Feeding Corvids

The outlines of a deal are emerging in Congress. It looks very very bad. Talking Points Memo's Brian Beutler has a summary, article.

Commentary:

Jane Hamsher in a spitting-mad post:

Few [of the liberal Congresspeople who will vote for this deal] will admit they were willing to cast old people into poverty and deny them medical treatment for the sake of Barack Obama’s 2012 election hopes. Post.

Digby,

That isn't "shared sacrifice," it's asking the poorest, oldest and sickest among us to give up a piece of their meager security in exchange for the wealthy giving up some tip money and the defense industry giving up a couple of points of profit. Post.

"We are the sacrifice."

I think default might actually be better than this deal.

Croak!

Can we call them "fascists" yet, mommy?

Democracy Now interview with Eva Larsson, wife of the late novelist Steig Larsson, whose life work was largely anti-fascist activism. The recent Norwegian terrorist is discussed. See also Searchlight Magazine.

"We Are the Sacrifice"

Robert Greenstein, President of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities:

If enacted, [the Boehner budget-cutting proposal] could well produce the greatest increase in poverty and hardship produced by any law in modern U.S. history. Statement.

The Reid and Obama proposals are little better.

Let the children of the wealthy and powerful go fight on the front lines in one of their many wars, and then we will listen when the leaders they sell us talk about "shared sacrifice."

Meantime, as one son of Ulster said while marching to the Somme, "We're not making a sacrifice. Jesus, you've seen this war. We are the sacrifice."

Croak!

Even the Mainstream Types Are Talking About a New Party

[This was written for comments on this post over at Economists View. It didn't run, for whatever reason. So here it is.]

I think a new party could move in on the Democrats from the left, and reduce the Republicans to third party status. The Democratic Party has managed to alienate both women and young people so a new party would have a natural constituency.

Progressives could also pursue electoral and legislative reforms that would make third parties possible: instant runoff or range voting and proportional representation.

I've been writing about this for years, search link 1, search link 2.

Was Murdoch Involved in Climate E-mail Break-in?

It is speculated that Murdoch's Neil Wallis, participated in the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit breakin, and sabotaged the PR job afterwards, much like an arsonist firefighter.

It is known that Wallis, the News International Executive Editor who was in charge of their electronic break-ins was reporting back to News International at the same time he was ostensibly working for Scotland Yard on those break-ins. He was also the person hired by the University of East Anglia to handle PR in their e-mail break-in. Did he do it twice?

Olbermann video: http://current.com/entertainment/movies/93351109_countdown-with-keith-olbermann-07-20-2011-1a-murdoch-and-climate-gate.htm (the Wallis coverage starts at 5:57.)

Olbermann transcript: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/20/996814/-When-MurdochGate-Met-ClimateGate

Discussion by Joe Romm of ThinkProgress: http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/07/19/272361/news-corp-hacked-climategate-emails-time-for-an-independent-investigation/ Croak!

Obama employment crisis croak

In response to Ta-Nehisi Coates post.

This is Obama's employment crisis. He's working really hard for it. Maybe he wants to lose--it makes about as much sense as any other explanation of Administration policy.

Croak!

But, really, I don't think he will. Look at the Republican clown car, er, field.

In Response to Krugman: should Democrats in Congress vote for it?

Krugman, via Economists View post:

Anyway, I don’t believe that it’s all political calculation. Watching Mr. Obama and listening to his recent statements, it’s hard not to get the impression that he is now turning for advice to people who really believe that the deficit, not unemployment, is the top issue facing America..., and who also believe that the great bulk of deficit reduction should come from spending cuts. It’s worth noting that even Republicans weren’t suggesting cuts to Social Security; this is something Mr. Obama and those he listens to apparently want for its own sake.

Which raises the big question: If a debt deal does emerge, and it overwhelmingly reflects conservative priorities and ideology, should Democrats in Congress vote for it?

This birds take is, the House Democrats would be best opposing; let the Senate Democrats do as they wish.

The House Democrats are largely progressive and quickly subject to public outrage. There's no victory for them--let the Republicans take the hit.

The Senate Democrats, on the other hand, are largely conservative. The conservatives won't hurt in the short term from this; let the liberals refuse to participate, and the conservatives form a coalition with the Republicans.

New party, still in the works.

Bipartisanship or, "What Digby Said"

So the stage is set. The conservative Democrats, led by Obama and Reid, will cut a compromise with the Wall Street Republicans, led by Boehner and McConnell. This will include substantial austerity for the lower class and continued support and amnesty for the upper class. Going to be a rocky decade; think 1950s politics combined with 1930s economics. As progressives, we need to turn to the question of how to deal with such a decade with very little support from national elected officials.

The Combined Corvids of North America thank the government of the United States for this rich gift of food.