Navigating the Roller Coaster Ride that is American Politics
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
After watching the Republican Presidential Debate last night on CNN, and then going through all the post-debate analysis and commentary, I will begin by saying that I think Michele Bachmann “won” the debate. My use of quotation marks with the word “won” is intentional – I believe it is far too early to declare a winner in the Republican field of candidates. However, as far as the person who made the best impression to the Republican and conservative electorate, the Congresswoman won – hands down.
The first thing I noticed – and remember I am a liberal - was the intensity of the anti-Obama rhetoric. Yes, I know, it’s the REPUBLICAN debate. These folks want President Obama’s job. However, I felt that more time was spent bashing the President’s policies than describing what they would do differently, and when pressed for specifics, each candidate used broad generalizations to describe what they wanted to do.
Towards the beginning of the debate, there was a lot of attention focused on President Obama’s heath care plan. Bachmann blasted “Obama-Care” and continued to gripe about the $500 Billion in Medicare cuts that would go into effect in 2014. I found that to be amusing since she voted for the Paul Ryan Budget, which essentially does away with Medicare entirely, replacing it with a “voucher” program. However, most conservatives feel that it’s the general tenor of the Health Care plan they object to – being another example of government overreach. I felt that Bachmann and Gov. Mitt Romney were most successful at tapping into that sentiment with their comments.
On the Ryan Budget, I was very surprised about Newt Gingrich’s explanation of the comments that got him in hot water last month. He first said he wouldn’t support the Ryan plan, comparing it to Conservative Ideological overreaching. He clarified – saying while he supports aspects of the Ryan Plan, most Americans do not. He compared it to Obama-Care – the President forcing a policy down the throats of Americans even though most didn’t support it. He suggested that the Republicans either slow down, or do a better job selling their plan to the people.
On the heath care front, I also felt that Gov. Tim Pawlenty missed an opportunity to differentiate himself from Mitt Romney. Political pundits have been saying for months – Pawlenty is the “not Romney” option – being another bright, energetic Governor from a “Blue” state who has conservative values. On Sunday, Pawlenty blasted Romney over his heath care plan for Massachusetts, which the President modeled his own health care plan after. He referred to it as “Obomny-Care.” He appeared to back off of that statement, seeming to go out of his way not to attack Romney over the issue. I think that was a mistake – considering that Romney’s Massachusetts plan is one of his biggest liabilities. Pawlenty had the most to gain from undermining Romney’s leadership ability on that issue, and he failed to do so. Surprisingly, no one attacked Romney on anything!
One of the audience members, identifying himself as a “plain old Republican,” expressed his concerns about the Tea Party and social conservatives pushing out moderates from the conversation. I was impressed by Bachmann’s response. She said that the party needed 3 pillars of support – from the fiscal conservatives to the social conservatives to the peace by strength conservatives. She explained the need for all three branches of the party to come together – respecting everyone’s views – as a path to victory in 2012. Her explanation was specific, to the point, and appeared to ease the concerns of the man who asked the question. She pointed out that, in the end, it would be economic policy that will determine the outcome in 2012, not social issues.
When the debate turned to finance – I had to constrain myself! All of the candidates continued to drum the beat of Tax Cuts in order to solve almost all fiscal problems. Former Senator Rick Santorum suggested a 5 year corporate tax holiday (no companies would have to pay corporate income taxes at all for 5 years) in order to grow the economy. Congressman Ron Paul took it a step further, saying he would like to completely end all monetary policy in the U.S. as well as end all government subsidies for private industry. In this instance, I felt that Governor Pawlenty shone brightest. He adequately explained his new tax plan (making a 3 tiered tax plan capped at 25% for income taxes and a flat 15% rate for corporate taxes and eliminating almost every deduction and incentive) and gave some examples of government functions that were unnecessary and he felt could be eliminated.
I was surprised that Romney largely agreed with Pawlenty’s plan, and didn’t offer any specifics of his own vision for financial policy.
A large amount of time was spent trashing the bailouts of Wall Street and the automotive industry. Herman Cain, the former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza, pledged he would never support a government intervention to bailout any private business or industry – specifically citing his belief that nothing is “too big to fail.” Mitt Romney had a tough time fully explaining his comments regarding letting the auto industry collapse. He tried to say he supported a regular bankruptcy process for the industry, and pointed out that is what eventually happened – though he refused to acknowledge the leverage the U.S. gave to the industry during bankruptcy, instead saying the President Obama bailed out the auto industry by giving it to the Unions.
That led into a 15 minute union-bashing segment which I can’t really explain. I understand the Republican Party’s general disdain for organized labor – but some of the vitriol that came out of the various candidates’ mouths was a bit much. I personally feel that some unions do overreach with their demands of employers, but the extent that the candidates demonized all unions in general – well – I disagreed strongly.
There was an interesting portion of the debate about NASA and U.S. space policy. All of the candidates agreed that the government should have a roll in space exploration, but agreed that the private sector should have fewer regulations in order to accomplish our goals.
Herman Cain spent a lot of time talking about entitlement reform, specifically in regards to Social Security. He supports privatizing the system, but he did not say if he supported raising the retirement age.
All of the candidates had similar views on the social issues of the day. They are all pro life, would keep the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy, and support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
Something that surprised me was the lack of any coherent Foreign Policy specifics going forward. They all universally agreed that President Obama didn’t have a focused foreign policy, but no one had anything specific on how they’d change what was being done now. Bachmann did offer a few specifics in regards to the situation in Libya, but that was about it.
Overall, I believe Michele Bachmann performed best overall. Mitt Romney didn’t offer anything new to the discussion, but may have helped mitigate some of the questions around his health care policy. Herman Cain didn’t do as well as he did in the last debate – he didn’t offer many specifics, other than his entitlement reforms. Rick Santorum and Ron Paul will not be the nominee, and neither offered anything new to the debate. Neither did Newt Gingrich, though he may have quelled some of the nervousness over his position on the Ryan Budget. The loser, in my view, was Tim Pawlenty. He missed a golden opportunity to undercut Romney’s positions and he opted not to. It seems he may not have the political chops to take Romney on.
I disagreed with about 75% of what the candidates said. However, my biggest take from this debate: The substance is there. Those who say this is a weak field of candidates better take a closer look.
People from all sides are now calling on Congressman Weiner to resign. It’s being said that his behavior is unbecoming of a member of the U.S. House of Representatives. It’s being said that since he initially lied about the scandal, he can no longer be trusted. Democrats are getting rid of campaign contributions associated with Weiner, saying the scandal has made the money ‘tainted.’ There is more than likely going to be a House Ethics Investigation into the matter.
I think Congressman Weiner shouldn’t have to resign over this, and there are plenty of examples why I believe this. First and foremost: David Vitter.
Senator David Vitter (R-LA) was caught up in 2 separate sex scandals back in 2007. The most well known scandal involved Vitter's phone number being included in a published list of phone records of Pamela Martin and Associates, a high end escort service owned and run by Deborah Jeane Palfrey, also known as the "D.C. Madam". The lesser known scandal happened days later when Jeanette Maier, the "Canal Street Madam", alleged that Vitter was a customer on more than one occasion in the 1990s, when Maier was identified by federal prosecutors as operating a $300 per hour brothel.
It should be noted that David Vitter got into national politics in the first place because his predecessor in the House of Representatives, Bob Livingston, had to resign due to an adultery scandal.
Despite the fact that David Vitter admitted to hiring prostitutes, he still currently serves in the U.S. Senate. Republican lawmakers did not call out for his resignation. He wasn’t even censured by the Senate. And, no criminal charges were brought against him.
I believe the reason Senator Vitter was left alone has everything to do with politics and nothing to do with morality. Had Senator Vitter resigned or been kicked out after this scandal broke, the Governor of Louisiana would’ve been able to appoint a replacement for him until a special election could be held. At the time, Kathleen Blanco, a Democrat, was Governor, and would almost certainly have appointed a Democrat to the Senate seat, adding on to the Democrats’ recently attained Senate majority after the 2006 elections.
There have been many sex scandals that have rocked politicians of both sides of the political spectrum, though it seems Republicans get caught up in these things more often.
Former Congressmen Mark Foley (R-FL) was caught sending sexually explicit text messages to underage male Congressional Pages. Former Governor Elliot Spitzer (D-NY) was caught up in the same D.C. Madame scandal that got Senator Vitter. Former Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) got caught soliciting sex from an undercover cop in a bathroom at the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport. Former Senator John Ensign (R-NV) admitted to an affair with the wife of one of his campaign staffers, which lead to a much larger lobbying and financial scandal.
To me, I find it hypocritical of Republican lawmakers to be calling for Congressman Weiner’s resignation when they don’t hold the same standards for their own members. I believe, as long as David Vitter is still in Congress, Anthony Weiner should be as well. David Vitter admitted to breaking the law. Congressman Weiner, though his behavior is disturbing, has not broken the law. If we look at these two cases in terms of how extreme the behavior is – Vitter hired prostitutes and Weiner sent dirty pictures of himself – I think Vitter should be in jail and Weiner should have his Twitter account taken away!
I know that recently, former Congressman Christopher Lee (R-NY) immediately resigned when it was discovered he had sent shirtless pictures of himself to women via Craigslist. Republicans called for him to step down, and he did. However, some political pundits have suggested that Lee’s seat was in a “safe” Republican district and would have little to no effect on the balance of power in Congress if he were to resign. Also, the Republicans were rolling out the Ryan Budget Plan to the nation, and wanted to keep the news cycle focused on that.
As it turned out, Democrat Kathy Hochul won the seat in a special election. Many conservative political blogs are now wondering if it was a good idea to have Congressman Lee step down.
Hypocrisy is something I cannot stand for in anyone – myself included. When a Democratic lawmaker does something wrong, the party generally will call for that person’s resignation. There was no such outcry for President Clinton, which, again, I think had more to do with politics than morality, which I find deplorable. But, overall, the Democrats have been fairly consistent with calling for lawmakers of their party to step down when they get caught up in scandal.
Republicans, on the other hand, seem to more fiercely protect their scandal-plagued members unless criminal charges are inevitable. During the Vitter scandal, the Republicans “prayed” for Vitter, and touted “forgiveness” as a wonderful virtue. Rush Limbaugh initially blamed the Larry Craig scandal on a vast “Left-wing Conspiracy” created to discredit a “true American Patriot.”
And, don’t get me started on the “Family Values” hypocrisy of these guys! Vitter, Ensign, Craig, and Foley – they all touted their strong “Family Values” as a virtue of theirs. They were morally superior and pure, therefore perfectly suited to represent you in Congress. What their constituents ended up getting was a Prostitute Lover, an Adulterer, a Bathroom Cruiser, and a Pedophile. Some Family Values!
Anthony Weiner has done something incredibly stupid. It’s a shame that his family will go through this. It had seemed that, despite his unintentionally humorous last name, he was taken seriously as a lawmaker. He became a champion of liberal causes, and became a darling of the more progressive side of the Democratic Party. Now, that is gone, and it will take a lot of work to get it back.
But, for now, make fun of him. Make all the Weiner jokes you want. Circulate the lewd photos all across the internet. He deserves it for making such a dumb mistake. But, he should be allowed to keep his job. The rest of this is between him, his constituents, his wife, and his twitter followers.
I love politics! I really, Really, LOVE politics! The same way a sports fan yells and screams at the TV during a game is how I behave watching politics. C-SPAN makes me hot! My idea of fun is reading exit polls and census data. Statistics are my foreplay! Though I would describe myself being slightly left of center as far as my political views, the fact is that I am black, gay, and a Unitarian. LIBERAL!!!
I don't mind the moniker - I feel that liberals have done a great deal of wonderful things for this country. Liberals championed Civil Rights, gave women the right to vote, freed the slaves (yes, I think Abraham Lincoln was a liberal) - all things I feel have made this country stronger!
HOWEVER, I am not the sort of Liberal who only drinks the Democrats' Kool-Aid. I am a free-thinker; an Independent of sorts - someone who does NOT walk in lock-step with the Democratic Party. I have voted for Republicans and Independents before (as well as a Reform Party guy and a few Green Party candidates - I live in Minnesota). President Obama did not automatically get my vote - nor is he guaranteed it in 2012.
I believe in a Government that works effectively, and efficiently. The Republicans are fond of saying we should only have as much Government as we can afford. I amend that to only having as much Government as we NEED. Granted, everyone differs on what is "needed" as far as the Government is concerned, but I think that is the debate we should be having.
My goal with this blog is to examine the issues of the day and try to find some common sense solutions to them. I may be a Liberal, but I believe taxes in this country are too complicated and too high – especially for businesses. I also believe that there are far too many loopholes and tax breaks for people and businesses that don’t need them. I support Health Care Reform, but I also think the Health Care companies needs to be allowed to compete nationwide – in order to spread the risk amongst a larger group of people. I think my ability to objectively consider all sides of an issue will be helpful for people who are sick and tired of the talking points being offered up by “Inside the Beltway” pundits and politicians.
No subject will be off the table. I will talk about current events, specific politicians, policies, and proposals. I’ll post links to interesting political stories and write quick op-eds about them. I’ll take suggestions – if, say, there’s a political story you've seen that you don’t understand or want my opinion on, send me a link and I’ll talk about it. I will also post essays about various political philosophies from any source that I think is worth mentioning, including any that I may write.
I will try posting at least one original post per week, plus links and quick nuggets of interesting political news. We’ll see if it works, and then we’ll go from there.
Thanks for following me!
