do any better.

I don't disagree.

>not being enthused about Romney (the likely nominee).

I don't know how likely it is that Romney will be the nominee, I'd think Romneycare would make him pretty toxic, but I agree - if he's the nominee, R's have no chance at the presidency. That said, Obama will have had 4 years for his policies to work, so if things still aren't going so well for the economy at that point, it's going to be an awfully hard sell to say, "well Bush caused it, and my awesome policies just need more time!", don't you think?

>Bush I seemed out of touch with the middle class and actually was

I don't know how you'd quantify that. All of the recent presidents are arguably out of touch with the middle class in one way or another, including Obama. (Arugula, anyone?) Bush I, IMO, didn't get reelected because of the sour economy and maybe having to walk back no new taxes. Simple as that.

>The main issue here is the hoarding of money by the private sector.

There are so many .. assumptions packed into this one sentence:
1. How do you define hoarding?
2. Is it still "hoarding" when the money in question is in a bank, where it can be loaned, or in an asset of some sort?
3. Why is "hoarding" an issue at all? Are you simply saying that the private sector isn't spending money in the ways you want them to?

jeff c. said...

"The right seems angry. The Nazis were angry!!! They are the SAME!!!"

"He's not there to teach. He's there to indoctrinate." --Kevin Baker, June 1, 2011

"Universal education is the most corroding and disintegrating poison that liberalism has ever invented for its own destruction." --Adolph Hitler.

Not that far apart at all.

Haplo9 said...

Totally Jeff. Hitler made the trains run on time. The Swiss make the trains run on time. Swiss = Hitler!!!!

Mark Ward said...

don't you think?

Well, President Obama is on record saying that the blame is on him now and not Bush but I don't really see any other options. What would you have done differently? No TARP? No stimulus? Or both?

I don't think there is any wise old man that could tell us what the best course of action is because we are in uncharted waters. I think Obama has done the best he can given what he was handed and what has played out since but how much can he really do? We aren't really a centrally planned economy. If he does too much, then we slide that way and stifle innovation. If he does too little, then is seen as a poor leader. And we also have the issue the criminal activity starting up again in the financial sector. In so many ways, he's really fucked when you think about it.

My thoughts on Bush I are just opinion. No way to quantify it. I agree with you assessment as well but the difference with Obama is that he does have popular support to let the tax cuts expire on the top earners.

I am saying that the banks aren't lending like they should and private companies are sitting in massive amounts of cash and not hiring.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/hoarding-hiring-corporations-stockpile-mountain-cash/story?id=10250559

I talked about all of this last fall. More links in there.

http://markadelphia.blogspot.com/2010/11/beginning-when-in-middle-of-fdrs-first.html

Wow, Jeff. I was composing and didn't see your comment. I would say that Kevin isn't exactly anti-intellectual as Hitler was although there is some common ground there. Kevin's view is rooted in a very irrational paranoia about our education system (which is similar to the Nazi's paranoia) coupled with a desire to instill his own form of Ranidan indoctrination in the schools.

juris imprudent said...

Yay, M finally found a fact - yes, banks are not lending and businesses are sitting on cash rather than investing (or hiring). Notice that the owners of banks and businesses are not doing Scrooge McDuck dives into pools filled with gold coins. They are being exceedingly cautious.

You might inquire into why they feel the need to be so cautious, but you might not like the answer.

jeff c. said...

Let me see if I can guess. Is it because they are uncertain as to what the Obama administration is going to do with their new regulations? In other words, it's all Obama's fault.

Haplo9 said...

>What would you have done differently?

No stimulus, for sure. I think the belief that government spending, allocated by the political process, is anything other than payoff to politically connected constituencies is folly.

TARP is debatable for me. A lot of people that seem to have more experience than me in the area have said that without TARP we'd have had a banking system failure. Call that one a draw. I'd like to see what would have happened without TARP, but no such crystal ball exists.

Where I think Obama has really erred is giving the impression of ambiguity. Obamacare is a good chunk of that. Unknown costs are a disincentive to hire - if you don't know how much employee healthcare will cost you in the future, the rational thing to do is to be very conservative with hiring. He has also done a number of things that seem very arbitrary - cutting off permits for drilling in the gulf. Actions like that can cause investments to be worth nothing overnight - as a businessperson, a very rational response to that is to be extremely conservative with your investments. Finally, Obama seems to be very unaware of unintended consequences. That cash for clunkers would simply move car purchases forward, only to slacken demand later, and junking a bunch of old cars would raise prices in the used car market. That home buyer subsidies would move purchases forward, only to slacken demand later. Obamacare seems likely to be a gold mine of unintended consequences.

Investor said...

@jeff c
Yes, in that regard, it is all Obama's fault. I am desperate to hire more people but my hands are tied by the perception that the economic recovery is smoke and mirrors. That Obamacare is lurking. You don't have to like it. You don't have to agree with that perception. But in this case perception is reality, and those who would otherwise write the checks or who would otherwise sign-off on job postings are sitting on their hands. You might dismiss them as victims of fear mongering on the part of those evil Republicans. From where I am sitting the explanation is even more black and white than you might make it out to be. The government isn't going to come running to save my company if it is on the verge of failing so the prudent thing is hunker down.

Larry said...

Huh. Stabilized the economy? I'm not so sure.

Washington Post: U.S. economy: Manufacturing slowdown the latest sign the recovery is faltering: "The economic recovery is faltering, and Washington is running out of ways to get it back on track.
Two bright spots over the past few months — manufacturing and job creation by private companies — both slowed in May, according to new reports this week. The data come amid other reports of falling home prices, declining auto sales, weaker consumer spending and a rising pace of layoffs."

CNBC: 'Sugar High That Has Buoyed US Economy Is Wearing Out'

Washington Examiner (opinion, but I don't see much to disagree with): This week's anemic economic reports provide the latest in a steadily lengthening parade of news that demonstrates Obama's policies not only have not produced the promised recovery, but very likely have retarded it. As the maxim goes, insanity consists of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result.

And for a British view of Obama's performance: Why Barack Obama may be heading for electoral disaster in 2012


And really, Mark, you ought to chill out with the Nazi smear. At least a third or more of your posts are filled with paranoia, fear, and hatred of the "otherism" of non-Progressive voters, with a healthy topping of name-calling and other insults. Pot, meet kettle, in other words.

Mark Ward said...

I think the belief that government spending,

And yet the lack of state and local government spending right now is a cause for our sluggish economy, wouldn't you agree?

Call that one a draw

I would not characterize world wide economic collapse as a draw. I think you may want to research the scenarios that were outlined pre-TARP a little more. VERY frightening and this was due to greed combined with lax regulation.

Regarding the health care plan, the CBO has projected it will be deficit neutral and actually save around 100 billion dollars. If you don't buy their estimates, that's fine but that means you can't accept their other estimates as fact which your ideology favors.

The problem with health care is very simple: it has nearly perfect inelastic demand. This means the suppliers can raise the price and people will still buy because it is their health....their life. You can't have a free market with health care. Essentially, what we have with the suppliers is an oligopoly and that means the government has to step in and influence the market which, at times, they can do in a positive way especially in situations like this.

Mark Ward said...

Investor, I would humbly submit that the cause of all of this comes from the games played by the financial sector. Their casino mentality caused all of this, they begged the government to help them...which we had to in order to prevent total collapse..., and now, like the children that they are, are pissed off that they have to follow rules again. So, they are holding people like you hostage.

I have no problem if you gripe about the government but I think you should do so from a protestation of lack of regulatory oversight.

Mark Ward said...

Larry, compare where the economy was when Obama took over and compare it to now. It's much better. That's thanks to him and President Bush btw. Thankfully the latter finally saw that paying attention to Wall Street might be a good idea.

I put up a post today regarding some of your other thoughts. It's simply not as black and white as you say and the government, by the very definition of our economy, isn't completely the bad guy.

Investor said...

@Markadelphia
I am not sure I understand where you are going with your assessment of "the cause of all of this". (What is "all of this", anyway?) But for sake of argument let's assume your contention is correct - that the financial sector is to blame for all of this. That doesn't address the question posed by juris imprudent - why people and businesses are not spending/investing - and the culpability of the government therein.

As a personal investor I am far more comfortable today sitting on a pile of cash and liquidating some long-term positions until I have a better understanding of what the administration is going to establish re: regulations and new taxes and, more importantly, how people are going to react to that information. Consequently, this is a direct result of the actions of the Obama administration. His fault, if you will.

As a business we, like many others, are holding off on hiring new people until many of those same concerns are addressed. We have the money to invest (using that term loosely, to include hiring and acquisition) but the equation is pretty simple at this point - the risk is too great given the uncertainty of what lies ahead. No business prefers to sit on cash in lieu of investing, and the fact that so many are doing that should be an indication that the environment for investing is poisonous right now. As an example, the Employment Cost Index continues to rise, making the prospect of hiring new full-time employees difficult enough without even considering any potential costs that will arise from the health care insurance reform. That specter is a direct result of actions of the Obama administration. His fault, if you will.

I think your contention that "they" are pissed off because they have to follow the rules again is somewhat disingenuous. Could it not simply be the case that "they" are pissed off because their ability to grow their business is diminished by the simple lack of clear direction.

A few posts back your colleague posted a question regarding whether or not another bubble was forming vis a vis tech stocks that don't actually have a physical product. An excellent question. But perhaps the better question is what these investors (including myself in one case) hope to gain by partaking in such a risky venture and why they are behaving differently from the herd. Again I think the equation/answer is quite simple. When the potential for profit outweighs the risk you make the bet. The Obama administration is leaving the door open for significant unknown risk with policies such as the health care insurance reform.

You are 100% correct with respect to your observation in your most recent posting that the act of sitting on cash in a weak economy is, in fact, only serving to further weaken the economy. But what alternative do you suggest? Throwing money out there in the hopes that the ECI doesn't actually skyrocket, and that the government doesn't come calling with a punitive tax bill, and that an increase in production will trigger an increase in consumption? Wouldn't that be a casino mentality?

Mark Ward said...

because their ability to grow their business is diminished by the simple lack of clear direction.

Yet if he provides that direction isn't he then engaging in centrally planning an economy?

I submit that the new regulations are there for anyone who wishes to review them. There's also no uncertainty regarding some tax policy. The tax cuts on the top percent of people will expire under President Obama. That's not "raising" taxes, btw. And, as I have illustrated for the last couple of days, low taxes and low interest rates are already here and companies are benefiting greatly from them. My opinion is that they don't really have to hire and know full well what they are doing. In other words, maybe there really isn't any mystery to this, right?

I also think that the label of "unknown" has been caricatured to the max with the health care bill. There are several knowns but the people who have antipathy towards the government don't want to accept them. Demand for health care is inelastic. If the costs continue to rise, how can the market correct itself without government intervention? People will continue to go broke.

Honestly, at this point in time, I don't think I have an alternative to what is happening. The next few months are going to be extremely illustrative of the ideological struggle between welfare capitalism and laissez faire economics.

Larry said...

I put up a post today regarding some of your other thoughts. It's simply not as black and white as you say[...]

Seriously, Mark? Seriously? Where the hell did I paint it as "black and white"? I said, "I'm not so sure," and posted some contra-indications to you and Walter Rodgers' virtual tongue-bath of Obama as a White Knight (so to speak) against the Forces of Darkness in modern America, villains so unspeakably awful that the most apt comparison is to Nazis. You want to talk about some black and white thinking... Sheesh. Your mind must resemble some sort of Picasso painting, perhaps with an eye occasionally peeping out of your ass to take a look around.

Anonymous said...

"the lack of state and local government spending right now is a cause for our sluggish economy"

I think you are correct Mark. It is a cause.

The taxes that support the government come OUT of the economy.

When the economy can't support the government, things get kinda funky don't they?