Peak Dumbassness (4.00 / 3)

As Matt Yglesias has been pointing out, this sort of thing is especially annoying coming from people (like Markey and Schumer) who represent some of the most mass transit-friendly parts of the nation.

One of the biggest political threats we're going to have to face is the millions of people and billions of dollars of infrastructure that are committed to the suburban sprawl lifestyle that just isn't going to make it through the next few decades. My biggest fear is a reactionary/fascistic political response to the huge amount of anger and disillusionment that is going to be unleashed when people realize their version of the American Dream turns out to be a Potemkin illusion. This sort of prattling on about OPEC, as if it were still 1981, is the worst possible way to prepare the public for the changes ahead.

---

by: Chachy @ Fri May 16, 2008 at 18:10:02 PM UTC

Agreed - remarkably stupid pandering (0.00 / 0)

Just like the gas tax holiday. At least Clinton and McCain have the (admittedly poor) excuse that they are running for office in a competitive election. As Matt Y. points out, Schumer is a shoo-in for reelection, I assume Markey is too. So why aren't they using high gasoline prices as a "teachable moment" and say, "You know what folks? Jimmy Carter was right! We should have been investing in mass transit and alternative energy since the late 70's. Oh well! But better late than never. We can still do this, and leave our children a cleaner cooler world with a more secure future."

---

by: Jeff S. @ Sat May 17, 2008 at 00:36:32 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Can't we just nuke them from space? (0.00 / 0)

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

---

by: Will @ Fri May 16, 2008 at 18:32:23 PM UTC

Saudis (0.00 / 0)

also, we don't actually own Saudi Arabia

actually I think they own us, specifically our subprime paper.

---

by: AliceDem @ Fri May 16, 2008 at 23:40:57 PM UTC

Spend Much Time In The Real World, Natasha? (0.00 / 0)

When I read posts like this I am reminded sharply about the naivete among Obama's supporters and, to a lesser extent, among the bloggingheads (mostly young, mostly male, mostly...).

Markey is ONE a Democrat and a good one. Just what in the world would you have him do? Throw out 50 years of established policy and do what...?

You folks need to grow up and take off the rose-colored glasses, because you are setting yourselves up for a huge fall. Much of what you want to do will not be possible even in YOUR lifetime, never mind the generation before you (baby boomers). Our generation gets a lot of criticism for what we have not done, but we wouldn't be where we are today - in a positive sense - if we hadn't fought like hell in the past.

Throwing over the practices of the past because you don't like them or don't agree with them is actually beyond naive. It is dangerous, especially when you have no concrete policies to replace them with.

Tilting at windmills is one thing. Tearing them down without replacements, well, that's something entirely different.

---

by: mabelle55 @ Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:54:41 AM UTC

wow (4.00 / 1)

Hey Mabelle, I'm young (well 30 :), male, and a relative Obama supporter (certainly in comparison to the alternatives).  I have a number of issues with your comment, starting with the incredibly condescending tone and the inherent conservatism embodied in the call for defeatism:

You folks need to grow up and take off the rose-colored glasses

The U.S. is an imperialist hegemon that has set it self up for a huge fall by having (in this context), poor energy and transportation policy for about 100 years in most places, for not investing infrastructure, and, from the vantage point of capitalists and by implication the American working/middle class (which is rich by global standards), set itself up for a huge fall by through the last 8 years of straying from the bipartisan imperialist consensus on foreign policy.  Not that that was just in any sense anyway.

How's that? ;)  By the way, I would point out that it's the generations before us that have generated these horrendous policies and now have the gall to ask us not to take a deeper look at changing them?  (See the last 30 years of history or just look at the powerbroker).

because you are setting yourselves up for a huge fall.

Actually, some of us are depending on that collapse of faith.  So that people will move away from Democratic politics and towards a broader conception of politics and social democracy and possibly even to rewriting the Constitution someday, at the end of a lengthy (30 years?) social movement.

Much of what you want to do will not be possible even in YOUR lifetime, never mind the generation before you (baby boomers).

Yeah we know.  Thanks for the news ;)

Our generation gets a lot of criticism for what we have not done, but we wouldn't be where we are today - in a positive sense - if we hadn't fought like hell in the past.

Which generation is that?  The baby boomer generation that is responsible for a) consumption b) ensuring patterns of consumption c) has placed its own priorities through demographic majority before every other d) elected the last 30 years of horrendous politics e) generated narcissism at a rate that's unbelievable (see: Clinton, Clinton, Bush II, and others) f) has glorified their parents' generation as "the greatest generation" - you know the one, parts of which resisted lifting immigration bars and supported segregation; and finally g) has the gall to criticise US, who are younger or older, for saying that it's fucked up that our government takes our tax money , drops bombs, doesn't shore up levees, and generally acts as if there was no tommorrow except when it comes to ensuring Baby Boomer social security?

Please.

Throwing over the practices of the past because you don't like them or don't agree with them is actually beyond naive.

You're right, it is beyond naive.  It's progressive and sometimes even radical!  We will find the solutions along the way because we're eminently practical (thanks to the gutted intellectual discourse of the United States and because there's not really much else we can do in an economy that's been slowing down since the 1970s for most people--so that there's not really much left other than relying on your wits as philosophy.

Whereas your argument is a classic statement of temperamental conservatism, another call to go to a nice safe Starbucks in a nice safe bobo neighborhood (made safe by broken windows policing against Black and Latino people ;) and talk about "soccer moms" and "triangulation" and "Welfare queens."

So viva la revolucion (ours, not yours)!  We'll get back to you after we clean up your mess ;)

---

by: dr anonymous @ Sat May 17, 2008 at 14:34:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

sorry - i forgot to mention the deindustrialization of the manufacturing sector and the creation of the financial capital beast (0.00 / 0)

sometime's it's hard to keep up.

---

by: dr anonymous @ Sat May 17, 2008 at 14:41:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Quadruple "New Starts" funding (0.00 / 0)

Amen Natasha, especially on the last paragraph/sentence!!

There is a mind-bogglingly easy short-term, no thinking solution for bringing "The Public Transportation to the People" fund the pipeline! There are over thirty rail transit projects that qualify for federal funds but are stuck somewhere along the process waiting behind other projects because their isn't enough money.

Public transit is already so popular that there are far more cities and regions applying for funds than there are funds. Quadruple the "New Starts" funding in 2009 and by 2010 you will have many happy mayors praising the Democratic Congress for bringing home the bacon, creating local jobs, and providing a transportation choice to everyone struck in a car for lack of an alternative.

We need a comprehensive plan to electrify transportation by rebuilding our urban trams and electrifying the Railroads. But action can happen immediately by simply funding the transit projects that are ready to go and stuck by the current lack of funding.

Oh yeah, and in might be a first step in saving civilization and if anybody cares about that.

---

by: EastBayBlue @ Mon May 19, 2008 at 07:18:31 AM UTC