Sunday, March 13, 2016

Tagged under: ,

From The US Republican Party To The UK Tories, The Empty Suits Hold The Positions Of Power

Mick Hall @ Organized Rage pours scorns on the "empty suits."

Below economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman looks at the calibre of the Republican Party candidates challenging for the US presidency in 2016.
During the recent debate of the Republican party contenders he highlights Marco Rubio’s inability to do anything besides repeat canned PR talking points, claiming it was startling. When challenged by fellow Candidate Chris Christie, Rubio simply repeated verbatim, robotic-like, the same lines.

Krugman points out the doctrines every Republican party politician now needs to endorse, on pain of excommunication by the mainstream media, the multinationals, and the billionaires who finance their campaigns. These basically boil down to low taxes, cuts to welfare benefits, support for privatisation and private health care, less regulation of big business and private security contractors, support for foreign wars, against rights for women.

Reading this list it's clear this issue is not just US centric, this particular cap would also fit most members of the current British Tory government led by David Cameron and George Osborne. If you listen to David Cameron speak, he repeats canned PR talking points verbatim over and again, one only has to listen to him during PMQs to understand this.

He cannot and will not go off message and act like a normal human being hence his inability to answer a straight question. Why? Because if he did it would reveal him to be little more than an empty suit.

A member of the BMA junior doctor panel who had been negotiating with the Secretary of State for Health, best summed up the dangers of having these empty suits running the nation:

"Jeremy Hunt as an example is dangerous because he doesn’t know how much he does not know."

We only need look at the middle east to understand the dangers of having these empty suits in power. Lets hope the US electorate does not make the same mistake as we did in the UK.


-------------------------------------------------
The Time-Loop Party By Paul Krugman

By now everyone who follows politics knows about Marco Rubio’s software-glitch performance in Saturday’s Republican debate. (I’d say broken-record performance, but that would be showing my age.) Not only did he respond to a challenge from Chris Christie about his lack of achievements by repeating, verbatim, the same line from his stump speech he had used a moment earlier; when Mr. Christie mocked his canned delivery, he repeated the same line yet again.

Paul Krugman (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
In other news, last week — on Groundhog Day, to be precise — Republicans in the House of Representatives cast what everyone knew was a purely symbolic, substance-free vote to repeal Obamacare. It was the 63rd time they’ve done so.

Mr. Rubio’s inability to do anything besides repeat canned talking points was startling. Worse, it was funny, which means that it has gone viral. And it reinforced the narrative that he is nothing but an empty suit. But really, isn’t everyone in his party doing pretty much the same thing, if not so conspicuously?

The truth is that the whole G.O.P. seems stuck in a time loop, saying and doing the same things over and over. And unlike Bill Murray’s character in the movie “Groundhog Day,” Republicans show no sign of learning anything from experience.

Think about the doctrines every Republican politician now needs to endorse, on pain of excommunication.

First, there’s the ritual denunciation of Obamacare as a terrible, very bad, no good, job-killing law. Did I mention that it kills jobs? Strange to say, this line hasn’t changed at all despite the fact that we’ve gained 5.7 million private-sector jobs since January 2014, which is when the Affordable Care Act went into full effect.

Then there’s the assertion that taxing the rich has terrible effects on economic growth, and conversely that tax cuts at the top can be counted on to produce an economic miracle.

This doctrine was tested more than two decades ago, when Bill Clinton raised tax rates on high incomes; Republicans predicted disaster, but what we got was the economy’s best run since the 1960s. It was tested again when George W. Bush cut taxes on the wealthy; Republicans predicted a “Bush boom,” but actually got a lackluster expansion followed by the worst slump since the Great Depression. And it got tested a third time after President Obama won re-election, and tax rates at the top went up substantially; since then we’ve gained eight million private-sector jobs.

Oh, and there’s also the spectacular failure of the Kansas experiment, where huge tax cuts have created a budget crisis without delivering any hint of the promised economic miracle.

But Republican faith in tax cuts as a universal economic elixir has, if anything, grown stronger, with Mr. Rubio, in particular, going even further than the other candidates by promising to eliminate all taxes on capital gains.

Meanwhile, on foreign policy the required G.O.P. position has become one of utter confidence in the effectiveness of military force. How did that work in Iraq? Never mind: The only reason anybody in the world fails to do exactly what America wants must be because our leadership is lily-livered if not treasonous. And diplomacy, no matter how successful, is denounced as appeasement.

Not incidentally, the shared Republican stance on foreign policy is basically the same view Richard Hofstadter famously described in his essay “The Paranoid Style in American Politics”: Whenever America fails to impose its will on the rest of the world, it must be because it has been betrayed. The John Birch Society has won the war for the party’s soul.

Like her or not, Hillary Clinton is a genuine policy wonk, who can think on her feet and clearly knows what she is talking about on many issues.
Bernie Sanders is much more of a one-note candidate, but at least his signature issue — rising inequality and the effects of money on politics — reflects real concerns. When you revisit Democratic debates after what went down Saturday, it doesn’t feel as if you’re watching a different party, it feels as if you’ve entered a different intellectual and moral universe.

So how did this happen to the G.O.P.? In a direct sense, I suspect that it has a lot to do with Foxification, the way Republican primary voters live in a media bubble into which awkward facts can’t penetrate. But there must be deeper causes behind the creation of that bubble.

Whatever the ultimate reason, however, the point is that while Mr. Rubio did indeed make a fool of himself on Saturday, he wasn’t the only person on that stage spouting canned talking points that are divorced from reality. They all were, even if the other candidates managed to avoid repeating themselves word for word.

0 comments :