You are herecontent / For the GOP, the Economic Meltdown May Have Happened Just a Wee Bit Early
For the GOP, the Economic Meltdown May Have Happened Just a Wee Bit Early
For the GOP, the Economic Meltdown May Have Happened Just a Wee Bit Early
By Bernard Weiner, The Crisis Papers
Most likely, we'll never find out what really happened inside the CheneyBush
Administration until after January 20, when ethically-motivated insiders feel
they can spill some beans without violating their oaths of loyalty, but here's
my surmising:
I think key officials inside the Administration knew that the financial
system was swirling inside the economic toilet bowl and would eventuate in a
massive meltdown; after all, there were numerous economists, inside and outside the
government, who more than a year ago were warning about the housing bubble
getting ready to burst, with disastrous impact on the availability of credit.
But, in this scenario, the CheneyBush higher-ups believed that, with luck, denial
and a helluva lot of deficit financing, they could delay the inevitable
collapse until after the election.
The catastrophe would then happen on Obama's watch, making sure to cripple
all his "liberal" plans and programs. Fixated on solving the economic crisis and
unable to fulfill much of what he promised (and probably having to raise
taxes for many), Obama and his Democratic majority in Congress would become highly
unpopular and the Republicans would be poised for victory in the 2010
congressional elections and might well be able to take back the White House in 2012.
The problem for the Republicans was that the financial house of cards
collapsed in a surprise rush, a bit too early to help McCain. Indeed, the economic
crisis (and McCain's inability to deal effectively with it) was the undoing of
any hope that he could pull off a victory in 2008.
THE PALIN EFFECT
It's important to remember that the presidential race was pretty much even
before the financial disaster manifested itself. The polling indicated that only
a percentage point or two separated Obama and McCain. Karl Rove was in his
element, with a "margin of error" that would permit just enough "tweaking" in
the polls and vote numbers to guarantee a Republican victory in the White House.
McCain wanted Lieberman as his running mate, but went along with the
HardRight choice of Sarah Palin. Her addition to the ticket solidified the red-meat
conservatives and the fundamentalists, guaranteeing that the GOP's base votes
would volunteer in large numbers and show up in force on Election Day. This,
they believed, would balance out the hordes of enthusiastic younger and
African-American supporters who would be working and voting for Obama.
But that strategy depended on holding off the economic collapse until after
November 4th. The Republicans missed their target by just a few weeks, and the
rest is history. The Obama turnout was immense, and too many moderate
Republicans and Independents couldn't stomach Palin's manifest ignorance and
incompetence. Thus, the McCain/Palin campaign, watching the economic disaster unfold
and realizing the significance of that electorally, was forced to turn to
downright nasty political name-calling and implied racism as the only arrows left in
their quiver.
The result was a landslide for Obama, both in terms of the popular vote (by
more than 7,000,000) and, especially, in the decisive Electoral College numbers
where Obama triumphed by more than a two-to-one margin.
THE GOP STRATEGY AGAINST OBAMA
Unable to keep Obama from entering the White House, the Republicans are
somewhat confused now as to how to stop his programs from succeeding after
Inauguration Day.
Some Republican leaders are urging the GOP to shun the extremists in charge
of the party and move more toward the center, in order to capture the growing
ranks of moderate Republicans and centrist Independents. Others are locked into
the "we would have won if we'd been more conservative" philosophy, and are
dedicated to bigger and better obstructionism in Congress.
After all, they reason, the Democratic tidal wave lapped up to the banks of
the U.S. Senate but was stopped just short of the 60-vote total, thus
permitting the Republicans in that body to filibuster Obama's preferred legislation.
GUMMING UP THE WORKS
In addition, Bush is doing his part by attempting to gum up the works for his
successor with numerous executive orders overturning environmental
safeguards, thus easing the way for polluting corporations to get what they want before
the Democrats take over. He also has placed key aides under civil-service
protections throughout the federal bureaucracy, there to hamstring Obama's
programs from the inside.
The essence of the Republican strategy is to ensure that Obama will face
concerted, unrelenting opposition from inside both Congress and his own
administration, while the corporate mass-media continue their anti-Obama assaults from
outside the government.
In this scenario, a weakened Obama presidency, struggling from one crisis to
another and unable to gain political traction, will create the conditions for
a Republican resurgency in 2010 and 2012.
THE PROGRESSIVE DILEMMA
I think the Obama transition team sees that handwriting on the wall as well,
which helps explain why the President-Elect has been, in effect, assuming the
mantle of the presidency by his speeches and actions well in advance of
Inauguration Day, to help build up his presidential momentum and enlarge whatever
political "honeymoon" period he's granted.
This is why the forces that worked for Obama's victory must remain united to
counter the pressure from the Right. Ordinarily, the progressive Democratic
base could be counted on to provide the bodies and support for the Obama
presidency, but there are fissures inside the Democratic Party that could weaken the
effort.
Many progressives, for example, feel they are being taken for granted and
watch, with disappointment and anger, as Obama moves more toward the center and
even the center-right in his appointments, positions and, particularly, his
foreign/military policies.
Watching the Obama balancing act on the greased high-wire of the presidency
is going to make for some fascinating, scary political theater during the next
four years. Stay tuned for the mayhem and fun. #
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernard Weiner, Ph.D. in government & international relations, has taught
at universities in California and Washington, worked as a writer/editor with
the San Francisco Chronicle for two decades, and currently serves as co-editor
of The Crisis Papers (www.crisispapers.org). To comment:
crisispapers@comcast.net .
First published by The Crisis Papers and Democratic Underground 12/2/08.
Copyright 2008 by Bernard Weiner.
- Login or register to post comments
-

- Email this page
- Printer-friendly version









Eliot Spitzer, the demised Governor of New York, was hot on the trail of what caused the sub-prime crisis and essayed this article in the Washington Post, on February 14, 2008, entitled: "Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime." Standing out notably is this portion of the article:
So, naturally, Spitzer was ruthlessly pursued and gotten rid of. (His personal actions were done on his own time with his own money -- not trying to justify what he did, but it was personal.)
I didn't realize the depth of the corruption on this front. I was aware that Mr. Spitzer was on the trail of banking corruption, but you have certainly filled in the blanks. How many crimes is this country going to weather before we see justice? More reason to pursue these criminals. I will not rest.
I, too, am unable to rest knowing that these criminals will be at large to push buttons in the "shadows" with all their wealth and power. There is something that the mind cannot inculcate -- that the magnitude of the crimes of these criminals will not be addressed -- anyone of conscience will never feel right about it period! Not only does Obama inherit a "hell" on earth, he will be the subject of continuous, brutal media attacks and persuasions of things happening in the "shadows." With Impeachment, he, at least, would have been able to commence his role on "terra firma."
We will not be rid of them, even if we can't "see" them!
I dont know about you . Iam a muslium but am really respect you man . God must give you reward for you this effort lv 4 you
Pelosi Lays Down the Law to Obama
As the House Speaker and supposed leader of the opposition party, Pelosi has been a dismal failure.
Now we know one reason for her single-handed gutting of the US Constitution, her stance that Bush's "impeachment is off the table:" self-preservation in her vaunted "position".
Pelosi made a pact with devil to remain in her "powerful position" when she acquiesced to torture.
It is apparent that she intends to work her own agenda rather than work with him on his.
In the past, Pelosi has been treasonous, and now that she has served her notice on President-Elect Obama, one of the best things he could do is engineer her relegation to the bowels of the House chamber, rather than allow her to obstruct his work.
He will be foolish to think that he can trust her. We already know from experience that he can not.
As far as I'm concerned, she deserves to be impeached right along with the rest of the Bush crew. I once heard her say, ". . . . but I like the President." So for this, she is O.K. with torture? And every other of Bush's wishes?
Further, what right did she ever have to take impeachment off the table? Taking impeachment off the table is tantamount to removing it from the Constitution. Taking impeachment off of the table deprived Americans of their remedy when dealing with despots provided us by the Constitution. But worse, that declaration made by Ms. Pelosi, on October 22, 2006, made it clear to Bush that he could do anything he wanted with no repercussions whatsoever. Prior to that, he could not be certain that that freedom he exercised of his own free will would not be met with repercussions. So, Ms. Pelosi sold us all out in favor of the President and, thus, is complicit, in a sense, for all that he has done since!
tahoe, I don't disagree with what you've written, but by your response, I must not have made myself clear.
My concern is that given her treasonous past behavior, she is a liability to Obama in that she will work her agenda rather than his, undermining him, just as she has supported Bush in his nefarious agenda.
So, from that standpoint, I do care what she says.
The name alone riles me no end.
Yes, I see your/our concerns with respect to her desire to promote her own agenda! Do you think she will do that alone? Well, I agree, she will try, but I don't think she will be successful with Obama. Obama has said that the "buck will stop here." It remains to be seen. But, yes, she could definitely serve as a hindrance just by her attempts to counter him, alone.
Worse! They, the Repugs, neocons, Bushies, Rovians, et al. will never give Obama any peace. They will simply continue spewing their filfth and hate throughout his tenure, while pushing buttons in the "shadows" -- all the while dangling Sarah Palin down the line for 2012.
Of course, if the criminals of the Bush Administration were to be impeached, it might put them in their place for a spell!
Although I see Obama as a strong and confident individual, I truly feel sorry for what will be his lot in addition to the "hell" that he is inheriting. And we can only hope that the weight of it all will not wear him down.
No problem. I perfectly understand wanting to omit Pelosi's words as irrelevant, but the only way to make her less relevant is to remove her as Speaker.
I don't think she will work her agenda alone; indeed, if we look to history, we will see many complicit Democrats - and Republicans - who have aided and abetted the dissolution of the our Republic with its democratic traditions during the Bush-Cheney years.
My opinion is that Washington is polluted with lobbyist money.
Unfortunately, I am very well-acquainted with the filth and hate spewn at Obama. I often read the least savory, illogical, profane ramblings.
I continue to strongly support Bush-Cheney's impeachment.
Although I am not certain that Blagojevich deserves impeachment simply because the evidence is being withheld at the prosecutor's request and so isn't out on the table, the Illinois state legislators have shown an object lesson to Federal legislators, aside from the curious timing and serving as a distraction to Bush-Cheney impeachment efforts, of course.
I wish Obama well in his endeavors.
I agree with all that you've said. I keep asking myself how do we rid ourselves of all this "evil." Not easy -- they are will ingrained (Dems and Repugs). Knowing who they are and voting them out is our seeming only remedy.
Yes, I, too, am not shutting up on the issue of impeachment. It is the first step toward return to the rule of law. It's the only way to show ourselves and the world that we, indeed, are self-governing and that this Administration was not/is not representative of America. (Albeit, late coming!)
Well, Blagojevich apparently has many other charges against him, as well, although I think Fitzgerald was not exactly correct in what he did either.
I'm in the Chicagoland area and, while we have had numerous criminal (monetary) types in our government -- each one is eventually found out and either tried, or simply gotten rid of. So, yes, Illinois does serve as an example. In reality, Blagojevich's criminal activities are minuscule compared to those of Bush, Cheney, et al. -- hard to comprehend why nothing's been done all these years.
One must wish Obama well in the face of it all!