I learned a long time ago that no matter how well-reasoned my point of view, some will not be persuaded. A few years back I was active in one or 2 low-carb forums when I drew the attention of Atkins diet fundamentalists, for example, I questioned the old saw about drinking 8 glasses of water a day. In another case, a woman who had been unsuccessfully trying to lose weight posted her menu, and I finally snapped when a couple of fundamentalists started speculating the corn kernels in her mixed vegetables were causing water retention. I made a simple inquiry about her exercises and she mentioned being wheelchair-bound. At this point, the whole thread shifted. But for me, the tipping point was when a woman with an epileptic child whom was on a ketogenic diet basically accused me of trying to practice medicine without a license for advocating a more balanced diet. I mean, people were choosing vegetables based on one or 2 carb grams a serving instead of taking into account other nutrients! There were wolf pack attacks, many of them personal in nature; it simply wasn't worth my time and effort. There were a couple of forum participants whom wrote me personal emails after I left offering moral support and encouraging me to rejoin. I didn't; it wasn't so much other people disagreed with me (I spent 5 years in academia, and you have to have some thick skin to survive), but the amount of time.
I could probably write a blog just responding to Paul Krugman's nonsense. There's not any shortage of people whom disagree with my libertarian or social conservative opinions. I could spend my time arguing fine-grained disputes. The fact that Joe Klein, a Time columnist, is far to the left of me politically doesn't really surprise me. I have no interest in digging up his last 5 years of columns to find some new blog material. Brent Bozell does a good enough job of confronting the excesses of the mainstream media. I don't see a need to reinvent the wheel.
So why, of all things, did I decide to take on Klein's latest column, A Time to Think Big? I think it's first a very interesting question in a world where we are now overextended by some accounts up to $80T or more in debt or unfunded liabilities, the largest debtor nation in history, in a no-growth economy with massive unemployment in a divided government, that Joe Klein could imagine that anything substantial can pass. The Congress hasn't even passed a budget in years--and that's standard operating procedure,
First, Klein takes a couple of cheap shots at Bob Woodward and Jeb Bush. These guys don't need me defending them; they're big boys, and I'm sure they've heard worse. But it's just startling how such amateurish nonsense makes it into print at perhaps the best known news periodical.
Even the legends among us, like Bob Woodward, are caught playing petty. Woodward wrongly accused Gene Sperling, the President’s economic adviser, of threatening him over Woodward’s assumption (also wrong) that the President had been “moving the goalpost” by asking for new revenue in the budget squabble. Woodward seemed frazzled by the mind-curdling intensity of tweets and television.Klein is just flat out wrong. Obama reneged on a key negotiation point with Senate Minority Leader McConnell. Obama has NEVER proposed a material spending cut; the budget has increased year over year each year in office. EVEN AFTER SEQUESTER CUTS, the budget is going up. Obama is only paying down 60 cents on the federal dollar. The federal government's share of GDP has gone up from 18-20% GDP to 23-24%. He has not only raised marginal rates (lowering the tax base) but he has raised investment taxes and Medicare taxes on higher earners. He's pulling the same kind of bait-and-switch crap Democrats have always pulled. Congressional Democrats promised Reagan they would cut spending after upper rate increases--did not happen. They did the same against Bush 41--and then ran against him in 1992 for breaking his "read my lips" pledged.
Woodward wrote a book about what happened in the 2011 negotiations; he has no other motive than to set the record straight. The fact is Obama threatened, on the record, to veto any GOP measure to deal principally with defense cuts. And when the fourth quarter numbers came out there was explicit reference to defense cuts--not domestic expenditure cuts. Most of the cuts Obama has been recently griping about are from the domestic spending side--illegal immigrants, security, overblown teacher layoffs...
Klein is totally and embarrassingly buying into White House spin--and willing to throw Woodward under the bus in the process. Woodward is hardly a right-wing ideologue. But the record is clear: we don't have a tax problem--we're pulling in roughly the same amount of pre-recession revenue--with 14 million people still unemployed and off the taxrolls. We have a spending problem. Let's point out what Klein conveniently ignores--even if Obama passed all the tax increases he wanted, they wouldn't begin to close the deficit--and we're not talking about trillions annually we should be socking away for properly funding entitlements.
The sheer hypocrisy of Klein accusing Woodward of being petty--it's clear that the pot is calling the kettle black. We already know how the Obama Administration treats its perceived. "enemies". I think Obama has been more on "The View" and nightly TV comedy/variety shows than the highest rated cable news network. Of course the Obama Administration doesn't like a journalist whom blows the whistle on them. Whether it's an economic adviser is immaterial--the White House attacked him; this is political reality, not Woodward's "paranoia". Political reality is probably more subtle than explicit thuggish threats--Woodward's sources dry up, he doesn't get invited to briefings, the bureaucrats don't return his calls, etc. Klein has to know that.
Then there's the Jeb Bush thing. To set the context, There's a question about what to to about nearly 8 million undocumented, primarily Latino immigrants. Remember GHW Bush affectionately referring to his "little brown" grandchildren? Jeb's spouse Columba is a Latina.
Law-and-order conservatives have called for mass deportations, which many believe is impractical and would tear families apart.. The question has been how to handle them. In many cases, the first goal of an immigrant is a green card, allowing permanent legal residency and ability to work for more US employers; those holding a green card are eligible for citizenship down the line.
The path to citizenship is controversial for a number of reasons, the most important of which is equal protection: immigrants from other continents have to play by the rules. .I haven't read Jeb Bush's book, but I believe what he's saying is he is willing to confer legal residency without the green card path to citizenship. It doesn't mean an alien couldn't eventually get citizenship by applying from his home country. (I'm not sure what that process would be, but the intent would be to get in line within the context of quota allotments, not give them preferences over people playing by the rules.)
Many liberals like Klein reject residency as "second-class citizenship" (just like they're dismissive of domestic partnerships or civil unions as "second-class gay marriages".) It is true some bipartisan efforts being negotiated are willing to discuss a special case path to citizenship. The devil is in the details. My guess is Jeb Bush's approach isn't that far off from an eventual compromise.
But Klein is ludicrously damning Jeb Bush's approach with faint praise. Almost no GOP legislator I know has been talking about granting legal status to undocumented aliens in good standing. Jeb is risking pushback from the amnesty populists.
I am more concerned about Bush's off-the-cuff discussion of "social mobility", which ironically Klein finds refreshing (probably because it pays lip service to leftist talking points). I think Bush has to be careful and have better appreciation for methodological problems; I think he's wrong on the general point things have changed; I do think it's a lot more challenging for businesses to succeed under bad federal policies and overregulation. I'll give Jeb benefit of a doubt.
Finally, I want to end my rant on this nonsense:
Another phony crisis: even as Republican-induced “bankruptcy” loomed, foreign buyers were feverishly snapping up U.S. bonds–we’re the safest investment on earth, despite our nitwit politics.First, the really phony crisis was Obama putting other spending priorities over servicing the debt. The government collects more taxes than the expenditures servicing the debt. Klein is once again buying into discredited Obamanomics. It is true that in a panic foreigners bought dollars--but gold has almost doubled since the 2007 recession, other countries like China are adding to their gold holdings, many countries are working around use of dollars, and the Fed is buying much new Treasury debt. TLT, a long-term government bond fund, is down over 5% YTD. Klein's lack of political insight is only exceeded by his ignorance of economic matters.
