Thursday, March 29, 2012


John Cole flagged this New York Times story under the headline "Here's an Idea -- Stop Financing the Elections of Nihilists and Crazy People":

Big business groups like the Chamber of Commerce spent millions of dollars in 2010 to elect Republican candidates running for the House. The return on investment has not always met expectations.

Even though money for major road and bridge projects is set to run out this weekend, House Republican leaders have struggled all week to round up the votes from recalcitrant conservatives simply to extend it for 90 or even 60 days. A longer-term transportation bill that contractors and the chamber say is vital to the recovery of the construction industry appears hopelessly stalled over costs.

At the same time, House conservatives are pressing to allow the U.S. Export-Import Bank, which has financed business exports since the Depression, to run out of lending authority within weeks. The bank faces the very real possibility of shutting its doors completely by the end of May, when its legal authorization expires.

And a host of routine business tax breaks -- from wind energy subsidies to research and development tax credits -- cannot be passed because of Republican insistence that they be paid for with spending cuts....

This is what they're doing when they control one half of one branch of government. This is what they're doing to the business community, which we assumed was part of their coalition.

Now, you can argue that they're just trying to harm the economy until they can elect one of their own as president. But they don't think Mitt Romney is one of their own, do they? Do you really want to be the rent money on the notion that they're going to moderate if they win the Senate and get a president of their own party, even if (or perhaps especially if) they think he's a squish? They'd rather burn the whole country down than compromise now -- do you think they're going to be the ones doing the deferring if Romney is president? Romney, a guy whose core principles are always "Whatever you guys want"?


Danp said...

If Republicans control the White House and Congress, this fiscal conservatism nonsense will disappear, or more to the point, be restricted to eliminating regulatory agencies and safety nets. But fiscal conservatism itself is a minority strategy only.

Steve M. said...

I always believed that, but I'm starting to suspect that these guys are drinking their own Kool-Aid and really want to do all this Ayn Rand/semi-Ron Paul stuff.

Danp said...

I still see Paul as the inspiration for the Tea Party. In 2008 he taught Republicans that they need to confess their sins (spending too much) and go all out Randian. But if the strategy works and they get the White House back, there are investors (like the Chamber of Commerce) who will expect adequate returns. They'll have no problem blaming future deficits on Obama, especially if the ACA is upheld.

Ten Bears said...

I've long contended the Y2K nuts had it right, but they just didn't quite get their fingers wrapped around it. The same could be said for the Y2K12 nuts.

Things have reached a point where giving thought to what's on the other side of the coming melt-down would be prudent. If Obama wins re-election, they'll start a race war and burn down the country. If not, they'll just burn down the country.

I'm thinking I need to double my supply of dried goods and ammunition.