Quote of the Day

The Daily Banter: The CEO of AIG Is, In Fact, an A**hole/9.24.13

American Exceptionalism

Shameless hypocrisy and an almost sociopathic unwillingness to base arguments on empirical evidence is nothing new for the modern GOP. But a piece in Slate right now by Eliot Spitzer highlights an interesting irony to the constant, panicked claims from the clown car of Republican presidential candidates that Barack Obama is taking us down the road to the "European-style socialism" he so admires.

See, there are two models currently on display for all to see which demonstrate two diametrically opposed ways of dealing with an economy gang-raped by Wall Street and its overseas ilk. In one, austerity is used to choke the people and their governmental systems to death, resulting in civil unrest and not a positive thing on the balance sheet to show for it; in the other, tempered bailouts and managed reconstruction is combined with a renewed emphasis on sensible regulation, resulting in a steadily increasing rebound and a drop in unemployment. The Republicans have lined up squarely, intransigently behind the former model; Obama, the latter.

Here's the thing, though: The place where that first response is being attempted, and where it's failing miserably, is Europe. The place where the second response is being used, to quite a bit of success, is Detroit.

So who's really being anti-American?

Slate: Why Romney Is Collapsing/2.21.12

Quote of the Day

"I'm not looking to put money in people's pockets. That's the other party."

-- Mitt Romney

This comment came at a town hall event in Iowa a couple of days ago. A member of the audience pointed out that Romney's economic plan offers huge corporate and estate tax cuts but does little to help the average person. "It doesn't put any money in my pocket," the man asked. "How will this help the middle class?" Romney, the guy who you'll remember once had trouble finding a bill in his wallet that wasn't a hundred, responded with the above gem.

By the way, the line wasn't taken out of context; Romney really said it and he really meant it, in that he draws a line between giving tax breaks to the "job creators" and genuinely helping out the people who need it most. The funny thing, though, is that even if it were taken out of context and everyone ran with the quote, using it to hang Romney in the eyes of the public, he would completely have it coming.

Why?

Because of this.

Empty Suit

AIG was one of the most infamous and disastrous casualties of the economic collapse of 2008. The whole place was a swamp of toxic asset sludge so incompetently managed that it eventually had to be bailed out by taxpayers to the tune of $70 billion.

So how is the insurance leviathan's former CEO thanking all of us for saving his fat-cat ass and rewarding his company's irresponsibility?

By suing the government for stepping in.

Think Progress: Former AIG CEO Sues Claiming Taxpayers Need To Pony Up $25 Billion More/11.25.11

Seriously -- fucking guillotine this asshole. I'll pull the lever.

With that in mind, here's one from the archive.

"Get Rich and Die Tryin'" (Originally Published 3.16.9)

***OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT: "Wide World of Justice" Presented by ESPN, Spike TV, and the Bloomberg Financial Network***

(The following is the property of the above networks and may not be reproduced or rebroadcast in any way without the express written consent of the owners.)

Intro Music: Ministry's Thieves

Frank: Good evening, everybody -- and welcome to another exciting edition of "Wide World of Justice," presented by ESPN, Spike and of course, the Bloomberg Financial Network. I'm Frank Flotsam.

Todd: And I'm Todd Jetsam, thanks so much for being here -- and what a show we have for you tonight.

Frank: You got that right, Todd. Tonight, the we bring a little street justice to a man who we think has really earned it -- because Lord knows he didn't earn the 165-million dollars in bonus money, funded by you the taxpayer, that he just handed out to his executives at AIG.

Todd: Of course we're talking about tonight's guest of honor -- AIG Chairman Edward Liddy.

Frank: And here he comes now!

(Chorus of boos can be heard from the crowd; screams, shouts, and obscenities)

Todd: Oh, they don't like him very much, Frank.

Frank: No they don't, Todd.

Todd: Now Mr. Liddy is being led through the crowd here in front of the New York Stock Exchange -- he's in a steel cage that's been placed on top of a wooden cart being pulled by a specially selected group of Wall Street Journal op-ed columnists. It's a good thing he's in that cage too, because it looks like the crowd doesn't want to wait for the show to begin -- they want blood right now!

Frank: Unfortunately, since the Journal people aren't protected, they're pretty much fair game and, am I seeing this correctly? Yes, speaking of which, it looks like the angry mob has already dragged away Stephen Moore, the senior economics writer for the Wall Street Journal, and if I'm not mistaken... wait... yes, that's his head we're seeing being tossed around like a beach ball.

Todd: Right you are, Frank. I recognize those stupid little glasses. Not a very dignified way for a Wall Street Journal reporter to go out.

Frank: Guess that's one "deadline" he had no trouble meeting (laughs)!

Todd: (Laughs) You better believe it. Okay, now it looks like we're just about ready to begin here -- and not a moment too soon. The crowd here is going absolutely crazy. They're throwing... what is that? Frank, what is that they're throwing at the cage containing Edward Liddy?

Frank: Oh my God -- they're throwing their tax returns at him!

Todd: Well, I'd say they're ready to give him the ultimate "retirement party," eh Frank?

Frank: Yessiree, Todd. Okay, the cage has been opened and Liddy is now being escorted up the steps of the Stock Exchange and to the platform. He's being led by police, and of course by the cast of The Real Housewives of Orange County -- who themselves will be put to death by honey-and-fire-ants a little later today at the after-party for this event. What do you think, Todd -- you think the ants will eat through collagen and silicone?

Todd: (Laughs) Well, we'll see, my friend.

Frank: Indeed we will!

Todd: Alright, Liddy has now been walked to the middle of the platform. The crowd still going wild here. He's been chained to a large wooden pole in the center of the platform, and now the executioner -- or as we call him, ironically, the "executor" -- is making sure Liddy's bonds are nice and tight.

Frank: Edward Liddy and strong bonds? Now that's funny. But if I can say, Todd -- Liddy looks absolutely terrified.

Todd: Yes, not the kind of Wall Street welcome he's used to.

Frank: The microphone is now being brought in so that Edward Liddy can speak a few final words before we give him the old 401 K.O. He seems to be struggling against the chains. Alright, let's listen in.

(The crowd noise dies, there's the sound of feedback, then silence for a moment.)

Liddy: No! We had to do it! We were required by law to pay out the 165-million in bonuses to our executives! WE HAD TO RETAIN TALENT!

(The mob begins shouting at him.)

Frank: (Laughing) Sorry, pal -- I just don't think that's gonna fly with these taxpayers.

Todd: A hundred-and-seventy billion dollars for AIG in a citizen-funded bailout -- and remember, this is a company that lost 61-billion dollars last quarter, and he's trying to make the case that there's talent that needs to be held onto? And it's going to cost 165 million of our hard-earned cash?

Frank: You know what we say to that, right Todd?

Frank and Todd: FUCK HIM! (Laughter)

Todd: Obviously, the executor not swayed by Liddy's pleas for understanding and leniency, to say nothing of more money from Congress.

Frank: Nope -- the executor now grabbing his ax with both hands. It looks like we could be just seconds away from the end, here. This one could be over fairly quickly.

Todd: But wait! No, he's dropped the ax and is reaching for... what is that? IT'S A 2X4 COVERED IN BARBED WIRE! Oh, he's going to make this one last. And now he's -- yes, he's LIGHTING IT ON FIRE!

Frank: Look at the look of fear in Liddy's eyes. The crowd is just loving every minute of this. It makes sense when you think about it, I mean, when they leave here it's not like they're going anywhere since they're jobless and their homes have been foreclosed on.

Todd: Makes for a very angry audience, Frank. They're chanting "justice" now, over and over. Listen to that.

Frank: And the executor is raising the flaming 2X4 and...OH, he brings it down hard on Liddy's head. That is not a pretty sight. For you parents with small children watching in the store window of Best Buy because you don't have homes, I really hope you covered the eyes of the little ones. This is not for the faint of heart.

Todd: And Liddy has now slumped against the pole, but he's still bound remember. He doesn't seem to be dead -- just stunned.

Frank: Yeah, about as stunned as America was when it found it that it'd have to foot the bill for this guy's incompetence and excesses (laughs).

Todd: And the executor has now stepped aside and is letting the rabid throng attack Liddy. My God, they're crawling onto the platform and are giving him paper cuts with their pink slips. Oh the humanity -- he's screaming in agony. Someone's poured what looks like battery acid on him. Yes, his flesh is melting away.

Frank: And -- wait. Is that an alligator?

Todd: It's a madhouse! A madhouse!

Frank: We'd better "bail out" before the bitter end finally comes, folks. But we want to thank you for watching tonight.

Todd: Please join us next week when our "guest of honor" will be none other than CNBC's Rick Santelli!

Frank: Until then, from the both of us here live at the burned and bloodied front of the New York Stock Exchange, this is "Wide World of Justice." Have a great night!

Todd: Good night, everybody! (Barely Audible: Holy shit, was that his leg?)

Outro Music: Notorious BIG's Mo' Money, Mo' Problems.

Quote of the Week

"I have trouble keeping lunch down when I read these jeremiads about how sad and mysterious it is that our institutions of government are failing. It’s not a mystery. One side wants them to fail. And there’s very little the other side can do about it, besides point it out, which the president has started doing — and now he’s the one being divisive! They’ve turned the world inside out."

-- Michael Tomasky in the Daily Beast

Steve Benen's addendum to Tomasky's piece is also required reading.

And these assholes have the nerve to wonder why people are taking to the streets -- and what's more, to demonize and denigrate them for doing so.

Guillotines.

Seriously -- fucking guillotines.

The Dream Is Collapsing

I don't generally swipe material wholesale from other people's sites, but a) what you're about to read really struck a chord with me, and b) it was posted in the comment section of Cesca's post promoting this week's Bob & Chez Show podcast, of which I'm obviously a part.

The person who wrote this is named Curtis Robert Tyree.

"I was listening to your show, and I have to say that it really hit me hard. I am working three jobs right now, one as a fre-lance reporter and the other two at museums. The museum jobs end in October and December. So I'm going to have to get at least one more job, maybe another. All of this while living at home because I can't afford an apartment and living expenses. I have a bachelor's degree in Communication and can't find a full time job, each position I apply for want MBA's or many years of experience, things I don't have. Plus, my student loans are coming up to be paid soon and it will be around $600 per month, which is more than I make right now with those three jobs.

On top of this, my father owns his own business, but he doesn't have any work right now because his drafting business deals with infrastructure, something that isn't being done right now. And my mother is a pastor at a church that doesn't have enough money to pay her full-time now, so she will be out of a job at the end of January. I'm seeing the collapse of the middle class every time I go home.

My grandfather, my dad's dad, was the shining example of the middle class. He had a manufacturing job, a pension, healthcare, and owned a home and new cars every couple of years. That dream is gone. Even when it comes to cars now. My car is 14 years old and has over 162,000 miles, my dad's car is 18 years old and over 150,000 miles and my mom's car is a 2004 with over 100,000 miles and all three are falling apart and we don't have the money to fix them. Living in appalachia, we do need them, there is no public transportation and for my three jobs I drive it's no rare occurrence that I drive upwards of 200 miles per day.

So to hear that people like me and my parents who aren't rich and that it's our fault really pisses me off. I do what I have to do to survive. My parents do what they have to do to survive. Herman Cain's parents did what they needed to do. Having 3, 4, or 5 jobs isn't, and shouldn't be, a defining thing about America but it is increasingly becoming our defining trait. Which is a shame. America used to be defined by boundless opportunity and hope, now it's just making sure the car works so you can shuffle between multiple jobs.

So to the people like Herman Cain, and those who cheered last night at the debate, tell me what I'm doing wrong."

First of all, to Curtis: I can't express enough sympathy and empathy and I couldn't wish more good luck to you. As Bob said in his own response -- you're not alone. Not by a long shot. And you're not doing a damn thing wrong.

Curtis's comment was likely a direct response to one particular segment of the podcast. In it, Bob and I talked not simply about the state of the economy -- with millions out of work and others forced to work far beneath their abilities -- but about the kind of country that those who contributed to it and who deny the average American's hardship seem to be willing to settle for. My point specifically was that Herman Cain speaks effusively about how his parents had no choice but to work three jobs to provide for him while he was growing up -- and he says this as if it's a point of pride. Sure, there's no shame at all in doing whatever you have to do to get by -- but there should be a monumental amount of shame in claiming that that situation is the ideal rather than the exception. I guarantee you that if you'd asked them, Herman Cain's parents would much rather have been at home spending time with their young son than working as a cleaning woman, a barber and a janitor just so that he could have something to eat.

You do what you have to do, certainly, but to claim that it's what you want to do and that it's the best case scenario is obscene. Occasionally that's just the way things have to be, but it's never the way things should be.

And that was the dream of the great American middle-class: the idea that a vast swath of this rich, powerful nation could and would work hard, produce, and take pride in its overall contribution to society -- and in return the people within that group could be reasonably assured that they would be able to carve out a small slice of the American dream. That there'd be roofs over their heads, food on their tables, that their families would be provided for and they'd be able to spend their golden years not living in fear. That was the contract America made with its people -- and it was always expected that each side would hold up its end of the deal. What's more, that's what made this country great. That's what made us powerful and the envy of the world.

How did we get from that to a crowd full of people at a presidential debate sociopathically cheering at the idea that it's the fault of 14 million unemployed people that they're unemployed?

How did we get to the point where Herman Cain feels like there's no shame or sorrow in holding up his very good parents' lack of any other choice as a new American ideal to which all our families should aspire?

Where the hell did we lose our way?

Street Walker

Credit where credit is due: While certainly not missing the opportunity to ascend a couple of his favorite soapboxes, Glenn Greenwald's takedown of newly minted CNN starlet Erin Burnett in yesterday's Salon was pretty spot-on.

Here's the pertinent point about both Burnett and her partner-in-crime on the Wall Street beat, Alison Kosik:

"Needless to say, Burnett and Kosik consider themselves to be opinion-free, objective 'reporters.' Indeed, this is what Burnett said in the Vantiy Fair interview when asked if she sympathizes too much with the Wall Street plutocrats on whom she purports to report: 'My job isn’t to give an opinion but to try and explain what’s happening.' But just like Andrew Ross Sorkin and his protection of and subservience to his 'CEO-of-a-major-bank' friend, these people are oozing bias and opinion from every pore of their being. They are so devoted to and immersed in the insular oligarchical world of which they are desperate to be a part that they know and care about nothing else. Expecting them to provide objective, critical assessments of business elites is like expecting a heroin addict to rat out his dealer."

What he's griping about, correctly to some extent, is that Burnett, Kosik and those like them are naturally going to dismiss and denigrate the Occupy Wall Street movement in its entirety because they're inherently biased against it. They've been granted a backstage pass and it's therefore to be expected that they'll be the first ones on their knees blowing the band. What's more, they don't even realize how prejudiced and untrustworthy they are when it comes to reporting on the economy because all they breathe is rarefied air -- it's literally all they know.

The only problem with Greenwald's argument, of course, is that most journalists bring certain biases with them to their stories -- and not only is Greenwald himself not immune to this, he's one of the worst offenders. Case in point: He draws an immediate connection in the above piece between slanted Wall Street reporting and what he calls the servile stenography that national security correspondents engage in when they report on anyone who supposedly challenges the official word of government officials. He of course uses this line of thinking to explain why anyone working for a mainstream news outlet would have a problem with Julian Assange and Wikileaks. While Greenwald's right to say that access to power, any kind of power, can potentially corrupt your ability to be objective, he's wrong if he assumes that only a subservience to authority would cause someone to rail against Wikileaks. Believe me, I don't have access to a damn thing and I still don't like Julian Assange, nor do I entirely trust his creation or the unchecked influence both of them wield.

Still, the overall point Greenwald makes about the questionable trustworthiness of "insider" correspondents is worth giving credence to. If you can get past his predictably and condescendingly casting himself as journalistic integrity's last man standing, the piece is worth a read.

And by the way, Greenwald isn't the only one taking Erin Burnett apart piece by piece. The Baltimore Sun's absolute evisceration of her as "self-satisfied, smug, privileged and feeling not one whit of (the) pain" of those protesting on Wall Street or those they purport to be standing up for in this country is required reading.

Assistant Quote of the Day

"I get the anger driving the protest — boy howdy! — but I don’t see any specific appeal to folks on Main Street yet, and I don’t see Main Street Americans responding. Anonymous, which has pushed this campaign to 'occupy Wall Street,' has no clear set of goals, preferring to think the crowd will magically produce a set of demands by consensus. The 'theory of change' seems to be (1) protest (2) ????? (3) change!"

-- Matt Osborne on this weekend's interesting but ultimately silly "Occupy Wall Street" rally, promoted largely by Anonymous

Obviously, at this point almost any show of organized, non-violent resistance has the potential to do some good. The problem is that "Occupy Wall Street" wasn't organized nearly enough. And for the record, you want to make a real statement? Try descending on Wall Street when it's not a Saturday and there are some, you know, actual people there. The overall idea was right -- it's just the execution and the platform given to certain self-defeating lunatics that was all wrong.

Quote of the Day

"We are not going to have a one-sided deal that hurts the folks who are most vulnerable... This isn't class warfare -- it's math."

-- President Barack Obama, announcing a deficit-reduction plan that includes $1.5 trillion in new taxes for the very wealthy and promising to veto any proposal that includes cuts without new revenue

In case you're curious, the president is responding to a thoroughly predictable preemptive "NO" from the perpetually obstinate congressional Republicans, including melodramatic super-twerp Paul Ryan who said recently, "Class warfare might make for good politics, but it makes for rotten economics."

Three important things to remember: 1) Yes, it is class warfare we're talking about -- and the upper class is winning in a rout, 2) Paul Ryan has zero credibility on matters of economic policy, and 3) he and his GOP cohorts don't give one forlorn crap about you. Not a one.

Quote of the Day

"I think that one of the things we have to keep in mind is what we're charged with and the amount of debt reduction this represents in terms of our entire debt and how significant that is... As I said in my questioning of him, it's about three percent of outlays that we're looking at. It's about one percent of our GDP over the next decade. So I don't think that triggers the kinds of dynamics he was testifying to in other areas."

-- Republican Rep. Dave Camp, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee

The person he's referring to is Congressional Budget Office Director Doug Elmendorf. What he's saying? Well, allow me to translate: "Fuck you."

See, Elmendorf essentially endorsed the basic premise of President Obama's "American Jobs Act" during an appearance before Congress's own Justice League -- the Super Committee -- on Tuesday by saying that a combination of government spending and middle-class tax relief is what's needed to kick-start the economy. According to Elmendorf, the choke-the-government-to-death austerity the Republicans have been pushing for months will actually hurt our fragile economy and what's necessary is to spend and help the working-class now then cut back and concentrate on the deficit later. Remember, this is the non-partisan CBO saying this -- ostensibly, the voice of reason.

Again, Kryptonian High Council-member Camp's response to what's presumably the last thing he and his fellow Republicans want to hear right now? "Sorry, don't care. Lalalalalala, I'm not listening!"

It's barely worth mentioning the right's history of simply disregarding any facts it finds inconvenient. Evolution, global climate change, the likely innocence of whatever death row prisoner they lust to throw the switch on, it's all entirely up for debate and in the end their views wind up carrying the most weight, even if their reasoning is based on ignorance and obstinacy. So why shouldn't they simply shoot down the testimony of a guy who's paid by the organization they work for to present the facts dispassionately? Hey, what are facts anyway? Yeah? Well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

I've said it before but it bears repeating over and over again: These people will never give Obama an inch. Not one. They will burn this country to the ground if it means that they can pile the ashes around the current president and use that image to usher them back into the White House -- where they'll rule whatever's left while we all suffer.

Let's Get To Work

Kind of like Cesca is pushing readers of his own site to do right now, for my reaction to last night's address by President Obama to Congress, download or listen to this week's podcast. Bob and I recorded it immediately following the speech, and it has our perspectives on it.

Bottom line: Obama brought it -- big time.

Quote of the Day, Jr.

"Conservatives view taxation as a species of theft—and to raise taxes, on anyone for any reason, is simply to steal more. Conservatives also believe that people become rich by creating value for others. Once rich, they cannot help but create more value by investing their wealth and spawning new jobs in the process. We should not punish our best and brightest for their success, and stealing their money is a form of punishment. Of course, this is just an economic cartoon. We don’t have perfectly efficient markets, and many wealthy people don’t create much in the way of value for others. In fact, as our recent financial crisis has shown, it is possible for a few people to become extraordinarily rich by wrecking the global economy."

-- Sam Harris, author of The End of Faith, in a thoughtful piece called "How Rich Is Too Rich?"

Warfare Is Hell

Every once in a while, The Daily Show illustrates something so flawlessly that the point it's making actually infuriates me. Watch every second of this, and then please tell me why twin guillotines haven't been erected directly outside the Fox News studios and at the corner of Wall and Broad.

The Huffington Post: Jon Stewart Takes on Fox News and "Class Warfare" Claims/8.19.11

Quote of the Day

"While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks... My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice."

-- Warren Buffett in a New York Times op-ed called "Stop Coddling the Super-Rich"

This is absolutely required reading -- and it should be circulated far and wide. The question is, at what point will the sociopathically obstinate Republicans listen? At last week's Fox News-hosted Clown Car Debate, every single GOP presidential candidate taking part raised his or her hand when asked the following question: "Say you had a deal, a real spending cuts deal, 10-to-1... spending cuts to tax increases... Who on this stage would walk away from that deal? Can you raise your hand if you feel so strongly about not raising taxes, you’d walk away on the 10-to-1 deal?" Once again, all eight candidates raised their hands.

I said it last week but it bears repeating over and over again: These people don't work for you. They're not the least bit interested in representing you. If you're not wealthy, or a major corporation, they couldn't give a crap about you.

And don't even get me started on the audacity of another squinty-eyed, hyper-Christian, pretend cowboy from Texas taking a run at the White House three years after the last one left -- and left the country in financial ruin.

Fight or Flight

So often these days I feel like all I'm doing is adding to the noise.

The worse things get, the more angry I get -- or as anyone who listened to this week's podcast knows, the more overwhelmingly depressed -- and the more I either want to lash out in every direction or just shut down completely. I figure everybody's got an opinion and more often than not everybody's willing to share it with you whether you want to hear it or not, so I'm not sure I provide a specific service that you can't get anywhere else.

Take for example the Standard and Poor's downgrade of the United States' credit rating from AAA to a mere AA+ -- the first time that's happened in our history. Not only is this development disheartening at face value, the enormity of what it will likely mean for each and every one of us and for the country as a whole simply can't be overstated. While there are plenty of reasons to contest S&P's decision -- from the fact that its calculations may have been off by $2 trillion, to S&P's role in approving the toxic crap that got us into this economic mess in the first place, to the question of whether a for-profit company should have a say in a sovereign nation's internal affairs at all -- it's impossible to deny what it means for our standing around the world. What's also impossible to deny, if you believe the people at S&P, is who is to blame for the downgrade.

"The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America’s governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed. The statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy... Our lowering of the rating was prompted by our view on the rising public debt burden and our perception of greater policymaking uncertainty, consistent with our criteria... The (debt ceiling deal) contains no measures to raise taxes or otherwise enhance revenues, though the committee could recommend them... Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act."

Translation: Yes, the U.S. is carrying a lot of debt, but we weren't downgraded because of that; we were downgraded because the Republicans in Congress turned what should have been a simple procedure with a long history of precedent into a political dogfight, one in which they, quite simply, threatened the world with the possibility that the U.S. wouldn't pay its bills. And what's more, they've already made it abundantly clear that they intend to pull the same kind of crap again and again, especially since they now know that it works. Whether intentionally or not, the Republicans and their bizarre subservience to the Tea Party minority got the hostage that they took shot in the chest -- and don't think for a second that it will cause them to rethink this brand of political terrorism in the future.

It practically goes without saying that Republican leaders are now giddily lining up to blame President Obama for this latest global embarrassment; it goes without saying because that was the intention all along -- to burn the economy to the ground, sabotage it from the inside, and hang it all around the neck of the man they hate more than they love America and its people. The marrow-deep audacity required to do something like this is nothing short of mind-boggling. You've probably heard this analogy a lot lately, but it's fitting: It's the child who murders his parents then pleads for leniency from the court because he's an orphan. I keep wondering how much will be too much; at what point, if there even is one, the current crop of Republicans will stop and realize that they're literally destroying our country; when they'll finally wake up from their wet dream of unchecked power and feel something approaching shame.

I imagine that it will never happen. They've proven over and over again that there's no depth they won't sink to, no maneuver that crosses the line, no lie too offensive, no hypocrisy that's unthinkable. So it rests with us to heap the shame on them they seem to fundamentally lack. Maybe it's because I tend to view things through this prism, but I can't help but blame the political media for so much of what's been allowed to happen here -- and it's time they honored their responsibility to the truth, as opposed to contriving some comforting form of fake objectivity, and did so with a firm understanding of what's at stake. The debt ceiling fight, the credit downgrade, the implementation of hostage politics, all of it stemmed not as a result of a "broken government" in which both sides share equal blame; these things were the direct result of one party, the one that tallied up an unprecedented debt then manufactured a phony crisis over that debt which has already cost us our credit rating and could very well lead to a partial collapse of our fragile economy. What they've done will hurt people. It will destroy lives. And the entire reason for it is simply that the GOP wants control of the White House again. After utterly ruining us, the Republicans are seeking to assume complete dominance of our national and global policy again. This is reality. This is what's happening. And while the press should be equally adversarial when it comes to its coverage of our leaders, it should not ignore the truth or pretend that there are two sides it. The truth is the truth. Period.

It should be presented that way.

Where we go from here, whether we rise again to a place of preeminence within the world or take another step toward becoming a banana republic -- that's anyone's guess at this moment. But each and every one of us now knows what needs to be done. Whether you're the President of the United States, a journalist, a student who could soon inherit a funhouse mirror image of the America you were raised to sanctify, or just an average citizen -- it's time to take a stand.

I want so badly to concern myself with how much noise I'm making, or maybe just go back to sleep right now -- but I know that I can't.

It's All Downhill from Here

Salon's Andrew Leonard sums up the only exculpatory spin that can be put on the shit sandwich America is very likely about to be forced to swallow whole:

"If one wished to give the president the benefit of the doubt, one could argue that maybe there was nothing he could have done to get a better deal. House Republicans were willing to push the nation into default -- and that's a scenario no sane leader could responsibly endorse. Obama couldn't credibly threaten a veto of any legislation that would reach his desk because Obama ultimately would not and could not voluntarily choose to default on the nation's obligations. Obama had to choose between an awful deal or an outright catastrophe. There's no way to come out of that jam smelling of roses.

But he didn't need to try to sell this resolution as some sort of 'compromise.' The president said it was not "the deal I would have preferred." He should have been stronger. He should have said it's a bad deal that does not address the pressing needs of the nation, and sets in stone cuts in entitlements that will savage an aging population faced by spiraling health care costs. And then he should have acknowledged that he still had to sign it, because the alternative would have ensured a nearly immediate slide into recession and the strong possibility of a global financial shock."

That's about all there is to it. I realize that both sides of the political aisle aren't at all happy with this deal and maybe it could be argued that that's one of the best things you can say about it. Unfortunately, if nobody's happy then that generally means it's a crappy deal, and while I know there are those on the opposite side of the fence who claim differently, they're full of it: the Republicans got almost everything they wanted. The Tea Party put a gun to the head of the entire country and turned what should have been a simple political procedure into an effort to bury us all under a big, heaping pile of its ass-backward dogma -- and that it did. What was one of the most embarrassing episodes for this country in its short but celebrated history has just morphed into an almost unimaginably devastating sucker punch to the American psyche. Thanks to a misguided embrace of austerity in the middle of an economic crisis, we'll no longer enjoy the inviolable powerhouse status we've had as a nation for decades into centuries. We're now no better than the European countries our twisted and treacherous Republican leaders so casually condescend to as part of the prerogative supposedly granted to us by "American exceptionalism."

The world is laughing at us right now -- and maybe it should be.

And we just learned an important lesson that we've, ironically, never really been able to admit to ourselves: terrorism is nearly impossible to defeat because it works. Welcome to the new era of Hostage Politics in this country.

A Debt of Attitude

I'll make this quick.

There's no arguing with the fact that what we all just witnessed outlined in pretty clear terms the dynamic that's been going on in Washington for the past several months in regard to the debt ceiling fight. Obama was not only reasonable, measured and -- I can't believe I even have to say this -- mature, but he made it clear that he was a man so willing to compromise for the good of the country that he's consistently fending off fire from many in his own party who feel like he's somehow selling them out. Boehner, meanwhile, was a petulant, haughty adolescent, someone not the least bit interested in genuine compromise and who's more than willing to forgo honest dialog in the name of cheap theatrics, bad jokes and brutish partisan intransigence because he knows it's what his party demands at this point.

I tweeted this a little earlier but it can pretty much be broken down like this: Obama: "We need to compromise and stop being petty children for the sake of everyone." Boehner: "Fuck you."

Interestingly, though, it was an aesthetic point that caught my eye almost immediately -- and one Chris Matthews pointed out on MSNBC a little while ago during the wrap-up coverage of the speeches. It was in bad taste enough, I thought, that Boehner chose to speak minutes after the president, despite the fact that it was always sure to prove Obama's point flawlessly that thanks to the House Republicans and their tea bagging overlords, DC has turned into nothing more than an embarrassing and endlessly mock-worthy circus. But there was something specific about the way Boehner spoke -- the surroundings he set for himself -- that bugged the hell out of me. He stood at a podium, with flags behind him -- a similar setting to the president's own speech. The implication was inarguable and thoroughly offensive: it gave the impression that the Speaker of the House was somehow on the same level as the President of the United States -- that this was a battle of equals.

Since the very beginning, the right has sought to utterly diminish and delegitimize this president; as a collective movement, it's treated him with disrespect and derision, called him an anti-colonialist-Marxist threat to the country who isn't even from this country and who wants to indoctrinate our children into the cult of socialism. They've made up lie after lie about this guy, and they've showed him and the office he occupies so little respect that they've felt they can stand up and call him a liar during a State of the Union address.

And tonight, in yet another breathtaking insult, John Boehner stood there as if he held the same authority as Barack Obama. As if he were America's other president.

I'll say this one more time for the cheap seats: I don't approve of everything Barack Obama has done during his presidency. He's by no means perfect. But what we saw tonight put into perspective the monumental differences not simply in vision but in sheer seriousness between Obama and the people he's up against.

Sorry, but at this moment every American has no choice but to take a side -- and I'm on Obama's side on this, 100%. Ironically, that is the compromise position. As for Boehner, screw him and the disgraceful bunch of uncontrollable babies under his purview who are holding this country hostage. Enough is enough.

Assistant To the Assistant To the Quote of the Day

"Oh no! Was the president mean to you, Eric? Did he hurt your feelings? Maybe you should blow up the economy to make yourself feel better."

-- Andrew Leonard in a Salon piece appropriately called "Eric Cantor: The Most Dangerous Whiner in America"

"Suck It Up and Cope"

Proving the old adage about a broken clock, the normally intolerable David Sirota masterfully chronicles the ten most profoundly infuriating examples of America's wealthiest telling America's struggling -- basically everybody else -- to go fuck themselves.

It reads like great moments in utter tone-deafness, and it's guaranteed to make your blood pressure rocket and make you want to see guillotines returned to the public square as quickly as possible.

Salon: The New "Let Them Eat Cake!"/7.13.11

FTW

Required viewing.