Over the years, I have developed relationships with elected and appointed people on both sides of the aisle. We have regular email exchanges about the topics of the day. The following comes to me from a high ranking GOP staffer in Congress. I have no ideas whether this represents anything more than a minority viewpoint amongst the GOP, but I found it noteworthy and received permission to share it.

The only editing I did was to change a few details to protect the sender’s identity.

~~~

Just got back from vacation, with Congress on an extended recess, and getting ready to go out again for elections. After that, nothing gets done in lame duck. Bet on Congress doing something to avoid the fiscal cliff, but not until doing everything possible to screw it up.

Romney looks like he’s toast. Which means four more years of more or less the same crap we’ve seen. Great for big banks–Michael Lewis has a piece out where he talks about how no one realizes just how good Obama (and he really means Geithner) were to Wall Street. Did you ever read that Lawrence Baxter piece I sent you? You should. Terrible title, but goes into detail on Obama doubling down on even bigger banks. Betting Big: Value, Caution and Accountability in an Era of Large Banks and Complex Finance,” 31 Rev. Banking & Fin. L. XXX (Oct. 2012))

Republicans are up in arms about QE whatever. The big complaint seems to be that it may actually make things better. Funny part is imagining what Romney would want if he were president; surely he wouldn’t want the Fed choking off his recovery by tightening up. (Bit that no one picked up on: Hubbard talking about how great a job Bernanke had done and was doing, only to have Romney turn around a week later and say no way would he reappoint Bernanke as Fed chairman. Either the campaign is clueless and disorganized, or Romney really will say anything to be president.)

Some articles today talked about how Wall Street was starting to have second thoughts about a candidate who wants to turn off the spigot; a couple of weeks ago, the FT has a column on how Wall Street should be careful about wanting a Republican victory, because that means that the “break up the bank” types like Hoenig will have even more influence. Hard to figure out what’s what: Big GOP talking point is “Dodd-Frank did not end TBTF,” but then being absolutely schizophrenic on the issue of whether big banks are a good thing and whether the American economy needs big banks. Marx was wrong: capitalism will not collapse under the weight of its internal contradictions; The GOP, on the other hand . . .

The new Congress is going to have quite a shuffle of Chairman. You should pay attention to Jeb Hensarling, a Phil Gramm protege. He is likely to be running the House Financial Services committee, which ibviosuly impacts what you do. Hensarling’s really, really smart, charismatic, organized, and has a coherent view of the world.

Like Gramm, it’s a world view that turns out to be wrong–but at least it’s consistent . . .

Strip out my name and change a few details, and you can publish this. No one here reads anything other than Drudge and Breitbart, so I can sleep at night. All I ask is that you fix my grammar.

~~~

PS: I had forgotten about this. Four years later, it still makes me laugh. My party needs to stop taking advice from idiots.

Big Picture Conference looks good. I wish I liked Barofsky more; unfortunately, he seems more and more like a relentlessly self-promotional hack, and a shrill one at that. Patterson is awesome. His book should be getting a lot more press than it has; scared the hell out of me.

Category: Politics

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

59 Responses to “GOP Sours on Romney”

  1. VennData says:

    During Clinton’s spectacular run, the GOP did everything they could to say it was Greenspan, The Maestro, who was the real magic behind the American economy. They replace him with Bernanke, and only after a Democrat takes office does the GOP turn Bernanke into a bad guy.What do the GOP want? Higher interest rates? Please
    The “Fiscal Cliff” is austerity, Greek style austerity, is that what they want?
    Bush destroyed the value of the dollar, this blog pointed that out to anyone who would listen. The partisans kept on laughing about the Treasury’s Strong Dollar policy under Obama, but Obama reallyhas had a strong dollar policy, so laughing about it is stupid. Does the GOP want to go back to a declining dollar like they did under Bush? Do they want a rising dollar? Oh yeah, their manufacturing lobbyists would love that. What do they want? What does the GOP want?
    Oh… I know… tax cuts for the rich…. even more of them… that will solve everything, just like Bush’s temporary tax cuts for the rich did… just like Reagan’s temporary tax cuts for the rich did.
    The GOP is a joke.

  2. Singmaster says:

    Please post a link to the Lawrence Baxter piece.

    ~~~

    BR: Done

  3. mathdock says:

    I trust you when you say your source represents a faction of unknown size. You suppose he was pro-Romney before? I notice he thinks we’ll have four more years of “more or less the same crap”…he may be right about Romney losing. My vote for Romney is in hopes to get Obama out, so I have no ideological in this fight. But to conclude we have four more years of the same? Do you think it lasts four more years?

    When Ben pulled the QE lever, he flushed the toilet. All the Central Bankers will keep going now in order to maintain the illusion they’re holding level with each other until we all hit the water trap. Does there exist a mechanism to stop this flush? No one suggests that there is one, not even Doc Krugman, who thinks Ben still hasn’t flushed hard enough. Does this mean we now have a Bernanke call?

    Does Ben intend to buy “enough” of the loans not marked to market on the banks’ books until “enough” is cleared out and then stop? Just how many loans need to clear?

    Finally, Looks like you had fun with Luskin four years ago. I hope someday you don’t have to say “Whoops” like he did…Must say, though, that the article was a piece of work.

  4. Glen says:

    “from a high ranking GOP staffer in Congress…”

    Romney looks like he’s toast. Which means four more years of more or less the same crap we’ve seen. Great for big banks–Michael Lewis has a piece out where he talks about how no one realizes just how good Obama (and he really means Geithner) were to Wall Street. (Did you ever read that Lawrence Baxter piece I sent you? You should. Terrible title, but goes into detail on Obama doubling down on even bigger banks.)

    See, what shocks me most about this post is that MAYBE a glimmer of recognition in BOTH mainstream political parties that what’s good for the big banks is not good for the country. This does put the Republicans and Romney in a box. They would win if they came out full populist and campaigned hard against the Wall St banksters, but that represent the people that CONTROL their party (control both parties in reality) and besides Romney IS a Wall St bankster, so how can they do that?

    So Obama wins, but this is still a huge win for the banksters, and a huge loss for the people.

  5. JerrodN says:

    The author does seem discouraged about the prospects for Romney, but to the title his comments “GOP sours on Romney” seem more reflective of BR’s own bias.

    ~~~

    BR: If you knew who this person is and his title you would understand. I have been as harsh on Obama as I have on Romney.

  6. JimRino says:

    Let’s be honest, this guy is a SANE Republican, therefore, he’s really a Democrat.
    He’s even giving you the warning about the insanity that could happen if they get elected.

    There is only one choice for an American that can progress Economically and Environmentally, you must throw out all house republicans. They predicted these last 3 years would be cooling, they are not. The ice caps have never been thinner, the tipping point was 1980, when global glaciers started to melt. We need ACTION NOW.

    Romney represents more US Tax Dollars to Corporations to SEND their Jobs Overseas. The US Tax Payer, under Republicans cutting their own throats, helping Corporations Outsource. This is INSANE Policy.
    It must stop.

  7. “Sours” implies that the sweetness has turned, he’s been a lemon since jump.

  8. PeterR says:

    To quote from the first sentence of the quoted material:

    “Just got back form vacation, . . . ”

    Barry, could you tell us whether the typo ["form" instead of "from"] was in the GOP staffer’s original, as sent to you? A minor point, perhaps, but I stopped reading carefully after this typo.

    PS — And Romney IS an idiot, and probably toast.

    ~~~

    BR: That was my editing removing some specifics that might identify the author — I’ll fix above.

  9. jeff in indy says:

    “Let’s be honest, this guy is a SANE Republican, therefore, he’s really a Democrat.”

    therefore, there’s no real difference between them; hence, why do we bother?

  10. Jack Damn says:

    It’s all the same party anyway…one snake, two heads.

    Would a Republican have done anything different in these past four years? Aside from healthcare, nothing would have been different. GM and the banks would have still been bailed out. McCain would have bailed out GM. All of them would have. Don’t kid yourself.

    QE1-3 would have still come to pass as well under a Republican. The side show issues, abortion, healthcare, etc., are there to keep the ignorant distracted, the “printing presses rolling”, and the power consolidated.

    It’s all one party. One snake, two heads.

  11. Jojo says:

    I suggested a number of times prior to the Republican convention that they consider dumping Romney and drafting someone, [almost] anyone else. That Romney was a loser from the get-go.

    The new season of SNL last night deliver quite the skewering of Romney. And the portrayal of a truly lame Obama whose whole campaign message is “I’m not Romney” was dead on. It’s also nice that they are letting the black guy play the black president this year. :)

  12. James Cameron says:

    > Romney looks like he’s toast. Which means four more years of more or less the same crap we’ve seen.

    It’s no accident that Obama is on the verge of being the first incumbent to win a presidential election since FDR with unemployment over 7.2% – forget 8.1%. Romney’s a loose cannon with policy proposals – and advisers – straight out of the last administration. Whatever the current administration’s weaknesses, and it certainly has them, these are not comparable regimes.

    And regarding the remark above that healthcare is a sideshow . . . it’s not if you don’t have insurance, or if you have an illness and can’t afford adequate coverage. That’s reality for a significant portion of the US population.

  13. rd says:

    The House Republicans are for regulation before (or is it after?) they were against it.

    http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h2069/show

    Apparently, Building Codes (regulation of the design and construction industry) are good for preventing damage from natural disasters but regulation of the finance system is ineffective at preventing financial disasters.

    It is these types of of internal inconsistencies within the current Republican Party that severely undermines their credibility.

    I happen to think that both Building Codes and strong financial regulation are effective at reducing damage during their respective events.

  14. b_thunder says:

    Perhaps, as paradoxically as it may sound, in order to end the TBTFs and to end the subsidies to the Wall St we do need to elect a “pro business conservative” who won’t be able to easily back out of his campaign promises.

    Perhaps chocking off TBTFs by stopping trillions of zero-interest cash from the Fed is the best thing that can happen to the thousands of small banks?

    Or perhaps rather than having a 30-year stagnation like Japan (except that without japan-like exports we’d never last as long as Japan, we’d become a 4th world country well within 1st 20 years), instead we’d have a 80% stock market drop, a bankruptcy for Lloyd Blankfein’s operation (and a dozen others) and then a quick recovery?

    And wouldn’t it be fun if Romney implements a tax reform where he cuts taxes and reduces deductions, such as interest deductions (the very thing that makes PE business model work and what made Romney so wealthy ) and by doing so forces most PE firms out of business?

    Am I daydreaming? Yes, but after having GWBush in office for 8 years, and after seeing how the “kenyan-born Marxist” has treated the Wall Street, I know that anything can happen.

  15. JohnDay says:

    That Mitt Romney is “TOAST” has been obvious for a while now following a disastrous RNC Convention in which almost all of Romney’s hand-picked “keynote” speakers hardly mentioned his name in their self-promotions. As one “pundit” very well put it after Bill Clinton’s moving speech endorsing Obama at the DNC Convention,…… “Democrats should simply send everyone home…Obama will be re-elected” !

    In brief, as the Writer of the above missive might have insinuated, the election in November will not be about Americans “loving” Obama; but rather about most Americans’ rejecting Romney’s “impulsively-mean-spirited character” and his flip-flops on issues – not to mention his “less than candid” disclosures concerning his Tax Returns – which have dis-qualified this Guy to hold the Highest Office in the Land !

    That Barrack Obama has not quite delivered on his lofty promises and that he is not among the most competent Presidents this country has known (e.g., the “brilliant” Bill Clinton) is no secret. But most Americans are willing to put their trust in a “well-intentioned” Obama who “struggled like them” – than in a mean-spirited Rich Guy whose real intentions once in office would be to protect “People like Him” !

    This isn’t to say that Americans are satisfied with Obama’s performance so far. Far from it. Nowhere is Obama’s management ineffectiveness laid more bare than in his “hanging on” to Tim Geithner as his Treasury Secretary for 4 years when a decisive leader such as George Bush would have fired this guy.

    Let’s face it, Obama’s Priority#1 once in office was to deliver jobs – especially after he was handed a “huge gift” by voters, i.e., control of both Houses of Congress and a $800 Billion stimulus-check.

    A more effective leader would have made sure that to execute on this Priority#1 he had to have the right “Chief Economic Officer” by his side, i.e., a qualified and competent Treasury Secretary.

    Instead of appointing a more experienced person such as Larry Summers (i.e., Clinton’s ex-Treasury Secretary), Obama – in his usual indecision and timidity – instead caved to pressure from “feminists” led by Valerie Jarrett to select Tim Geithner instead. Later, fearing a tough confirmation-fight with hostile Republicans in Congress, Obama lacked the courage to fire Geithner even after the latter proved his ineffectiveness to help stimulate the economy and create jobs. (Ben Bernacke has proved to be more effective than a “do-nothing” Geithner who’s now preparing his Resume for a “big job” on Wall Street).

    Geithner taking advantage of Obama’s ignorance & naivete on complex economic matters, played on his “pseudo-loyalty” to Obama to push Geithner’s one & only agenda as Treasury Secretary:

    Protecting the interests of Wall Street and Big Banks ! !

  16. gyma says:

    Which book was this person referring to in the P.S.?

    ~~~

    BR: Dark Pools.

  17. ToNYC says:

    It’s no accident that Obama is on the verge of being the first incumbent to win a presidential election since FDR with unemployment over 7.2% – forget 8.1%.

    The Fed did fail fail on the dual mandate and QE to the nth proves the 1/x horizontal asymptote.
    The relative numeric is without useful current meaning in this ZIRP / savers disconnection environment. The survivors will make their own job-free cash as usual in such a crisis of confidence.

    Beyond that Citizens United has provided the template to prove that the Corporation is a Sociopathic entity since it has essential non-human embodiment and RoboMoney is that manifesting Corporomorph candidate. To say that corporations have inalienable rights is OK to say, but corrupted humans will say anything after being moneyboarded.
    Most people I care about don’t wish to be governed by a sociopath who delights in the joy of firing those who provide him services. Imagine what would befall the Robomoney’s if they couldn’t play one human volunteer against another so he could collect it in switzerland (tax amnesty observer noted on line x of 200x tax return?) or the caymans where sailing boats float under many obscure names? If you play with such a character, you know for sure he’ll take all the loose change and put it where all but his current corpirates can watch over it. He will delight in firing by court US marshalls those copirates who provide such oversight as well. Vote for the human when you can find one that’s even close.
    The math is done and quite easy this time.

  18. george lomost says:

    I still say that Romney is just slightly less liberal than Obama and in the unlikely event that he gets elected the deficits will continue to balloon and the banksters will continue to run amok. The only reason Romney is the GOP candidate is that all the rest are either psychotic (Bachman, Palin, Santorum) or ethically and morally bankrupt (Gingrich, Trump).

    If the bizarre off-the-cuff remarks that Romney has been making lately are any indication, the Presidential Debates will turn him into a McGovern-type loser. (Anyone remember how quickly McGovern spiraled down into oblivion in the waning days of that presidential campaign?)

  19. simoncz says:

    Who is this Patterson he mentions? What’s the book title? Please.

    ~~~

    BR: Its a reference to Scott Patterson, who is speaking at the Big Picture Conference. H s two books are The Quants and Dark Pools.

  20. jefcox says:

    Gary Johnson just to vote none of the above? Plus he actually might change things.

  21. Jojo says:

    Robert Reich
    Why Romney and Ryan are Going Down
    Sunday, September 16, 2012

    Unemployment is still above 8 percent, job gains aren’t even keeping up with population growth, the economy is barely moving forward. And yet, according to most polls, the Romney-Ryan ticket is falling further and further behind. How can this be?

    Because Republicans are failing the central test of electability. Instead of putting together the largest possible coalition of voters, they’re relying largely on one slice of America — middle-aged white men — and alienating just about everyone else.

    Romney, Ryan, and the GOP don’t seem to know how to satisfy their middle-aged white male base without at the same time turning off everyone who’s not white, male, straight, or middle-aged. Unfortunately for Romney and Ryan, the people they’re turning off are the majority.

    http://robertreich.org/post/31668931701

  22. [...] GOP Sours on Romney { 0 comments }   [...]

  23. slowkarma says:

    At about the middle of last week (I wasn’t paying that much attention) the Rasmussen tracking poll showed Romney leading. Rasmussen is a Republican, but not a hack — his polls have been fairly reliable. Just sayin’.

    ~~~

    BR: I rely on 2 polls: 1) Real Clear Politics All Polls & Nate Silver’s 538. The first is a composite of ALL the polls, and the other is the most accurate pollster the past few elections.

    Real Clear Politics (owned by right leaning Forbes) has Rasmussen as the outlier at +1 for Romney. The RCP Average is Obama +3.1, with the rest of the 10 polls range from +1 to +6 Obama; Even FOX News is Obama +5

    Your bias is showing.

  24. As your northern neighbour, my polling experience runs closely to the premise that voters almost never vote in new Parties, but rather they usually vote out governing parties which have fallen from favour.

    Today’s update of my Race-for-the-White-House projection says Obama will hold the electoral college votes lead on Nov 6th. Voters still give Obama more pluses than negatives even if they aren’t completely satisfied with his record and the view of the future.

    The GOP has less than seven weeks to change this attitude and win the Senate & White House. They have to focus on Obama and the Democrats’ dropping the ball. The facts and issues are there, but they haven’t been able to articulate the message.

    The USA is on a trajectory to get a “B” sovereign debt rating within 8-12 years. 518 thousand have left the labour force this Summer. The economy is in the worst shape since early 2009: Q3 GDP is a mere 0.1% pace. Until six months ago we heard the nauseating double-dip rhetoric almost daily. Now that it’s actually true … the media is silent – an obvious effort to protect “the chosen one”.

    Romney attacks Bernanke to appease the Paul camp, but offers no alternative strategy for the FOMC. So even if Obama stumbles, the GOP & Romney are failing to present themselves as a Govt-in-waiting.

  25. BITFU Search Engine says:

    I bet it was Invictus that sent that post.

    ~~~

    BR: When I write that it was sent in by a GOP staffer, IT WAS SENT IN BY A GOP STAFFER

  26. Joe says:

    DAMN!!!! This is depressing. I guess part of it is that I’m retiring at the end of the year and entering the h0me stretch. And that gives me the long perspective and some history to achieve some realizations; That with the Vietnam war aside, Johnson looked damn good otherwise to someone who equated him mostly with the war back then. And with the self absorptive, self destructive personality flaws aside, that Nixon’s policies look pretty reasonable compared to today’s Republican party. That Carter was the wrong man for the wrong time despite being a Democrat running against Reagan. Who was an idiot and a fussy little old lady, but still stands tall for his ability to govern with the Demos compared to today’s Republican uncompromising politicians. And so on and on. Until this last election.

    As a life long Democrat, as much as I disliked the Republican party party and what it stood for, a Republican administration and/or congress was something you could stand until the pendulum swung the other way. You might not like it, but you could survive it and thrive. This buncha clowns driving the party to the extreme social right would gag a maggot.

    Can’t I have a coupla three two term presidents and congresses of WHATEVER party who have their heads mostly screwed on straight? That can actually work together sensibly? So my kids can just show up, do their jobs, and have a chance at as much better a life than their old man had than he had than his parents?

  27. gman says:

    “Would a Republican have done anything different in these past four years? Aside from healthcare, nothing would have been different. GM and the banks would have still been bailed out. McCain would have bailed out GM. All of them would have. Don’t kid yourself.”

    As Romney REASSEMBLES Bush jr. foreign policy team? You must be kidding me! The odds of an all out war against Iran would go up massively under Romney. Any pretense of fiscal sanity must be thrown out the window.
    Eliminate the cap. gains tax and ramp up the odds of a slide into a 20T war in Iran? Despite the wrong headed and hypocritical rhetoric that party exhibits toward Keynes …that cocktail may just work in jump starting the global economy :o)

  28. Joe says:

    A buddy swears that Ryan is Cheney’s secret son. Makes ya think…..

  29. louis says:

    Just like they got sick of McCain? They are ready for 2016, Christie for the medicine, Rubio for the votes.

    Order of finish?

  30. Duude says:

    So many don’t yet realize QEn will result in new multi-year highs with virtually every commodity as the dollar spirals into the abyss. More importantly, CRUDE will rocket to new highs for 2012. Not good for a consumption-based economy. Crude isn’t supposed to fly this high in September. Ten days ago, both Russia and China began trading oil in non-petro-dollars. What’s next for the Fed? Shorting oil futures with freshly minted dollars? The madness will stop sooner or later.

  31. matson15 says:

    Patterson” WHO?
    Book? is “scary,” and he is “awesome.”

    Amazon show 10+ pages of mystery boo0ks by “Patterson”

  32. A says:

    Ultimately, out of a population of some 300+ million people, you would think both parties would be able to find superior alternatives to the current Obama/Romney combo.

  33. victor says:

    The GOP retains the House and takes the Senate; BO keeps the WH. what next? gridlock (ok) or Clinton redux?

  34. SecondLook says:

    Joe -

    The sad story of the Republican party comes directly out Johnson’s pushing through the Civil Rights Act of 1964. (One of the best books on the subject is “The Walls of Jericho: Lyndon Johnson, Hubert Humphrey, Richard Russell, and the Struggle for Civil Rights” by Robert Mann).
    Johnson, the consummate politician knew full well that the Republicans, supporters of Civil Rights since the founding of the party, couldn’t resist taking advantage – the implementation of the “Southern Strategy”. What the Republican leadership at the time couldn’t foresee, couldn’t imagine, was that eventually, Southerners would take over the GOP – bringing with them, not only an anti-Federal government view, but deeply, and increasingly hard, social conservative beliefs.

    It’s rather ironic, from the end of the Civil War to the Great Depression, the Democratic party was what we would call conservative – it’s two major wings being Southerners and Western farmers, and the “Bourbon” Democrats favoring laissez-faire capitalism, the gold standard, and opposing US intervention in other countries.
    The Republicans had more elements within their party – progressives, internationalists (and their opponents, isolationists), Wall street and Main Street. Their big umbrella was similar in concept to what the Democrats created later, a heterogeneous party that worked by not letting any faction take over, and by giving each enough reason to stay together.
    Now, not exactly, but close, the two parties have switched – like the Earth’s magnetic poles flipping.

    A -

    Political parties aren’t like Human Resources managers searching for the most qualified, capable, people for a job. Their function, whether under the old party boss system, or the modern primary, has always been to find:
    A: The person most likely to win.
    B. The person who must follows the party line.

    Sad, but true, most Americans involvement with politics extends only to voting now and then (look at local election turnouts). So, we get what the party “leaders” want, and/or those with fire in their bellies, and money to burn.

  35. theexpertisin says:

    I wonder if Bush and the conservatives will still be blamed when things are worse in 2016 than at present. And with Obama re-elected, it will be “when” and not “if”.

    We could use a Bill Clinton or a Reagan at this time to forge a grand bargain with Congress and move this country out of the mess we are in, domestically and internationally.

  36. SecondLook says:

    victor -

    You wrote: The GOP retains the House and takes the Senate; BO keeps the WH. what next? gridlock (ok) or Clinton redux?

    There is a third scenario, a much grimmer one: War between Congress and the Presidency, which by how our government is structured, the former will win.

    First, the Senate can, on the opening day of the session, vote to suspend the filibuster rule – called the nuclear option (Trent Lott’s term for it). It would give the majority party, full and unfettered control of the Senate. If the Republicans vote for it, that would be the bugle call to war.

    With the advice and consent powers of the Senate, they can refuse to confirm massive numbers of Presidential appointments, in effect holding the Executive branch hostage to their demands; i.e we’ll confirm X if you agree to do Y. Oh, it will be argued in platitudes about the wrong person for the job, but reality is hardball.
    In the worse case, if a vacancy appears in the Supreme Court, especially if it’s a “conservative” vacancy, expect to have an 8 person Court for some years.

    Expect countless hearings, investigations, of the Executive branch. The goal being to wear down, through sand into various departments, agencies that the Republicans hate.

    The power of the purse: No Federal budget past. That doesn’t mean that the government shuts down (The Republicans have learned their lesson about that), but instead for years a Continuing Resolution:
    “A CR is a temporary measure that keeps funding levels the same (not adjusted for inflation) as the year prior.”
    Temporary can be as long as Congress wishes.

    The only arena where the President could continue to function effectively is in foreign affairs, but even there, don’t underestimate how much Congress could interfere.

    The gamble with going to war is the hope that the Republicans can convince the public to blame Obama – leading to 2/3 majorities in the next congressional elections, and then, just about complete control of the government. The great risk is a backlash against them, leading to losing Congress.

    Frankly, given the levels of animosity, I think this is the most probable scenario, risks and all…

  37. Julia Chestnut says:

    Unfortunately, I agree with SecondLook. The only thing that the American people could do then is, starting with the short terms on the House Side, start throwing the leaders of such a strategy out of office.

    And I am baffled by JohnDay’s contention that Obama “bent to the feminists” in going with Geithner instead of that paragon, Summers. The moment he appointed Summers to a spot of any importance, I knew that the election rhetoric had been a lie, and things were going to go exactly as they always had. Summers, quite aside from his obvious problems with women, is a personal roving disaster, not unlike Pandora’s box flapping his ugly lid open at the most inopportune times.

    I don’t think it’s feminism that makes me consider Summers – and Timmy – to be plutonium. They are Rubinites, and hey – no one is more experienced on the Dem side than old Rubin himself, why aren’t you gunning for him to come back to the economic helm?

    And you are living in a fantasy world if you think Valerie Jarrett was even around.

  38. PeterR says:

    Thanks Barry for all the comments and edits.

    “Dark Pools” = HAL etc..

    Scary times.

  39. PeterR says:

    Jojo’s link led me here, a salient encapsulation IMO of the choices to be made in November:

    http://robertreich.org/post/26990374473

    Scary times . . .

  40. Sumption says:

    FYI.

    It strikes me that the Republican Party is so screwed up that the supposed RNC and Congressional leadership either need to step down or disband the party if they haven’t the intelligence or ability to defeat Obama and his crowd of economically and foreign affairs illiterate clowns.

    Unfortunately, the Republicans are such a weak, disconnected group at the moment that it is likely that Obama will be re-elected with relative ease. The Republicans have focused on so many of the wrong issues and wrong subset issues in my judgment that they deserve to have their asses handed to them again.

    Obama is an exceedingly weak player for the U.S. economy and most certainly U.S. foreign affairs. He is amateur for his level of responsibility. Yet, the Republicans can’t fight their way out of a paper sack because they’re so damned busy sucking up to their supposed right-wing base that they miss the big picture. It is no wonder that they haven’t a clue as to how to attract Independent voters and women at large. Clearly, the Republican Party is headed for File 13 at this rate. And deservedly so.

    It is obvious why I am an Independent voter. I can’t support Dumb and Dumber when the stakes are so high…and that is the critical situation at this juncture.

    The following is a good read. Pass it on if you agree.

    -Bill

  41. DrungoHazewood says:

    The pugs could go after O with the Corzine angle, but we all know why this heinous pilfering doesn’t elicit a single word.

  42. Moss says:

    ‘No one here reads anything other than Drudge and Breitbart’

    That is why the GOP is what they are and where they are. They simply view the world through a very narrow tunnel.

  43. Donald says:

    Sumption, I agree with your “Dumb and Dumber” analogy. What can we do? Even the TEA and other grassroots efforts are derailed by the Koch bros and Dick Armey. What is an intelligent or educated individual to do?

  44. rd says:

    The GOP have allowed themselves to be taken hostage by Grover Norquist and the evangelical far-right. These people can’t deliver the votes in the main election but can easily remove non-compliant candidates at the primary level. As a result, much of the GOP members in Congress are not permitted to even have rational discussions with the other side of the aisle under the threat that they will not make it into the next election cycle if they do.

    At the Presidential level, it means that Romney has been forced to abdicate many of the positions that he held when governing Massachusetts. Therefore, he can’t run on his government record as he basically had to disown it during the primaries. Since the Republican Party invented the flip-flopping he was against it before he was for it election theme, they have also positioned themselves where they can’t even say that they learned something over the years as that would imply that something actually can be looked at from multiple angles and reviewed for sensibility over time. Instead, they start justifying flip-flopping by wandering into State’s Rights territory where things are acceptable at the state level but not at the federal level.

    The Republican Party these days is looking like a vibrating system that is in perfect unison with positive feedback that increases the amplitude of the positions to the point where it will soon break and fly apart at the seams. The classic example right now is the Mass Republican Party debating on adopting the national platform as the state platform which will fly in the face of much of the electorate – they could single-handedly derail Scott Brown against Elizabeth Warren in their search for ideological purity across the country.

  45. Jim67545 says:

    And the investment ramifications are….?
    The American public is working with insufficient information. Many just are paying no attention to where we truly were in 2008. Many just don’t know. Regardless, neither candidate is doing anything to explain the grim reality (don’t want to scare everyone) and the media crops away all but a few sound bites anyway. So, without an understanding it is is little wonder that this group of voters wanders off in this radical direction and that group jumps for that seemingly quick fix. And all believe that the problems could have been corrected in Obama’s first 6 months in office. They have no concept of what really needs to be done and how deeply we, as a country, need to dig.
    It does not help that some (Ryan) are making up “facts.”

  46. AHodge says:

    This can be tipping point stuff
    an implosion where everyone runs away
    on planet D they have been imagining taking back the house all year
    maybe this delusional notion warms up the troops
    but gaining a little traction?
    istill think its still real long shot Cooke said in june they must win
    ALL lean Ds 24 seats
    ALL tossups 25 seats
    and 13 of 18 lean R seats
    but you neverknow those classise may be flexible
    id give a d retake maybe only 15 or 20 to one now? not impossible

  47. thetruthseeker says:

    JimRino,
    While I agree that the Repubes will continue to hurt this economy through offshoring, please be intellectually honest enough to not forget the fact that it was Clinton and his hatchet man Al Gore who were the driving force pushing NAFTA/GATT. Remember this (i.e. “Larry, can I finish”):

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhwhMXOxHTg

    So the Democraps are just as much to blame as the Repubes.

  48. number2son says:

    Anyway, the Sept. 17 edition of The New Yorker has a piece on Elizabeth Warren’s run in MA. It’s rather interesting that Obama has borrowed some of her heartfelt rhetoric to good effect.

    I’d be pleasantly surprised if more than a few of the Republican obstructionists got their comeuppance in this election. And even more so if Obama actually made something out of it.

  49. TacomaHighlands says:

    Singmaster asked..
    Please post a link to the Lawrence Baxter piece. And you did.

    Barry can you double check the link? Doesn’t appear to be coming up for me. Coming up for you? I’m Mac user too.

  50. Singmaster says:

    Tacoma,
    It worked for me. Be patient. It’s 116 pages.

    Know any Tacoma/Portland jokes?

  51. easygoer says:

    I always liked a cartoon in Wilson & Dilulio where a young elephant asks his parents if that means he is a Republican. It illustrates the familial and tribal loyalties that influence party membership. It is up to Republicans to improve the policies our politicians pursue and build a coalition that can operate effectively (for the country) in the majority or minority.

  52. Oral Hazard says:

    Barry, All I can focus on is the crack about Barofsky. Is there snark I’m missing or is that a wish that he’ll agree to back out of the gig?

  53. No, that’s what the staffer wrote — I did not edit him for content

    I am looking forward to hearing Neil Discuss his time in DC and he media coverage of the book

  54. [...] off, the responses to my GOP insider’s email (GOP Sours on Romney) surprised me. I assumed — wrongly apparently –  that after 23,877 posts I would get [...]

  55. Christopher says:

    DC is a two headed viper….and until the Corporate Money is removed from Government….

    Nothing changes.

    Anyone who still truly believes that either party is actually “looking for the little guy” should have their head examined.

  56. Giovanni says:

    I’m no fan of George Bush III, I mean Barack Obama* but electing Gordon Gekko, I mean Mitt Romney guarantees that the last financial collapse was just a warm up for the next one. While Obama has sold out to Wall St., Romney IS Wall St. and the raping, pillaging and plundering of the economy (and taxpayers) will kick into high gear if we let those people complete their takeover. They are completely unapologetic about wrecking the economy and bringing the world’s financial system to the brink of collapse, especially considering we saved their bonuses with nearly unlimited (and continuing) bailouts, and have used our tax money to kill or maim every effort that’s been made to prevent a repeat. If these people get in it will be time to stock up on the real precious metals; tinned food and small caliber weapons.

    * That so many on the right hate Obama so intensely is curious because other than not starting any wars (well, and actually killing Bin Laden) he is indistinguishable from Bush II in terms of what he’s actually done. Yeah he talks all socialist but he hasn’t done a thing to prevent the next financial meltdown, just the way Bush failed. My hope is that for the lack of a better alternative, he gets re-elected, grows a pair and fires Goldman from the government along with all their suck-up pals like Geithner. And that the ongoing financial frauds be prosecuted and the capos, I mean CEOs go to jail.

  57. Giovanni says:

    Maybe it’s time to go all Iceland on the existing party with two heads here and start over with online streaming of participatory democracy and then hire ex-cops to go after the banksters as discussed here: http://bit.ly/Qy2XS4 (Note this is the video that came up after Finding a Vein For That Sweet, Sweet Junk).

  58. [...] the week fending off reports about the turmoil inside his campaign and about some Republicans being less than thrilled with the former Bain Capital [...]

  59. Forget me, I am apparently biased, in the bag for Obama, etc. — how about the conservative, hard right “The Washington Times”


    Romney campaign takes friendly fire from within GOP

    Critics see it as remote, inattentive
    By Ralph Z. Hallow
    The Washington Times
    Monday, September 24, 2012
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/sep/24/romney-campaign-takes-friendly-fire/