Matt Yglesias

17 Responses to “The GOP’s Retreat to Irresponsibility”

1. Marlowe Says:
   March 26th, 2009 at 11:13 am

   I think we got onto an interesting point here about how much more comfortable Republicans seem with being in the opposition where they’re free to act totally irresponsibly since they know they won’t be held accountable for the consequences of their ideas

   Err, as opposed to how responsibly the Republicans acted for the preceding two or three decades? I, for one, don’t see any difference between Republicans today and the main stream Republican Party since the rise of Reagan (except to the extent that they’re got continually more cohesive and nuttier since the Gingrich revolution). Do the Bush years (cough, Katrina, cough) suggest that that Rep[ublicans are any more responsible when they are accountable for their actions than when not?

2. James Gary Says:
   March 26th, 2009 at 11:17 am

   What Marlowe said. Also, the video takes forever to load and hangs the rest of the page content while it’s loading. Firefox, Mac OS 10.5.6.

3. Don Williams Says:
   March 26th, 2009 at 11:17 am

   Some spam email I got recently shows how well Obama’s Kumbaya bullshit is working with the Republicans:
   —————–
   Dear Newsmax Reader:

   The race between Republican Jim Tedisco and liberal Democrat Scott Murphy is very tight.

   As you know, this special congressional election in New York is very important. If Tedisco wins, it will send a powerful message to Washington and the media: Americans don’t want Obama’s radical, socialist plan for America.

   That’s why we at The National Republican Trust have already committed more than $500,000 to help defeat Wall Street Democrat Scott Murphy and elect Republican Jim Tedisco.

   Today, we are launching our new TV ad exposing Scott Murphy’s support for the AIG bonuses — bonuses that were protected by Obama’s stimulus plan that was not even read by members of Congress before they voted for it!

   Please take a moment to watch our new TV ad — Go Here Now.

   Please help us in this critically important race — Donate Here Now.

   You can make a powerful difference!

   Yours for America,

   Scott Wheeler
   Executive Director

   P.S. The Democrats are continuing to money into the race and are even trying to lock up TV air time. It’s urgent we make our last minute TV buys. Help us today — Go Here Now.

   Paid for by The National Republican Trust PAC. Not authorized by any candidate or
   candidate’s committee. 2100 M St. N.W., Suite 170-340 Washington, DC 20037-1233
   —————-

   Note how the Republicans are blaming Obama for trying to fix the very disaster that themselves caused.

4. Njorl Says:
   March 26th, 2009 at 11:23 am

   Dear Newsmax Reader:

   Well that’s part of the problem, whatever the problem might be.

5. KCinDC Says:
   March 26th, 2009 at 11:44 am

   Don, I’m shocked that the National Republican Trust PAC is continuing to behave in a partisan fashion, even in our new era. Next you’ll be telling me the same thing about the DNC.

6. kafka Says:
   March 26th, 2009 at 11:48 am

   “Don, I’m shocked that the National Republican Trust PAC is continuing to behave in a partisan fashion, even in our new era. Next you’ll be telling me the same thing about the DNC.”

   I’m shocked anybody cares about which GOPocratic whore wins anymore.

7. JT Says:
   March 26th, 2009 at 12:16 pm

   what kafka says… always a sane viewpoint.

8. Noah Says:
   March 26th, 2009 at 12:37 pm

   You know, it’s not like being in power made Republicans act responsibly. Even in 2005 when they thought their power was the dawn of a new era of Republican dominance, they were wrecking America’s institutions like there was no tomorrow.

   I think the Republican Party’s irresponsibility has more to do with structural factors within the party than with the party’s current level of power.

9. Adam Says:
   March 26th, 2009 at 1:19 pm

   Ah, kafka. I love that the same attitude that got people voting for Nader is still around. Boy, Bush and Gore sure were two sides of the same coin huh? Palin or Obama? I mean, they’re practically identical, why bother picking?

   And I’m SURE our lovable middle-school Republican JT feels the exact same way, just like he says.

10. Don Williams Says:
    March 26th, 2009 at 2:17 pm

    1) The primary point is that NO ONE in the Democratic caucus has
    blamed the Republicans –and Republican ideology — for this mess. They let the Republicans off.

    2) So the Republicans are returning the favor by hanging this disaster around the necks of the Democrats like a shit-stained commode lid.

    3) Plus the grassroots Democratic voter has to wonder at the subdued response of the Democratic leadership. If they really represent us, why do they view this $10 Trillion fucking we getting with the same nonchalance that they might view an overnight frost making their daffodils wilt?

11. Don Williams Says:
    March 26th, 2009 at 2:21 pm

    Re Adam at 9: “Boy, Bush and Gore sure were two sides of the same coin huh? Palin or Obama? I mean, they’re practically identical, why bother picking?”
    —————
    Yeah, good thing for us that the Republicans didn’t win.

    They might have taken $10 Trillion of our tax dollars and used it to pay off the gambling debts of their plutocratic campaign donors.
    To, for instance, ensure that Goldman Sachs didn’t suffer any losses on those AIG contracts.

    Good thing we got the Democrats looking after us, huh?

12. DCDan Says:
    March 26th, 2009 at 2:28 pm

    If you ignore the defense (or offense?) industry, I’d agree on the progressive spending.

    That black box (50% of discrectionary spending?) remains somewhat a mystery to me though, and I’m not ready to write it off as progressive — though it does lead to good jobs. But, how much is skimmed to shareholders, lobbyists and exec’s? And, hell, congressmen like the Duke-stir…

13. Kolohe Says:
    March 26th, 2009 at 3:05 pm

    At the end I talk about how the left should be pursuing more revenue by any means necessary and not fussing so much about how progressive the tax code is.

    Well, this is pretty much off the table with the promise to give 95% of the public a tax cut.

14. Robert Waldmann Says:
    March 26th, 2009 at 3:06 pm

    It is possible that while it would be worthwhile to accept a trade-off, said trade-off is not on offer. You seem to think principled opposition to regressive taxes hampers progressives.

    I’d say the more important issue is interested opposition to regressive taxes by the vast majority of voters.

    I like progressive taxes, but even if I didn’t, I’d accept tax increases focused on the rich, because, I agree that we should be “pursuing more revenue by any means necessary ,” and I think highly progressive tax increases are the only politically feasible means.

    Slighly regressive taxes used to finance social programs do indeed transfer from the relatively rich (on average from the slightly poorer than average) to the poor. The relatively rich hate this and they decide who wins elections.

    Clearly you look at Europe. Don’t be silly. when they introduced their slightly regressive taxes and generous transfers decades ago they were almost all White. If you were my age, you would know how regular Americans feel about egalitarian transfers when they are giving about as much as they are getting and the poor are benefiting.

    You have to face political realities. Increased slightly regressive taxes are politically impossible in the USA unless people are convinced they are needed to save Social Security Old Age pensions.

15. Buy Propecia Says:
    March 26th, 2009 at 11:29 pm

    Buy Propecia…

    http://www.folkd.com/user/buypropeciaonline Buy Propecia…

16. Ex Back Says:
    April 9th, 2009 at 8:57 pm

    After reading this article, I just feel that I need more information on the topic. Could you share some more resources ?

17. measoussy Says:
    April 13th, 2009 at 4:55 am

    This is quite a hot information. I’ll share it on Twitter.