Doesn’t This Seem Familiar?

There was a noteworthy exchange between ABC’s Jake Tapper and White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs:

TAPPER: The president wants this (stimulus) package to be bipartisan and he wants it to be stimulative. But when it passed out of the House Appropriations Committee on Wednesday, not one Republican voted for it. And there are lots of elements of this bill that economists say are not stimulative. There’s $726 million for after-school snacks, $50 million for the NEA, $44 million to repair the USDA, and $200 million to work on the National Mall, including grass. Does President Obama think that what passed under the House Appropriations Committee on Wednesday was bipartisan and was stimulative?
GIBBS: There’s no question that the president believes that the bill is stimulative. Our analysis of the legislation right now is that 75 percent of this money will be spent in the next 18 months to create jobs and to get people working and to get the economy moving again. Absolutely, it’s stimulative. It puts money back in people’s pockets that we believe they’ll spend and help the economy. Look, I don’t want to get into this or that vote count in certain committees. This is a — as I said, this process is long and one that will wind through many curves. The president looks forward to working with members of Congress from both parties to ensure that it happens.

But Gibbs really didn’t respond to the nub of the question: Does President Obama want the larded-up, Democrat constructed stimulus bill or does he want a bipartisan bill? Gibbs won’t admit to the junk that is in the bill, but it seems clear the President at this stage isn’t making any effort to slow down the Pelosi steam train. All of the high-minded happy talk — about not allowing spending for the sake of spending, insisting on substantial infrastructure relief and enforcing the rule that spending needs to meet short and long term goals — is pretty much out the window. And, with it, much hope of a truly bipartisan deal.

0
Shares
Google+ Print

Doesn’t This Seem Familiar?

Must-Reads from Magazine

Trump Quietly Gives Putin What He Wants

Quid pro quo?

Until now, the notion that Donald Trump was providing Russia and Vladimir Putin with concessions at the expense of U.S. interests was poorly supported. That all changed on Wednesday afternoon when the Washington Post revealed that Donald Trump ordered his national security advisor and CIA director to scrap a program that provided covert aid to anti-Assad rebels in Syria.

27
Shares
Google+ Print

Voters in the Age of Affect

Is it Trump's posture, or is it simpler than that?

Though it enjoys a level of political dominance unseen since the 1920s, the Republican Party’s agenda is stalled. Yet, despite their failure to repeal and replace ObamaCare, Republicans are damned like Sisyphus to keep trying. Republican office holders must now administer health care’s taxes and subsidies, and the rest of the GOP agenda cannot advance without freeing up the revenue dedicated to the administration of ObamaCare. A dysfunctional, one-party Congress led by an unpopular neophyte in the Oval Office should precipitate a backlash among voters. But that outcome is far from certain. Ubiquitous surveys and studies dedicated to uncovering the mystery that is the curious and contradictory Trump voter suggests that this may indeed be a new political epoch.

11
Shares
Google+ Print

Iran’s Newest Hostage is Different

An escalation.

On July 16, 2017, Iranian Judiciary spokesman Gholamhosein Mohseni Ejehi announced that Iran had sentenced an American to ten years in prison for alleged espionage. An Iranian judiciary website subsequently identified the American as 37-year-old, China-born Xiyue Wang, a Princeton University Ph.D. student in history.

18
Shares
Google+ Print

Trump’s Naïveté on Display in Syria

The hen house is secured.

Eric Edelman–a former undersecretary of defense in the Bush administration, an aide to Vice President Cheney, and one of the most respected foreign policy hands in Washington–wrote that the July 7 meeting in Hamburg between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin was the most disastrous superpower summit since John F. Kennedy met Nikita Khrushchev in 1961. That Cold War-era summit emboldened the Soviets to put up the Berlin Wall and send missiles to Cuba, thus bringing the world to the brink of nuclear war. It’s a harsh judgment, but its essential accuracy is being confirmed by what we have learned since July 7.

39
Shares
Google+ Print

The ‘Intersectionality’ Trap

No more Sister Souljah moments.

Republicans didn’t always scoff dismissively at the self-destructive, reactionary, fractious collection of malcontents who call themselves The Resistance. The hundreds of thousands who marched in the streets following Donald Trump’s election once honestly unnerved the GOP. This grassroots energy culminated in January’s Women’s March, a multi-day event in which nearly two million people mobilized peacefully and, most importantly, sympathetically in opposition to the president. It was the perfect antidote to the violent anti-Trump demonstrations that typified Inauguration Day, and it might have formed the nucleus of a politically potent movement. The fall of the Women’s March exposes the blight weakening the left and crippling the Democratic Party.

79
Shares
Google+ Print