Rereading our own Josh Green's excellent 2009 profile of Chuck Schumer, I'm struck again by the phenomenal miscalculations--I'm tempted to say arrogance--of the Democratic Party. They really believed that the 2008 election had given them an enormous mandate to do nearly anything they wanted. They believed that a huge stimulus bill filled with Democratic pet projects would gain them political capital, rather than cost it. They misled themselves on the effects of Obamacare--both political and economic--as the Official Asymmetrical Information Spouse points out in a new column.
Fair enough if you're an activist who doesn't care about whether Democrats lose office, as long as you get some major programs passed that are hard to undo. But Democrats seem to have genuinely believed themselves that winning the election meant that voters wanted what they wanted, at least along major dimensions. Those of us who protested that they were passing these bills against substantial political opposition were told, "Elections have consequences."
Well, it will be interesting to see if elections still have consequences when Republicans win them. I am in no way enthusiastic about having Republicans back in office; the current platform of extending the Bush tax cuts and . . . um . . . well . . . er . . . seems beyond childish to me. But I can't say I'll be sorry to see Democrats leave. It's healthy for parties who overinterpret their mandates to be badly chastened.
Yeah, there'll be consequences, just like the consequences we're suffering through now. But McArdle's lack of class is old news. This is the interesting part:
Every Man A King
Most of ObamaCare don't go into effect until 2014. So no one, except the clueless, was arguing about immediate effects. Second, why should we trust your hubby? He's paid by, among others, the Koch Brothers.
McMegan
And Matt Yglesias is paid by, among others, George Soros; and . . . well, it turns out that virtually everyone is paid by someone.
The facts he cites are empirical claims; if you think they're wrong, why don't you show us why?
Why bother? Especially since one would be arguing about a health care bill that the insurance companies wanted. And hey, everyone is paid by someone, so it doesn't matter in the slightest that oil companies are paying Reason to advocate for deregulation and against climate change, or that Merrill Lynch pays The Atlantic for access to Megan McArdle.
9 comments:
Eva Heller wrote a very funny book - With the Next Man, Everything will be Different
http://www.amazon.com/Next-Man-Everything-Will-Different/dp/0394578341
which has a minor character who, upon getting married, can't go 30 seconds without mentioning her mann.
In case you want to read something better than McArdle.
I've been trying to catch up on teen literature, which means I've been reading lots of books about girls who almost have sex with vampires. Sparkly vampires. Basketball-playing vampires. Half-vampires.
It makes me miss the teen stories about family dysfunction and alienation from my youth.
...And Matt Yglesias is paid by, among others, George Soros...
Did she give any links to evidence that Soros really does pay ONE liberal blogger? Does she explain how Soros benefits by paying Yglesias, and show how it can be compared to how the Koch Bros. benefit from spending mega-millions on wingnut blowhards and excusers?
No, of course not, even if there WERE such evidence, which I doubt.
God what a boring, ill and mis-informed comment section she has.
They really believed that the 2008 election had given them an enormous mandate to do nearly anything they wanted.
Yeah, unlike Bush and the Republicans in 2000.
It's funny how she left that part out of it. Liberals said "mandate!" because conservatives said mandate. Now the liberals are supposed to get a spanking to teach them a lesson about arrogance?
Also, she insists that the health care bill was unpopular when Nate Silver showed that it wasn't, as long as people knew the facts. Which she did her best to prevent.
So much dishonesty. It's no way to live.
She may not even realize her uselessness. Latest evidence is sticking her nose in at Brad DeLongs to support some stupidity about present value, & getting it bit off.
I just saw that and made a note of it. I blog-google McArdle's name often, of course, and I've seen a little uptick in criticism lately.
W.T.F?
What is in the resume of a JD who failed the bar exam that qualified Harold Ford Jr to be executive vice chairman of BofA?
Post a Comment