P.S. You're Fired

Eric Alterman:

"This nation was doubly cursed on this day five years ago; first by the attack itself, and second by the reaction of our dishonest, incompetent and corrupt leadership’s exploitation of it for their own naked political and ideological purposes. . . . we are a less admirable nation than we were five years ago. We are more warlike, more arrogant, more ignorant, less compassionate, less generous, less free, and thanks to the Bush administration’s catastrophic invasion of Iraq, far less safe."

Bastion of our liberal media that it is, MSNBC.com has fired Eric Alterman.

Billmon Explains All

Whiskey Bar: Dog Bites Man:

"I tend to believe it will take a rather massive eruption of reality -- and probably a catastrophic one -- to produce fundamental political change in America, of the kind that might allow a progressive left-wing movement to smash the Rovian machine, break the political stranglehold of private wealth and bring the corporations, including the corporate media, back under some kind of check and balance.

Call me a wild-eyed radical, but I'm hoping for a 1932, or at least a 1980 in reverse, not a 1994 in reverse -- although we all could certainly do without a repeat of the Great Depression or the stagflationary '70s.

In any case, I'm reasonably sure that anything less than a 1932 or a 1980 (that is to say, a full-fledged political realigment) can and will be rolled back fairly quickly by the authoritarian powers that be. If the Carter and Clinton presidencies taught us nothing, they should have taught us that.

We're obviously not looking at a realignment election yet. We're probably not even close (although I wouldn't put money on that proposition.) But it's getting hard to see how an economic and/or foreign policy train wreck can be avoided, one that will eventually force large numbers of voters to fundamentally reassess their existing political loyalties.

Until it happens, though, it's probably best if the corporate dreamweavers and the Rovian propaganda technicians keep their bosses in the power. I still believe (call it an article of faith) that a majority of the voters will eventually figure out they've been had -- sold not just a bill of goods but a counterfeit reality, one that is crumbling in front of their eyes. When that happens, they're going to be enraged, in a way that makes this year's discontent look like the passing tantrum of a grumpy two-year old. We can only pray they'll be angry at the right people."

I can scarcely think of anything to add, although I do pray for a bare House majority for the Democrats, because I think the ability to expose scandal in Congressional investigations is a much needed tool. Still, I can see how that could work against the Democrats, who can be manipulated into being either scapegoats or complicit.

The Mouse that Roared

Billmon:

"a few months back various lefty bloggers were debating the political impact of media consolidation, with the majority opinion seeming to be that it was no big deal.

Guess again."

ABC is spending $40 million to present six-hours of commercial-free propaganda for the far right-wing propaganda film, Path to 9/11.

This comes after the 7 years of Whitewater, the War on Gore that was the 2000 campaign, and the Swift-boating of John Kerry. In the unlikely event that the Democrat claw their way back to power, Disney/ABC will have to be utterly destroyed. Or, the Democrats and democracy have a very short life expectancy.

We have to have a Storm, a very big storm, verging on Civil War, or our country is lost.

The Consequences

Kevin Drumnotices that the Republicans no longer care about policy and its consequences, they care only about how symbolic measures affect electoral politics:

"This is, by a long measure, the most underreported aspect of the Bush administration's war on terror. Not that they're pursuing the wrong strategy — though they are — but that in the end they don't really care that much one way or the other. Winning the war has always been secondary to winning elections."

They do not care about policy or its consequences.

They care only about power.

It is all about the symbols and the rhetoric. Rational assessment of ways and means is completely ignored.

The Consequences of this cannot be good; the inevitable failure will create a political storm. But will the poltical theatre of that Coming Storm teach an electorate, which has been buying this nonsense, anything?

Thanks!

President Bush: "And so, here on Labor Day, I say to the union members who are here, happy Labor Day, and thanks for supporting leadership that is progressive, smart, capable, and has your best interests at heart."

Bush Iraq Strategy: Truth and Consequences

Mark Kleiman: "The notion that seriously aggravating the threat from Iran, including the very real possibility that Iran will join the nuclear club, could be justified by finding a bunch of rusty nerve-gas artillery shells left over from the Iran-Iraq war doesn't pass the giggle test."

Landmines in the Political Storm to Come

It is more of a hypothesis than a thesis, but I think that Rove's Grand Strategy for Republican Power ad infinitum has two components: plan A is to use faux populism and control of Big Media to create the propaganda necessary to hold onto Power and to consolidate the Bush building-a-fascist-State project in the near-term.

If Plan A fails, ruined by Bush's personal penchant for total and abject failure in every venture of his life, then Plan B is to dig the country into giant holes with the deficit/tax-cuts and with the Iraq War, and, if the Democrats are pushed by events into Power, to ruthlessly exploit the pain caused by Democratic attempts to get the country out of those holes to discredit the Democratic Party for a generation, returning to Power after a short interval to consolidate their Authoritarian State.

The deficit, and the financing of the deficit with Social Security taxes, is one of those two giant holes.

The obvious "solution" to the problem of the huge national debt is inflation. I think Sterling Newberry is right: Bernanke is an inflationist.

The situation of the U.S. and world economy has assumed a posture of dynamic stability. As everyone knows, it is nowhere near a position of static (i.e. equilibrium) stability. (It has not been my observation that world trade, national economies or even industries customarily assume anything like a static, long-term equilibrium; people, who analyze them as if they do need to get out of the classroom more; a different analysis is necessary to understand whatever stability is observed).

But, I think what is more likely to happen is that the U.S. will embark on an increasingly inflationary course, in order to prolong the stability of the world economy. Bernanke is an expert on the Great Depression, and fears deflation above all things, and as a conservative inflationist, he's sees deflation as a threat to the plutocracy, as it proved to be in 1932, much to Bernanke's evident regret; the U.S. economy is awash in dollar liquidity, and the greatest danger is that vast sums accumulated in the Persian Gulf and China will drive up asset prices in the U.S. while driving down savings so far that a general inflation is triggered by runaway consumer spending. Bernanke will choose inflation to protect the plutocracy, with even the slightest encouragement from whoever occupies the White House in 2009, and has to right Bush's fiscal disaster, while coping with the willy-nilly expiration of numerous tax cuts, constituting a huge, involuntary tax increase designed by Republicans, but exploding under a probable Democratic regime.

To keep the world economy stable on its current dynamic path, U.S. inflation has to be higher than Chinese inflation, to provide the Chinese enough headroom to ensure that China doesn't accidently slip into deflation, while trying to maintain its currency's peg to the dollar. Chinese deflation, triggering a Chinese recession, which could be extremely sharp after such a long and massive growth spurt, would bring the whole house of cards, which is the current pattern of world trade, tumbling down.

Inflation is a classic way out of a debt crisis. But, with the marketed debt primarily in inflation-adjusted and short-term paper, inflation will fall most heavily on Social Security, where the trust fund consists primarily of non-marketable debt, with no inflation protection. Ricardian equivalence will manifest as a giant default on the SS trust fund, by means of inflation, and, of course, an excuse for the Plan B Restoration Republicans of 2012 to finally axe SS altogether.

Sorry to be such a pessimist. But, I think Democrats really need to be more aware and articulate about the extent to which Iraq and the Deficit are the twin landmines of American politics. Getting out of Iraq or staying in Iraq -- either one -- is going to have catastrophic consequences for the U.S. and the Middle East, for which Republicans and Big Media will blame the Democrats.

Getting out of the current economic situation, in which the U.S. standard of living is propped at least 5% to 10% higher than can be sustained, given our negative savings rate, our dwindling manufacturing base and the hollowing out of corporate America, is going to be very painful, and Republicans will both blame the Democrats and do all they can to block or sabotage any policy, which will make the collapse of the Bush economy any less painful for the middle class.