GOP's Triumph of Reality Over Ideology

GOP's Triumph of Ideology Over Reality - Jonathan Schell, The Nation

I originally misread the title, the version in my title is how I read it.

This seems to be a complete case of transference.  The Republicans are accused of the motives of  Jonathan Schell.

“The record of the last decade or so suggests that the party these days is animated by two main goals. First, it seeks unchallengeable, absolute power. Its modus operandi for achieving that goal has been to use institutional power—the power of corporations, courts and legislatures—to acquire more institutional power.” Substitute Democrat for the party, and it is correct.

The republican party is for decreasing the power of the federal government, in favor of the states and the people.

“A recent case is the drive in Republican-dominated states around the country to disenfranchise Democratic-leaning constituencies, such as the poor and minorities, by legislating onerous requirements for voting.”  Voter fraud is no reason to make the process more selective?  An yes, the Republicans have been successful in this area. The Democrats are very selective in thier logic: the Obama initiative to register the dream act kids is much more selective than Jonathan Schell would allow for the vote.

“Republicans have exhibited a strong desire to take up residence in an imaginary world, an alternate reality—one in which global warming is found to be a fraud perpetrated by the world’s top scientists, Obama turns out to have been born in Kenya and is a Muslim (and a socialist), budgets can be slashed without social pain, firing government employees reduces unemployment, tax cuts for the wealthy replenish government coffers, and so forth. Perhaps it seems odd to identify such an objective as a political goal, but past ideological movements of the left as well as the right offer many examples of the power of such a longing.”  The inverse of Jonathan Schell’s argument, seems perfectly logical. (It is too bad he gives no supporting evidence for any of these assertions.)

One exception “budgets can be slashed without social pain”  There will be pain, but it is necessary. “, tax cuts for the wealthy replenish government coffers”- this has been shown to work time and again, at least short term.  The wealthy keep money locked in investments and when taxes are cut, they rush into the bargin and transfer the deferred income into actual income.

“The career of Sarah Palin offers an illustration. She and reality were strangers, as the world saw in her first interviews and subsequently. Her mind was almost a blank slate in that respect, and she showed neither inclination nor aptitude to remedy the lack. To draw her into that world was a kind of cruel mistake. She soon withdrew from it, deciding, after protracted dithering, to stay out of this year’s presidential race and retreat into a world in which her talents and temperament were in fact stellar, the world of myth-making and spin on Fox News. (It is entirely in keeping with this choice that her husband, Todd Palin, has now turned up in NBC’s militarized “reality” show—that is, unreality show—Stars Earn Stripes.)”

“There was a lesson in Sarah Palin’s withdrawal. For all the triumphs of cash-fueled political manipulation, the sphere of policy and governmental decisions has its dangers for the addicts of unreality. Fantasies can be a path to power, but they can also become a costly self-indulgence”  Wait! Where did this come from.  I tend to use the mention of Sara Palin’s name as a litmus test.  People who routinely use the liberal “Sara Palin” narrative are either not too bright or are deliberately ignoring reality. In this case however, Jonathan Schell is a perpetrator of continuing character assassination that is the politics of personal destruction.

And Sara Palin is one of their failures.  She has survived and is a force on the national arena.   She won’t stay dead, she won’t be irrelevant, as is - Jonathan Schell

"Such is the case with Ryan.  ...  He is a major-league denier. All the most prestigious academies of science around the world, including the American National Academy of Sciences, agree that warming is real, man-made and well advanced. Ryan demurs. He has accused climate scientists of a “perversion of the scientific method, where data were manipulated to support a predetermined conclusion,” in order to “intentionally mislead the public on the issue of climate change.” He has voted against any and all measures to remedy the problem. He has suggested that the existence of snow in winter in Wisconsin is evidence against warming, which he has called “a tough sell in our communities, where much of the state is buried under snow.”"

Science does not reach consensus.  Every theory is subject to verification.  "All the most prestigious academies of science around the world," saying it is so, doesn't make it so. The theory of global warming has failed to realize its projected temperatures, time and again. "He has voted against any and all measures to remedy the problem.".  That the remedies suggested would solve the problem, is fantasy even if the theory were proven. I basically agree with Ryan, so that is now settled science.

"As for that budget, it promises to achieve balance while providing no such thing, instead calling for broad tax cuts without specifying spending cuts anywhere near the level that would be needed as offsets to bring the budget into balance. It depends entirely on one of the hoariest of false promises in politics, the free lunch, thereby contributing to what Paul Krugman rightly calls an economic “culture of fraud.”"

The republicans have the power to make cuts. Specifying which cuts is unnecessary.  Lets assume an across the board cut, or better yet, a reduction to 2008 levels. How about just removing the inefficiency of the federal government by letting the states do almost all of the social programs, and letting the federal government focus on the items actually specified in the constitution. The reduction in federal head count alone could achieve the the savings, and who better to make the ultimate sacrifice.

 "hoariest of false promises in politics, the free lunch" , what, like claiming the top 1% should carry the whole load?

And so forth and so on