GOP Sees Positives In Negative Stand
Leaders Seize On Spending Issue
By Alec MacGillis and Perry Bacon Jr.
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, February 9, 2009; Page A01
After giving the package zero votes in the House, and with their counterparts in the Senate likely to provide in a crucial procedural vote today only the handful of votes needed to avoid a filibuster, Republicans are relishing the opportunity to make a big statement. Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Tex.) suggested last week that the party is learning from the disruptive tactics of the Taliban, and the GOP these days does have the bravado of an insurgent band that has pulled together after a big defeat to carry off a quick, if not particularly damaging, raid on the powers that be.
"We're so far ahead of where we thought we'd be at this time," said Rep. Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), one of several younger congressmen seeking to lead the party's renewal. "It's not a sign that we're back to where we need to be, but it's a sign that we're beginning to find our voice. We're standing on our core principles, and the core principle that suffered the most in recent years was fiscal conservatism and economic liberty. That was the tallest pole in our tent, and we took an ax to it, but now we're building it back."
The second-ranking House Republican, Rep. Eric Cantor (Va.), put it more bluntly. "What transpired . . . and will give us a shot in the arm going forward is that we are standing up on principle and just saying no," he said.
The fact that the stimulus legislation keeps moving forward nonetheless has done nothing to dim Republicans' satisfaction. Rather, they sense a tactical victory, particularly in the framing of their opposition to the plan as a clash with congressional Democrats instead of with President Obama, who remains far more popular with voters than does Congress.
Someone should notify the Republicans that Obama is still popular, the stimulus package has a 54 percent approval rating and the Democrats are viewed more favorably than the Republicans.
Even when the bill passes, the media will declare this a victory for Republicans because they apparently have "core principles" but everyone who is not myopic will know the Republicans sat around trying to make gains for the midterm.
TPM Reader JC sent me to this interview with Nouriel Roubini and Nassim Taleb on CNBC. Here's what JC wrote: "In this clip, Nouriel Roubini and Nassim Taleb are still being treated as a circus sideshow by CNBC... They're predicting the end of finance, and offering the only clear path out of this mess that I've seen offered (with the knowledge to back it up), and CNBC keeps asking them for stock tips. It's ludicrous. Wall Street media -- CNBC at least -- doesn't realize how bad this is yet. They're stuck in a bubble where they think everything will go back to normal in a few months...."
He hits it spot on. These two guys are talking about a deep structural crisis in the world economy. And these CNBC yahoos can't stop asking for stock tips. Really surreal.
I'm watching it again now. This is a seminal piece of video. You have to see it. I'm not sure I've seen anything that captures -- albeit unintentionally -- the vast disconnect over what is happening today in the US economy.
Paul Kanjorski, a U.S. Representative from Pennsylania, describes an electronic run on the banks on September 18, 2008, that almost brought down the U.S. economy, and the world economy. His description starts after 2:00 into the video:
sighyoung wrote:Paul Kanjorski, a U.S. Representative from Pennsylania, describes an electronic run on the banks on September 18, 2008, that almost brought down the U.S. economy, and the world economy. His description starts after 2:00 into the video:
sighyoung wrote:Paul Kanjorski, a U.S. Representative from Pennsylania, describes an electronic run on the banks on September 18, 2008, that almost brought down the U.S. economy, and the world economy. His description starts after 2:00 into the video:
sighyoung wrote:Paul Kanjorski, a U.S. Representative from Pennsylania, describes an electronic run on the banks on September 18, 2008, that almost brought down the U.S. economy, and the world economy. His description starts after 2:00 into the video:
I think he's exaggerating just a little there, no?
His explanation of the difference between asset vs. equity purchases misses the point too. The problem is that banks are bankrupt. Buying their bad assets doesn't change that unless you overpay for them (which was probably the idea).
