Mean relentless Democrats must quit picking on shy little Republicans, Reid says

From The Hill:

Democrats must be “very, very careful” to avoid overreaching and will not rubber-stamp President-elect Obama’s policies, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said Tuesday.

Good point. After all, the D.C. Democratic impulse to stand up for Americans against the mad and pernicious policies of the Republicans led Reid and his colleagues to almost think about maybe giving some consideration to opposing Bush's blank check to invade and occupy Iraq. There also was almost opposition to war funding for a minute there. And trampling the constitution and civil liberties. And pro-corporate economic policies. And ...

Thankfully, Harry Reid is on the scene to rein in this upstart Obama fellow from doing anything that might ruffle the feathers of Senate Republicans or -- horrors! -- Joe Lieberman.

Seriously, if anybody knows somebody who knows Harry Reid, could you please tell them to tell him to go on Craig's List or eBay or wherever it is on the internets that clues are sold.

On a related note, Paul Krugman has a horrifying analysis of how the Democrats might be on the verge of getting rolled by Republicans yet again and just like always -- or as Harry might say, overreaching. After laying down some numbers suggesting that to work, the recovery plan needs to get a lot bigger and more aggressive than the numbers that are currently on the table whether Republicans like it or not, Krugman writes:

I see the following scenario: a weak stimulus plan, perhaps even weaker than what we’re talking about now, is crafted to win those extra GOP votes. The plan limits the rise in unemployment, but things are still pretty bad, with the rate peaking at something like 9 percent and coming down only slowly. And then Mitch McConnell says “See, government spending doesn’t work.”

Rather than being "very, very careful" to avoid overreaching, Reid and his Democratic colleagues might want to consider an alternative strategy: Being "very, very careful" to avoid being wussies (as I suggested, very presciently if I do say so myself, which I do, weeks ago).

Comments

[Scorpiogal]

Gleaner is spot on!

Yeah,why *is* it that when Reid decides he's gonna show some cajones, he finds them when dealing with the small potato issues(read Burris' seating)? Hey, maybe he could work as intently on oh, I dunno, helping to get Nevada back to work! Jeebus.

[atdleft]

How very true, Mr. Gleaner. We can't afford NOT to spend big on our people. We need jobs for the jobless and investment in an economy in desperate need of a cash infusion. We can't afford to skimp on saving this nation from the next Depression.

[Patrick]

Yup, lets save it by doing the exact same things that lengthened the great depression.

And gee, I hope Democrats do all those Anti-corporate policies like bailing out corporations....

-_-

[Nancy]

Scorp - Righto! - Have you called him or e-mailed him? We need to start making some noise so the good Senator remembers we are still here and he is still running in 2010!

[Patrice]

Starve a depression and feed a bubble

[Scorpiogal]

@ Nancy,
Amen sistah! I've sent my email. I'm tired of milquetoast leadership. And yes. 2010 is just around the corner!

[Nancy]

Sister Scorp - Usually you speak my mind but this time you said milquetoast leadership. I can't find any leadership in the Majority Leader's office and I've looked high and low - milquetoast is everywhere but ain't no leadership to be seen. President Elect is going to have to do this without him - or in spite of him - or something I guess. Damn shame too! Read Steve Sebelius' rant over at City Life - he really says it all in this one.

[Libra Dude]

Patrick - get stuffed and go far, far away you raging asshole.

[Scorpiogal]

@ Nancy and Libra Dude
True!

[Tailspinterry]

So if Patrick is really Patrick R. Gibbons, policy analyst for NPRI, does his boss know he is wasting company time on The Gleaner? Or maybe it's in his job description because they see some value in eliciting liberal viewpoints to re-jigger as straw men for NPRI reports. Today Gibbons of NPRI proposed ending programs for mine worker safety and class-size reduction. Talk about evil.

Terry, they probably encourage it. Which shows how pathetic NPRI really is.

[dave404]

The Nevada Policy Research Institute, as represented by their spokesperson Patrick Gibbons, is a guy with no business license for his own LLC (medicare fraud Patrick?), hates the America Military (their dying breath and loss of blood provide "nothing of value"); believes that anybody that wants to have a fist fight on any corner for a title and a bling-bling belt and millions of dollars should be free to do so-having a commission to sanction such a fight is stifling the free market; that if a worker gets killed or injured at work that is their bad luck and NO they don't get care nor legal counsel to pursue treatment as really, safety in the workplace is soooooo 1880s!; got screwed buying something, or a hospital bill that is grossly inflated? too bad, your an idiot and no consumer affair division can help you; government workers are entitled to minimum wage and are not allowed to negotiate their working conditions...they are to be treated differently than any other worker- hell, if cops and firemen and teachers want to strike what do we as society care?!; the financial condition of your bank is between you and your bank, it is of NO concern to the government; you think your insurance company is taking advantage of you and not providing what they say they will or that you car insurance cost is $500,000 a year? tough!, it isn't an issue for the state, what?, the insurance company is some fly-by-night with $2 in assets and can't pay your claim? TOO BAD FOR YOU!; are you an employee who must work 14 hours a day for straight pay even though the law says all hours after eight hours are to be treated as OT at time and a half? TOO BAD! no government oversight for you! sue your employer in court-no the government won't let you; what, you got a mortgage from a company that is preying on your ignorance of the law? What, they are collecting impounds for for insurance and taxes and aren't paying the bills?-too bad for you!; matter of fact you want roads and transportation? That is of no concern for the state; taxicab wants to charge you $2,000 from the airport to the Strip even though the sign said $14 and you swore you saw a sign that said "ELY" 2 miles on the way to the Mirage? Too bad, that is not the business of the state!; finally, your real estate agent lied to you and screwed you, too bad, making them have a license in the first place stifles competition!

Hey, Patrick, why don't you actually buy some real estate in this town before you tell the rest of us permanent residents how to live?!

[Patrick]

Talking about straw man fallacies and ignorant assumptions. You need to start thinking deeper than that.

Think about secondary effects, things seen and unseend, think harder.

If you don't want to do that how about we divide the state in half, big government on one side, limited government on the other and lets wait and see which side produces better results (limited government and low taxes will. Big government and high taxes will increase poverty, decrease the quality of education, reduce economic growth, lower the quality of life so on and so forth).

[dave404]

No straw man, Patrick, I used your own words-eliminate the B&I Department.

Nevada is already divided in half! The experiment lives!I'll take Southern Nevada and you can have Battle Mountain. HAHAHAHAAHA!

I can save the state mony too if I recommend eliminiating all government spending- talk about the need to think deeper!

[dave404]

"On fiscal policy we expect the Obama administration to adopt a large Keynesian fiscal stimulus. We regard this as a time-shifter, eventually contributing to an end to declining economic activity at the cost of higher Federal debt service in the future. It should help limit the feedback loop between the financial crisis and the recession. Keynesian stimulus is not a cure-all. It merely increases the likelihood of preventing a serious recession from deteriorating into a depression. Critics are correct that aggressive monetary and fiscal stimulus will have some negative side effects over a period of time, but the higher priority is to prevent a worse case outcome in the near term."
Bank of New York Mellon; December 2008
pershinginthenews

[Patrick]

NOpe, total straw man, you aren't presenting an accurate picture of the statements. Your first problem is assuming, automatically that without regulation (or with less regulation) things would go to hell in a handbasket. Thus you assume the point in question - do we need to spend millions regulating.

You have to prove, through facts, yes, not with simple statements or other straw man counterpoints.

Thus to not make a strawman you have to basically assume the opposition correct before showing presenting the evidence to the contrary.

[Patrick]

Dave,

The best case senario for government spending is absolutely no positive effect on the overall economy, for example we can have short term gains and then long term losses. Whatever short term gains we make now will be eaten away by long term losses, probably through high inflation.

Nothing says "We want to rob the poor and middle class" like inflation.