UPDATED — SEE BELOW
Salon laments that all this focus on the debt is ruining things for libs.
The painful price of deficit hysteria
Regardless of the outcome of the debt ceiling debate, conservatives have already scored a major victory over liberalism. Even if President Obama emerges from the struggle in stronger political shape than the GOP, the fiscalization of American politics — meaning the focus of debate on deficits and debt — constitutes a powerful blow to liberal Democrats who once hoped that President Obama’s election would herald a new era for their cause.
None of this should come as a surprise. Focusing on deficit reduction has been a long-standing strategy for proponents of conservatism ever since modern liberalism took hold in the 20th century. Whenever liberals make progress on their policy agenda, conservatives’ best bet has been to talk about the budget. While it is difficult to directly oppose many government programs, since the public tends to support specific services, it is easy to raise fears about overall costs. Those are just numbers, not programs. Moreover, budget-balancing has long been symbolically important to many Americans. As the political scientist James Savage has shown, a balanced budget represents to many citizens the perception that the government maintains control over its operations.
The jig is up. Now it will be more difficult to grow the government invoking The Children or Fairness. The great unwashed are bound to ask annoying questions like, “Can we afford it?”.
Even Nancy Pelosi was heard to utter blasmphemy.
“It is clear we must enter an era of austerity, to reduce the deficit through shared sacrifice.”
Obama’s mega ego dashed liberal hopes for the mega welfare state. Not the change they believed in.
—Update
This might be a good place to stick this revealing pearl of wisdom from liberal Republican Chuck Hagel. Last Sunday on Meet the Press, the discussion was about the lack of compromise in Washington, code for Republicans are extremist ideologues. Hagel explains what it is some members of Congress believe they are there for.
You come to Washington to make a better world.
That is not their job description. They are giddy with power and a grand purpose. Don’t be mean and point out harsh realities. Don’t take notice that the world is not a better place, it is a mess because of the past actions of Washington.
They need to change their presumed imperative to “do no harm”. That would pretty much eliminate most of the work they do.
Great things happen when conservatives stand firm on principle, don’t buy into liberal scare tactics, and play some hardball.
We can only thank the Tea Party for this development.
Message to liberals: You are getting “experience”. The meaning in this context: “experience is what you get, when you don’t get what you want.”
Marinade on that for awhile.
Hobbit’s?? What a dumbass! I’m sorry but he’s a a a a a DUMBASS! These are the people that lived off us for a loooonnnnng time and had a fun, free, ride and now it’s over, the end, screw you! And Laura this morning mocking us, asking “what’s your strategy, idiots”(she didn’t say idiots, but she implied it) was just eye opening to another degree. This would be funny if, if if if, that’s what they don’t really care about, the if, THE PEOPLE THEY ARE PLAYING THIS GAME WITH!!!! Disgusting. I’m so mad I’m spitting nickels here!!!(grandma use to say that)
Is it possible that they’re finally starting to “get it” that we’re not playing around here? Or is that too much to hope for?
Great post pat, as usual, and excellent point about the underlying message re the debt talks. This has been swirling around, but is the ultimate message to everyone about the recklessness of liberal policies and the fundamental importance of conservative ideals 🙂
The liberal line we’re hearing is that the focus upon living within our means is a ruse by conservatives; some sort of a trick to promote a deeper, sinister agenda. I don’t know about you guys, but I promote fiscal responsibility as a vital goal for its own sake, completely independent of anything else I believe in. There’s no subterfuge here; fiscal sanity IS the bedrock upon which any other structure must rest. Without that foundation, it doesn’t matter what sort of government we build, because it will come crashing down. I think we’re seeing another case of projection; the people that are never honest about their own agenda always think the other guy is plotting against them. This is their paranoid fantasy. And their view makes perfect sense, if you look at it from the standpoint of a child, or maybe an addict, focused entirely upon the wants of the moment. I mean, gosh, we’d all like to have an endless fountain of money at our command, but it’s just not a model that works. There isn’t enough money in the universe to feed Washington’s appetite; hasn’t that been proved to everyone’s satisfaction? Mature adults, whether they be liberal or conservative, need to realize this. That’s my challenge to all sides: The nation must live within its means, and that goal must be our very top priority. If we can’t see that and act upon it, then Washington will soon lead us to the addict’s doom, dying in a gutter, begging passing strangers for our next fix. Oh, yeah, and swearing we did it all for the sake of our children.
“And their view makes perfect sense, if you look at it from the standpoint of a child, or maybe an addict, focused entirely upon the wants of the moment.”
I constantly find myself amazed at the clear parallels between the actions of liberal politicians and those of my four-year-old son when he’s trying to avert or get out of trouble. One such exchange from earlier this week:
Me: “Why is the jug of milk in the living room?”
Him: “It was an accident.”
Me: “No, it wasn’t, you had to have deliberately put it there.”
Him: “But I didn’t mean to!”
Me: “Yes you did; you put it there on purpose.”
Him: [beginning to whine] “Just stop talking about it, okay?”
Me: “No, I won’t stop talking about it. If you leave milk out, it will get yucky, and it’s not okay.”
Him: [tantrum brewing] “I don’t wanna hear about it, okay?!”
Me: “Too bad, you’re gonna hear about it. Now put it away.”
Him: [throws a tantrum] “This is your fault!”
This was the point where I put the milk away, informed him that it was not my fault since I didn’t leave the milk out, and he got a time out until he could calm down, after which we had a little talk. I guess this means that we need to start installing time-out chairs all over D.C.
Focusing on deficit reduction has been a long-standing strategy for proponents of conservatism ever since modern liberalism took hold in the 20th century. Whenever liberals make progress on their policy agenda, conservatives’ best bet has been to talk about the budget. While it is difficult to directly oppose many government programs, since the public tends to support specific services, it is easy to raise fears about overall costs.
Oh Jesus! It’s all a mind game to these people! I have a long memory. Who told Americans about the debt? Would you believe it was the Democrats? When Reagan was president, they were complaining about the deficit ALL. THE. TIME! Instead of blaming their own spending, they were blaming Reagan for taxing too little. That was causing the deficit, not them. If it wasn’t for that I wouldn’t have become concerned about the deficit when I did, as a teenager. Now they’re complaining that Americans are too concerned about it. Where was this sentiment in the 1980s?? Nowhere to be found. It wasn’t to the Democrats’ advantage. They used the issue for all it was worth. Now they want to act like it was never a priority for them. What BS. Either Zelizer is ignorant, or he’s pulling a Jedi mind trick. In either case, he’s in denial about what Obama’s presidency really faces. Anyone who wasn’t ignorant of the reality of the situation could see the real problems he’d have to deal with. Even in the presidential debates, Obama was asked about the government’s fiscal situation, and what, if anything he’d be willing to give up on his campaign agenda to help avert disaster. He didn’t seem to want to give up anything. He still doesn’t, and neither does Zelizer. He still wants to “live the dream.” How sad. He’s like the poor homeowners who were told they could buy an expensive house when they were making $12,000 a year, and then had to face the bleak reality that they couldn’t afford it.
Those are just numbers, not programs. Moreover, budget-balancing has long been symbolically important to many Americans. As the political scientist James Savage has shown, a balanced budget represents to many citizens the perception that the government maintains control over its operations.
“Just numbers.” Classic. Money isn’t real. It’s all just numbers, and numbers don’t mean anything. All that ‘rithmetic stuff in school was meaningless. It’s nothing compared to government programs that people need. How much in denial do you have to be to believe this?? I’d hate to see his finances.
Budget balancing is just symbolic. It doesn’t mean anything in reality. So all the people who defaulted on their mortgages, all the people who are up to their necks in credit card debt, and the corporations who blew hundreds of billions of dollars and collapsed are the victims of meaningless cultural symbolism. Right.
President Dwight Eisenhower believed in fiscal responsibility as a cornerstone of our national security strategy during the Cold War. It wasn’t just a political talking point for him, and it wasn’t just perception. He knew that if we got into a war with the Soviets, we’d have to be in good financial standing to finance it. That’s not just cultural symbolism. That’s real. The finances of our government have a direct impact on foreign policy. And as we’re seeing, they have a direct impact on our economy as well. Obama knows all this. He said as much 5 years ago. Hillary Clinton said as much last year, for cripes sake! Now we know Obama doesn’t care what happens to our foreign policy, or our economy, and neither does Zelizer. Great. How low the Democrats have come.