TYT Power Panel: Should Progressives Give Up Being Bipartisan?
From this Monday night's The Young Turks on Current TV, Crooks and Liars managing editor Tina Dupuy, Turk's regular Ben Mankiewicz and Color of Change's Rashad Robinson discuss whether the Obama administration is finally going to crack down on the banks and whether we see newly appointed RMBS co-chair Eric Schneiderman or Treasury Secretary win out that battle.
Tina and Ben were hopeful we might finally see something finally be done. Robinson reminded the viewers that without pressure from progressive groups, we might not have finally seen President Obama finally make some moves towards some accountability. And Cenk wasn't so optimistic after the stalling and lack of accountability we've seen so far.
For more on that, here's Taibbi's take over at Rolling Stone -- A Victory for the Public on Foreclosures?.
Dave Dayen has more on whether we might see Schneiderman and this working group accomplish anything -- Schneiderman’s RMBS Working Group: Resources, Jurisdiction and Will.
And from C&L here's more on the pressure that's been put on the Obama administration to act from Mike Lux -- Word of the Day: Accountability and from Ken Quinnell -- AFL-CIO's Trumka Joins Chorus Calling for Investigation of Banks.
Next topic for the panel was the recent article at Politico -- Death of bipartisanship has killed the Washington deal. As they all noted, Republicans gave up on bipartisanship a long time ago and progressives haven't had too many real victories in quite some time given how far our politicians on all sides of the aisle have moved to the extreme right.
And one final note, C&L has been in talks with Current TV about Tina doing some correspondent work for them this election season and possibly covering CPAC next week. If you'd like to get a chance to see more of Tina on Current, send them a note and let them know how you feel.
You can contact them at feedback@current.com
or @current on Twitter.
Thanks everyone and we'll keep you posted!
I wanted to give an example of today's "bipartisanship."
Raising the debt limit. The progressive decision was.. pass it, so we can spend more and save our country. The Republican position was "let it fail" or promise trillions in cuts over the next years.
The president went with trillions of cuts, but assigned a supercommitee to determine those cuts.
I'd say Republicans won about 80% of that. The Progressive decision was not even considered.
But wait! The Supercommitee failed to come to a deal (we find because Republicans refused to show bipartisanship on giving away ANYTHING) but at least the back up trigger if bipartisan compromise was not reached, the Democrats would sacrifice half domestic spending, and the Republicans would sacrifice Military spending.
Now that the trigger has happened, people are panicking, (Yes, even Democrats) to make sure Military Spending remains untouched. Though Obama has promised to veto changes to the trigger,... um.. well, he promises a lot of things.
If the Military trigger is disarmed, that would be a 100% Republican Victory.
Bipartisanship!
Clinton was the best Republican president the USA ever had. Bush 2.0 was the worst. They both sucked. Obama is somewhere in between - perhaps one of the more mediocre Republican presidents, like Ford or Bush 1.0.
It's called the American Dream because you have to be asleep to believe it.
-George Carlin
between being bi-partisan, moderate and totally unreasonable. Bill Clinton may have not done MUCH for liberalism, but he certainly was no conservative either with the way he handled the economy and our foreign policy miracles (both of which seem to be a permanent past fixtures regardless of who's in office at this point. Daddy Bush was a progressive Teddy Roosevelt Republican riding Reagan's coat tails, and Bush won ONE (the second of his two terms) because of a B.S, Supreme Court consensus and the Republican puppetmasters who had him on their strings the whole god-forsaken eight years.
In short, Obama has governed well to the Right of his (original) campaign platform but is still by no means a true conservative, fiscal, social and otherwise (i.e. he prefers taking the magical and unpredictable Third Way in his decisions and proposals). Such a false equivalency is about as absurd as calling George Bush (neo-con) a 'liberal' because he had the most unhinged and inconsequential Government expansion (Dept. of Homeland Security and war deficits) since, well ever! Both Clinton and Obama are bi-partisan preferred moderates to be sure, but they'd look a lot more 'progressive' and accomplished if they didn't have the Radical Reich Wing forcing their and America's hands straight into a running garbage disposal. Let's not miss the beauty of the rain forest for a few dead, hollow trees...
President Obama is like the AHCA his administration miraculously passed: marginally helpful, efficient enough to be built upon, and will only become a uniform disaster if Republicans win 2012 & repeal it (with all the other good he did)!
with the fascist pigfuckers marching the USA off a cliff. Let me know how that works out for ya in 2025 when you die of exposure in a FEMA camp somewhere in Nebraska, and the last sound in your head is the slapping of the tent flap rattling in the cold howling wind. Your teeth will chatter and your last words will be "but we were so reasonable..."
That's how sheeple like you get herded into death camps. They give you a "reasonable" alternative. Wear a star of david or risk getting arrested. Live in a ghetto or risk getting arrested. Get on the train to some new living quarters or risk getting arrested. Line up for a shower, or risk getting shot... It's always in your best interests to go along with the scumbags bent on killing you. You want to survive? FIGHT BACK. Don't give an inch. Throw these monsters back into the sea.
It's called the American Dream because you have to be asleep to believe it.
-George Carlin
Depends which era you're talking about. Eisenhower had a 90% tax on the rich. Even Nixon and Reagan were much higher than 32%, and even supported taxes on Capital Gains and Estate Taxes. At some points, it was OK for a Republican actually talk about immigrants as if they deserved a fair shot. At some point, it was OK for a Republican to support the New Deal. Teddy Roosevelt's head would've exploded if he knew that fraudulent bankers and the Bush-era war criminals were not being investigated.
These people were always a little loony, but there -is- an argument to be made that Obama is to the right of past modern Republican presidents in domestic issues, and ridiculously to the right of them on civil liberties.
The only reason he's still considered "left", and.. he IS considered left, is how completely insane the Republicans have become. A recent study says that the Senate has recently moved 2 times to the right as it used to be. The House has moved 6 times to the right as they used to be.
Basically Obama has to be slightly left of Genghis Khan to still be considered "the democrat" in comparison to today's Republicans.
The GOP's idea of "bipartisan" is when Democrats acquiesce to their demands.
I'm tired of being the side that always relents and gives in to their hostage-taking, only to then be attacked for not giving in to ALL their demands.
This country is in the position it is in BECAUSE we've compromised on a slew of issues (namely deregulation & tax cuts) that are bankrupting this country.
* There are two types of Republicans: millionaires and suckers.
"Mugsy's Rap Sheet": Recording history for those who seek to rewrite it.
Yes, progressives need to learn that they will get NOWHERE by reaching out across the aisle. The Republicans will NEVER acquiesce and will block every last bill they receive under President Obama. Being bi-partisan with Republicans is a total waste of time.
This is the wrong way to frame the question. Should progressives fight back against the fascist tendencies on the right in American politics?
The answer is yes, they should.
Progressives are not. Progressives are just as tenacious to the left as conservatives are to the right. And genuine leftists don't compromise at all. Which is why I say fuck 'em all, cuz my anarchist panties are all in a bunch this morning and I'm feelin' mean.
It's called the American Dream because you have to be asleep to believe it.
-George Carlin
"Progressives" have always despised bi-partisanship. They consider it to be cowardly caving and never fail to call it such with the fervor of a tea partier. Now this doesn't apply to real actual live progressives who want to negotiate progress. No it principally applies to those who imagine they are progressive.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
or constipated.
"Folks, this is not your father's Republican Party."
Joe Biden
I'm on Atkins.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
?
"Folks, this is not your father's Republican Party."
Joe Biden
The reasonable Republicans that could negotiate deals for the good of the nation as a whole are gone. They were chased out of the party long ago by the Southern Strategy converts that have been swelling the ranks steadily for 40 years. Reasonable people really didn't want to be associated with a bunch of racists who switched parties because they would have no truck with the idea of civil rights being a permanent plank of the Democratic platform.
If you look back to the Watergate era, the R's hadn't yet swung so far to the right, and more specifically to "my party above all," and IMO, Nixon had to resign because he knew Congress was still bipartisan enough to look to the good of the county and would have taken their duty to remove him seriously. If such a move were taken during the Bush presidency, Repubs would've closed ranks and blocked it for the benefit of their own party over the entire nation they are pledged to represent.
Reasonable people who are conservative are the Blue Dogs now. If progressives want to negotiate or attempt to persuade someone on the "other side," they're the ones you could attempt to be "bipartisan" with. "Real Republicans" should be ignored. Any deal that needs them won't happen or will just result in a total cave-in with possibly a poison pill added in just so they can use it against the President and Dems later -- I'm looking at the "insurance mandate" that was supposedly added to the health care reform to make it more palatable to Repubs who were beholden to the insurance industry.
That was the 1st part of the video, and the answer seems to be that Obama admin. is. But wait! They have dragged this out soooooo long that there will be a loss of opportunity due to statutes of limitations by the time to prosecute comes around.
Obama is playing it like he cares but fuck 'im, he is doing this for show.
Progressives "gave up" on "bipartisanship" eons ago ..
"Liberals" not so much ..
The only "bipartisanship" we've seen for decades has been deals that benefit both parties and their major donors but screwed the people.
One more time - "liberals" are part of the problem, not part of the solution.
When will government of the people, by the politicians, for the corporations perish from this Earth?
Not soon enough!
But Tina Dupuy is blonde, Fox news, Republican, hot. But then she opens her mouth and it's obvious she's got a brain, which makes her HOTTER!
.. so why should anyone let them use that as a bargaining position?
You can't interpret their bargaining style as anything other than an insult.
I have some experience with collective bargaining; this is more like dealing with a bank.
You tell them ' OK, come back when you have something to put on the table.'
Then talk it up on every media source what their starting position was: 'My way or the highway'
Talking points:
"How can we deal with people that won't make ANY compromise for the good of America?'
'It's like dealing with a 3 year old that won't eat their vegetables'
"They put their parties' agenda for rich people ahead of Americas' recovery.'
'The SS GOP is hitting our Ship of State with torpedoes just to get their way'
'The Republicans are more worried about the status of their party than the welfare of America'
'They signed a pledge to a lobbyist that seems to mean more than their oath of office'
'It's sad that their hatred of the President overrides their commitment to this nation'
The list goes on and on, but so few Democrats are willing to get in fight with the GOP.
They are already in a fight. And they keep walking away with a bloody nose.
Bring your balls to work Harry Reid. That way you will actually feel it when you get a nutshot.
Unless you are feeding from the same trough as the GOP.
Then you should object to the tactics, bend over the bargaining table, take it up the a$$, and keep the campaign money coming.
Wall Street is just a parasite on the actual labor and investments of average Americans.
Banks play with futures, debt paper, complex financial instruments, and other peoples incomes.
Sell 'em short & help 'em crash - Tear 'em apart & sell the pieces
We should give our support to one Republican--Newt Gingrich. If he runs out of money, we will have to pay for all of the negative ads against Romney. If Newt wins the nomination, we win the House and Senate. This is money well spent.
to begin with. Loony ass SC Judges, no problem. Wars without cause, sign us up. Impeachment, why we'd never.
And the list goes on and on forever.
Homopartisan. LOL...I love Tina!
Just 'Cos You Got the Power...THAT DON'T MEAN YOU GOT THE RIGHT!
it's a concept whose time has passed.
________________
common sense matters as much as truth
Here, here. The GOP and it's fascist soldiers gave up bi-partisanship a long time ago. We're in a political war and it's time to start fighting back. People don't trust liberals because usually, we don't.
I don't believe in God. Teach a man to be a good citizen and you have solved the problem of life.
-Andrew Carnegie
By definition it takes two parties cooperating to have a bipartisan situation. The Rethuglican Party has no interest in cooperation with anyone.
Comments are restricted to registered users only.
Login - Register