Archive for July 6th, 2010

Stephanie makes it hard for anyone to say she’s liberal without having it be laughable. She also makes it hard for liberals to understand what she is doing.

Blue Dog Democrats have been a strong part of the Republicans’ opposition to any legislation Obama was elected to pass. Stephanie voted against health care reform, for instance (though that apparently doesn’t matter to my fellow blogger because she isn’t farther right than most Republicans). The new thing she and Republicans are on about is reducing the deficit.

What is incredibly disconcerting for people with a heart is that reducing the deficit is more important to many on the Hill than making sure those that have lost their jobs aren’t without help. They continue to hold up legislation to help the millions of unemployed. As Alex Pereene notes, this is a new type of Democrat. The old rifts were easier to understand. As Alex puts it:

Throughout the entire post-New Deal era there have been massive divisions in the Democratic coalition, but they usually break down more like “people who think we shouldn’t let Americans starve on the streets vs. people who agree with that but hate black people” or “people who understand that a strong social safety net is vital for the health of the entire nation vs. people who agree with that but who also want to nuke commies.” This new brand of Democrat, I am unfamiliar with.

The important part of being a Democrat was concern for the well being of people. Republicans talk about bootstraps and sink or swim while Democrats realize our system will always leave some at the bottom and those people deserve help. There were the divisions of Democrats that had less-than-savory beliefs, such as Dixiecrats, who eventually became Republicans. But the overall concern has been and should be about the people. But this new group apparently cares more about the deficit, which makes them hard to understand.

This is in the face of economists, including Congressional Budget Office Director Doug Elmendorf, who say benefits for the jobless are one of the best means of stimulating the economy. Elmendorf specifically says that cutting the deficit while economic activity and employment remain low will slow economic recovery. Again, he’s the director of the CBO, which all those people on the Hill look to to gauge what impact legislation will have.

What a great time to take a stand! Let’s screw over the unemployed while also slowing our economy’s recovery! Brilliant!

Anyone moron who insists Herseth-Sandlin simply follows Pelosi’s lead is willfully ignorant. She’s pretty muchdeclared war on Pelosi. Worse than that, she’s more or less declaring war on what we should stand for.

But those struggling to make payments and feed their families can be comforted by the fact that they and our economy will be worse off in service of cutting the deficit.

Enjoy ads painting Stephanie as a liberal.

Adam Feser