Making the 'sabotage' argument more explicit

[babylonsister]

Posted with permission... and if it walks like a duck...


http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/06/12086309-making-the-sabotage-argument-more-explicit?lite

Making the 'sabotage' argument more explicit
By Steve Benen
-
Wed Jun 6, 2012 11:30 AM EDT


For quite a while, the notion that Republican policymakers might be trying to hurt the American economy on purpose was a charge too provocative for Democrats to make out loud. It's one thing to say the GOP's economic ideas are wrong; it's something else to ask whether the GOP is waging a deliberate campaign against the nation's wellbeing.

Slowly but surely, though, it appears Democrats are becoming more comfortable broaching this provocative line.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), for example, argued last fall, "Republicans think that if the economy improves, it might help President Obama. So they root for the economy to fail and oppose every effort to improve it." This week, in reference to the Paycheck Fairness Act, Reid said, "Unfortunately, it seems Paycheck Fairness may have two strikes against it. It would good for women and good for the economy."

And yesterday, referencing the stalled-but-critically-important highway bill, Reid said, "I'm told by others that [House Majority Leader Eric Cantor] wants to not do a bill to make the economy worse, because he feels that's better for them. I hope that's not true."

Republicans aren't pleased.

"Leader Reid's claims are ridiculous and patently false," said Cantor's spokeswoman Laena Fallon via email. "Rather than making up stories that have no basis in reality, Leader Reid should follow the House's example and focus on pro-growth measures that will get the economy going and get people back to work."

Nor was Boehner's office about to let Reid's remark slide. "That's bulls**t," said his spokesman Michael Steel.

Maybe it's time for a larger conversation about this? At a minimum, it's a question quite a few credible observers are asking, whether that infuriates the GOP or not.

Michael Cohen, a senior fellow at American Security Project, apparently following up on a discussion I launched, said last fall, “We’re far past the point where there is reason to doubt that the GOP is purposely trying to harm” the economy.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), vice chairman of the Senate Democratic Conference, believes “some” Republicans “want the economy to actually fail” on purpose. Paul Krugman said in a column, “{I}t’s hard to avoid the suspicion that G.O.P. leaders actually want the economy to perform badly.” Eugene Robinson, a Pulitzer Prize winner, was asked whether it’s possible Republicans would sabotage the economy. “Well, let me be honest,” he said. “It has occurred to me that this is a possibility.” E.J. Dionne Jr., Dan Gross, David Frum, and Andrew Sullivan have all raised the same concerns.

A while back, Kevin Drum wondered whether this will ever be “a serious talking point,” adding, “No serious person in a position of real influence really wants to accuse an entire party of cynically trying to tank the economy, after all.”

Given the last couple of years -- the debt-ceiling scandal, the death of the American Jobs Act, the Republican rejection of any proposals to boost the economy, the GOP proposals to take capital out of the economy through dangerous austerity measures, the GOP-driven downgrade, the GOP leadership’s demand that the Federal Reserve take no actions to improve the economy, the threats of government shutdowns -- it appears all kinds of serious people are at least entertaining the question.

I still rather doubt we'll see a broader national discussion about Republicans' motivations and whether sabotage is a legitimate possibility. Even as many on the left broach the subject, they do so carefully, with caveats and qualifiers.

But I wonder what the polls would say if the questions were put to the public, and whether the sabotage issue would have any effect on the 2012 elections.

[NV Whino]

1. The dems are just now figuring this out?

Oy vey.

[1StrongBlackMan]

2. And ...

as posted yesterday (I can't find the post), it seems that business leaders are agreeing with this "question", though not in so many words.

The article that I am citing to indicated that the business community is thinking that a romney win in the fall is the only thing that will break the dead-lock in congress and get the economy moving.

I know it might appear "unstatesman-like", but why ... oh why ... aren't the Democrats (and the media) putting the gop's own words out there on a daily basis?

Well, I know why the media won't; but the Democrats ...?

[AnotherMcIntosh]

3. Why "aren't the Democrats ... putting the gop's own words out there on a daily basis?" Good question

[1StrongBlackMan]

8. I would love ...

the DNC and/or any Democratic leaning SuperPac to produce a single ad that would be aired in every market, a minimum of once a week until september, then daily until 6 weeks out, then 12 times a day until election day.

The American public needs to be hit hard and often ...

The ad would have President Obama (or a likeness of his voice) saying, "We have heard you; it IS about the lives of the American worker and this is what my Democratic colleagues and I have proposed." (pointing to each element of the rejected Jobs Plan)

"Here is what Nobel Prize winning economist and the CBO has said about our Plan." (Cut to commentary, re: the Plan's job growth estimates)

"And this has been the gop response." (Cut to vote tallies on Jobs Plan)

"But that's not all, my gop opposition has proposed the same old plan." (Cut to Bush making statements, re: tax cuts and de-regulation, followed by economists and CBO commentary on the Bush stuff)

"But they want to go further down the wrong road." (Cut to economists and CBO commentary on the romney's plan and Ryan's Budget)

"Don't let them." (Cut to a working America)

And, have every Democratic candidate end with,

"I stand with our President. I stand with working Americans. Vote Democratic. I approve this message."

I don't know if this would conform to campaign finance laws; but the ad guys at the DNC/SuperPacs can figure it out and adapt it.

[Gregorian]

4. In the beginning I called it sandbagging.

There is so much fear in Congress that to make the leap from sandbagging to sabotage is nearly impossible. The more we discuss this the more air it gets.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=pJHCGU2ttrc#t=408s

[vanlassie]

5. MIHOP or LIHOP

[longship]

6. What would be the difference if they were just opposing Obama?

At every turn they have opposed every single policy and bill the President and Democrats have put forward. This may be the cause. The effect, the crashing of the economy, may just be an epiphenomenum -- one that although not deliberate would serve well in an election year.

So, isn't this a plausibility?

I understand that the results are no different, but I find my scenerio an easier sell to what may be a skeptical public. That may be an argument against this tactic whatever the truth might be.

Just throwing this out for comment.

[Uncle Joe]

7. I'm convinced the Republicans are doing their best to sabotage the economy.

It's way past time, this subject; albeit a distressing one be brought up to the public at every possible venue.

Thanks for the thread, babylonsister.

[HopeHoops]

9. Mitch the turtle explicitly said the GOP's only objective was to make Obama a 1-termer.

If that means fucking the country sideways, that's what the GOP will do. Cantor and Steel aren't exactly reliable sources of information of any kind and it's no shock that they would deny their true objective. The turtle just let it slip out in a rare moment of honesty.

[dmr]

10. Don't forget they're masters at the October Surprise.

Seriously, the GOP and their monied friends are domestic terrorists.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

11. Ironically, the SABOTAGE argument is gaining traction because of last Friday's weak jobs report

Ironically, the SABOTAGE argument is gaining traction because of last Friday's weak jobs report--see http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002759908 .

The SABOTAGE argument would not have been as persuasive earlier this year, when private sector jobs were soaring. But now that Republicans may have started to get what they've long wanted, they may experience unexpected consequences. Their fingerprints are all over the details of the weaknesses in the jobs report.

David Axelrod on FTN Sunday, and Krugman and Cutter on TW with Stephanopoulos, were able to point out that the weakest sectors in the report were state government--particularly teachers--and construction. Help for these two sectors is PRECISELY what Republicans have been blocking for two years.

Stephanie Cutter pointed out that over a million jobs have been on the table in Congress for nine months, since the President announced his latest Jobs Program. Paul Krugman put the figure at 1.4 million jobs the Republicans have been blocking. Both omitted the three million construction jobs in last year's Transportation bill, ordinarily noncontroversial even at the peak of the business cycle, but still being blocked in the House by John Mica.

IMO, some deep-pocketed third party Democratic Super PAC needs to sustain a continual attack on this Republican economic sabotage by saturating the media with detailed economic analysis by a down-to-earth spokesperson such as Bill Clinton. That way, if the economy worsens in the same sectors pinpointed in last Friday's jobs report, it poses not only a threat to the President's re-election, but also an unprecedented opportunity.