COLUMN: That Old Saying In Tennessee

by: David Sirota

Fri Jan 16, 2009 at 13:17


"There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again." - George W. Bush, 9/17/02

George W. Bush is not the world's brightest - or most articulate - man. Indeed, it often feels as if Simple Jack has been our president for the last 8 years. But occasionally, his most hilarious gaffes have an idiot savant quality to them in that they (inadvertently) express the deepest human truths. One of those, as I point out in my newspaper column this week (and as shown in the above clip) is the truth about fooling people - and how you can't pull the same trick on the public twice, and expect to get away with it. It's an important lesson for President-elect Obama - one he doesn't yet seem to get or care about, if his behavior on the bank bailout is any indication.

David Sirota :: COLUMN: That Old Saying In Tennessee
After campaigning on populist economic themes, and promising that one of his first presidential priorities would "turn(ing) the page on policies that have put the greed and irresponsibility of Wall Street before the hard work and sacrifice of folks on Main Street," Obama decided to make his very first exercise of presidential power a veto threat aimed at keeping taxpayer money flowing to the same Wall Street firms that underwrote his campaign, and are underwriting his inauguration festivities.

This is disappointing, to say the least. As the column shows, the policy merits of the bailout are few - if any. And you don't have to trust me on that - trust the GAO, the Congressional Oversight Panel and various news organizations that have shown how the money A) hasn't helped the broader economy and B) is being used to subsidize executive salaries, dividend payments and bank industry consolidation. Indeed, the New York Times reported this week that "the Treasury says there is no urgent need" for Congress to approve the next $350 billion of the bailout.

So why the rush? It's money politics in its most mundane - and predictable - form. Both parties Washington Establishments - including both Bush and Obama - know that the easiest way to pass a wildly unpopular $350 billion payoff to their donors is to quickly pass it in the middle of a presidential transition, so no one politician or party has ownership over it.

Polls show the public has always opposed this bailout, but they also showed that the original alarmism in September scared the country. It wasn't enough to get people to say they supported the bailout, but it was enough to mitigate the intensity of the opposition.

The same, I believe, won't be said this time around. With the failure of the first half of the bailout - with Wall Streeters still pocketing huge bonuses/salaries, with the economy not rising, etc. - and with Treasury acknowledging this next $350 billion isn't immediately necessary, what was once rationalized as a necessary emergency bitter pill now looks like what it really is: the most overt effort to rob taxpayers in contemporary history.

Though the rationales and explanations from Obama and other bailout supporters in Washington will try to muddle the picture with references to complexity and economic fatalism, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to see the kleptocracy at work. To the average $40,000-aire, it looks like at a time of recession, skyrocketing health care costs, and slashed wages, the government - and specifically, Obama - is responding first and foremost by forcing every man, woman and child in America to cough up about $1,100* and give it to millionaires in Manhattan - the same millionaires who comprise the political donor class, the same millionaires who created this economic crisis in the first place. And you know what - that's basically what's going on, and with the U.S. Senate's happy approval. Indeed, to date, no political leader has seriously articulated how spending this $350 billion on a Wall Street bailout is a better way to boost the economy than spending it on universal health care or a jobs-creating public infrastructure program.

After the 2008 election's focus on "change," it's an understatement to say the endurance of kleptocracy in American politics is something to behold. It's something to be in awe of, really. And it once again reminds us why a durable, long-term social movement - not just one or two elections or candidates - is needed to really start rebuilding our country.

In the short-term, we may still have a shot at forcing one half of Congress to go on record in opposition to this bailout. Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) has said he's not sure whether the House will be able to vote down the measure rejecting the next $350 billion - meaning everyone should either sign the petition against the bailout, or contact their House members directly. Congress simply handing a president - any president, including Obama - a $350 billion blank check without any legislative mandate for transparency, oversight or direction, is a clear abdication of the legislative branch's constitutional responsibilities, regardless of platitudes about how much we should simply "trust" Obama more than Bush.

In the medium-term, the more pushback and pressure Congress and Obama feels in passing this next bailout tranche, the more likely we will to get them to support measures like bankruptcy reform. And in the long-term, the more we keep supporting Better Democrats like Tom Geoghegan - and the more we let Better Democrats/bailout flip-floppers like Jeff Merkley know we're watching - the more we build a truly powerful movement organized around economic justice and against money politics. It doesn't mean totally writing off Merkley or Obama - they will likely be good allies on many issues. But it means that voicing our displeasure with their actions has a long-term value - and that voicing our displeasure with them is not a sign of supposed "disloyalty."

Read the whole column here.

The column relies on grassroots support - and because of that support, it is getting wider and wider circulation (a big thank you to all who have helped with that). So if you'd like to see my column regularly in your local paper, use this directory to find the contact info for your local editorial page editors. Get get in touch with them and point them to my Creators Syndicate site. Thanks, as always, for your ongoing readership and help contacting local editors. This column couldn't be what it is without your help.

* $350 billion divided by 300 million Americans.


Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Invest in America becoming energy independnet. (0.00 / 0)
We really need to get on about the business of becoming energy independent. This past year and the record gas prices played a huge part in our economic meltdown and seriously damaged our economy and society.We keep planning to spend BILLIONS on bailouts and stimulus plans.Bail us out of our dependence on foreign oil. Make electric plug in car technology more affordable. It cost the equivalent of 60 cents a gallon to drive an electric plug in car. The electric could be generated from wind or solar. If all gasoline cars, trucks, and SUV's instead had plug-in electric drive trains, the amount of electricity needed to replace gasoline is about equal to the estimated wind energy potential of the state of North Dakota. Get with it! Utilize free sources such as wind and solar. Stop throwing away money on things that don't work. Invest in America and it's energy independence. Create cheap clean energy, create millions of badly needed green collar jobs. Put America back to work. It is a win-win situation. We have to become more proactive citizens, educate ourselves and demand our elected officials move this country forward into the era of energy independence. Jeff Wilson's new book The Manhattan Project of 2009 Energy Independence NOW outlines a plan for America to wean itself off oil. We need a plan and we need it now! www.themanhattanprojectof2009.com  

Agreed (0.00 / 0)
While energy prices alone were not the problem, they were certainly enough to push those teetering on the edge over the side.

[ Parent ]
as usual, huh? (4.00 / 3)
the same Wall Street firms that underwrote his campaign
According to the Center for Responsive Politics, employees of securities and investment firms contributed $14M to the Obama campaign out of a total ~$600M.  That's underwriting?  If so, where does the ~$200M from small-contribution folks fit in, or, for that matter, the $42M from lawyers and law firms of all persuasions?

More (0.00 / 0)
According to CRP, Obama raised more from the education sector than commercial banking, securities and investment combined.

[ Parent ]
Small donors, middle class (0.00 / 0)
Are getting 200 billion or so of tax cuts of which David is hypocritical against (I though he was for populism?) because of ideological purity. not to mention the indirect assistance they get by billions in education, health care and jobs.

Oh and the small donors will get 50-100Billion of the second half of the bail out to help them out with foreclosures.

But you gotta ignore because the conventional wisdom of traditional blogs have spoken! Obama is bad! we are good!


[ Parent ]
What's most scary, I think (0.00 / 0)
is that it all comes down to trusting Obama to be a decent, smart, honest and competent president, without any meaningful checks and balances (as of yet) on him if he proves to not be these things. We've essentially gone from a malicious proto dictator who didn't give a damn about the country, to a presumably benevolent proto dictator, whom we now have to trust to do what's best and right for the country. It's like the election was about which king we wanted. And all because congress still won't do its job, a job that it's congressionally required to do, and which we elect it to do.

I obviously expect Obama to do a better job than Bush in virtually every way imaginable. But this trust thing is inherently un-American, wrong, and dangerous. No matter how careful and smart and decent Obama ends up being in executing his job (apart from the inevitable mistakes), and no matter how diligent he is in not abusing the powers of his office, until congress starts doing its job again, acting as a necessary, vibrant and conscientious check on presidential power and abuse, we're going to continue to not have a functioning republic.

The real problem with our political system these past 8 years was never really Bush or Cheney. The real problem was congress, and its refusal and/or inability to do its job in not standing up to and allowing the inevitable abuse of power from happening, or getting out of hand. And, apparently, this hasn't changed much. Obama will be a better president than Bush, by far. But congress still appears intent on serving as an extension of the president's staff. Oh, it makes noises, but they amount to nothing in the end. How sad.

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton


Obama has put the fox (Summers) in the henhouse (taxpayer pockets) (0.00 / 0)
This is one of the worst decisions that could be made given the economic catastrophe that has resulted from policies which Summers played a large part in enabling.

Forget the claims that he is "old school" in his views towards women and minorities. The biggest problem is that he is "old school" in his attitudes towards wealth creation. He is an expert at three card monte. He made his career and his money by skilfully substituting the wealth redistribution card for the wealth creation card.

What I now understand is that Obama supports business as usual for the Wall Street Casinos. He is not going to re-regulate derivatives trading with its 30:1 multiples on leverage and risk. He is not going to re-establish the firewalls that Glass-Steagall provided. He may even support the re-ascendance of shadow banking. The result of these decisions is that he is going to prolong the present U.S. economic decline.

People are not stupid. Not all of them anyway. Many Americans now know what caused this mess. And they know that Obama's intent is to keep that process in play.

It should come as no surprise that accountability is off the table where Obama and the U.S. banking system is concerned.


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox