Robert Reich: The Republican shakedown

[babylonsister]

The Republican shakedown
By Robert Reich

This originally appeared at Robert Reich's blog


You can't fight something with nothing. But as long as Democrats refuse to talk about the almost unprecedented buildup of income, wealth, and power at the top -- and the refusal of the super-rich to pay their fair share of the nation's bills -- Republicans will convince people it's all about government and unions.

Republicans claim to have a mandate from voters for the showdowns and shutdowns they're launching. Governors say they're not against unions but voters have told them to cut costs, and unions are in the way. House Republicans say they're not seeking a government shutdown but standing on principle. "Republicans' goal is to cut spending and reduce the size of government," says House leader John Boehner, "not to shut it down." But if a shutdown is necessary to achieve the goal, so be it.

The Republican message is bloated government is responsible for the lousy economy that most people continue to experience. Cut the bloat and jobs and wages will return.

Nothing could be further from the truth, but for some reason Obama and the Democrats aren't responding with the truth. Their response is: We agree but you're going too far. Government employees should give up some more wages and benefits but don't take away their bargaining rights. Private-sector unionized workers should make more concessions but don't bust the unions. Non-defense discretionary spending should be cut but don't cut so much.

more...

http://www.salon.com/news/economics/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2011/02/24/robert_reich_union_republican_showdown

[Better Believe It]

1. A BIG K & R

[disillusioned73]

2. As usual...

the Dems bargain from a position of weakness. Same shit - different toilet.

[dgauss]

3. K&R

[ProSense]

4. Reich nailed it here:

The Republican message is bloated government is responsible for the lousy economy that most people continue to experience. Cut the bloat and jobs and wages will return.

That's exactly what Boehner/Republicans are saying.

As for this:

Nothing could be further from the truth, but for some reason Obama and the Democrats aren't responding with the truth. Their response is: We agree but you're going too far. Government employees should give up some more wages and benefits but don't take away their bargaining rights. Private-sector unionized workers should make more concessions but don't bust the unions. Non-defense discretionary spending should be cut but don't cut so much.

I agree that the Republican line is bogus and that Democrats are emphasizing the deficit when they should be emphasizing spending, but I don't hear the President and most Democrats agreeing that addressing the deficit is the same as creating jobs.

There needs to be a clearer distinction between deficit reduction and stimulus spending, which is more important in the short term.

[flpoljunkie]

7. Dems should be explaining that Republican budget cuts will kill any economic recovery

Over and over again-through all the noise and all the Republican lies.

[shireen]

5. awesome clear oped

i wish more people would read it, esp. the idiots who think Republicans are trying to help them!

[damntexdem]

6. Yeah, the GOP arguments shake down to a few things:

1) the U.S. cannot afford a middle class anymore;
2) the U.S. cannot at all afford to care for the poor and vulnerable;
3) the U.S. cannot afford to keep its promises to its older citizens; and, most importantly,
4) the U.S. can only afford to serve the interests of the super rich.

And too many Democratic pols have bought into that mindset, while many more have been too scared to criticize the mindset.

[Kurovski]

8. It's undemocratic to support and slaver over royalty. (nt)

[paulk]

9. I don't understand why Obama

and the rest of the Dem leadership isn't listening to this guy.

they instead are reenforcing the Republican lie.

[Amonester]

10. Why would "the top" Democrats "bite the hands that feed them"?

You know, all the BIG 'contribution$' they 'expect' to 'ca$h in' from the $uper-Rich themselves?

Ok, they only 'ca$h in' about 1/7 of what the repuke$ get, but still, why would they 'suddenly' say NO to these MILLION$?

Will.Not.Happen.

[CrossChris]

11. As long as Democrats represent that same buildup of wealth, what can we do?

Seriously, what can we do? Just sit back and watch this happen?

[Avant Guardian]

12. Obama is leading from the rear

Rather than "lead" he lets facts on the ground head where they will. Once the outcome becomes clear, Obama steps in, "on the side of history".

We will contine to get shaken down under this form of 'leadership.'

[PurityOfEssence]

13. Our President isn't a leader; he's a campaigner

He's a somewhat right-of-center ultramoderate, and has principles--although a bit out of whack, when considering his apparent feelings of the necessity of corporate control--but he's not a "leader" in the classical sense. There doesn't seem to be anything he'd unequivocally stand up for and get out in front of, and he's far too concerned with being liked.

His judgment should be called into question a bit, too, since he does say bad (and justifiable) things about the reactionaries yet still continues with his ongoing knee-jerk, one-note tactic of being on all sides of everything. Any understanding of the conservative mindset will show that they brook no nuance and no criticism, so the very idea of trying to "make nice" with them after the odd rebuke shows a lack of sense.

It's an ongoing campaign to continue to be popular and to be re-elected; a leader is one who immediately seizes on the office to DO things.