« Let Us All Give Thanks | Main | Controversy Over Kansas »
July 26, 2005
The Unbearable Smugness of Baering
What is Ken Baer talking about? No one's pleased that Medicare makes mistakes and wastes money, but does he really think that Democrats are resisting efforts at "reform" because we want more medical mistakes and less money for the program? Does he really think Medicare, with higher patient satisfaction than private insurance and slower cost growth, is "FUBAR" (if so, why reform it? "Fucked up beyond all repair" kinda precludes, you know, repair)? Does he really think Democrats should be loudly demanding reform at a moment when we can't pass or craft any legislation on the subject?
Since the DLC conversation has been raging around, I might as well tap it now: this is what I don't like about the DLC breed. It's not that they're not progressive -- I'm almost certain Ken and I would agree on what to do here -- it's that their rhetorical devices for getting there tend to include 1) a lot of sniffing and despairing at all those hopelessly irresponsible liberals followed by a 2) high-minded promise to stroll into whatever trap the Republicans have set for them or 3) set one themselves if the right's been remiss.
Unless Ken, in some absinthe-fueled hallucination, suddenly believes we're in power or Republicans like entitlement programs, he'd do well to wisen up a bit. If Democrats start screaming for Medicare reform, Republicans, who control every lever of government that could conceivably enact reform, will happily take the opportunity to gut the program. That's not, assumedly, what we're after. But if we demand change at a time when we can't help craft it, that's exactly what we'll get.
When we reenter power, we can do the responsible thing and tighten up our old programs. But for now, declaring Medicare inviolable in the face of its enemies isn't irresponsible, it's necessary. When the folks who can actually bring legislation to the floor want to call some Democrats and explain their great ideas for bettering the program, we'll listen. Until then, I see no reason to arm DeLay and point his gun at the cornerstone of the Great Society.
July 26, 2005 in Health Care | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c572d53ef00d834233b7d53ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Unbearable Smugness of Baering:
» Dems 2008: Netroots Love or DLC Baggage from Swing State Project
If you've been within earshot of the liberal blogosphere, you've probably heard of the collective eye-rolling that followed the fact that Evan Bayh, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Mark Warner and Tom Vilsack all groveled before Al From at this week's DLC mee... [Read More]
Tracked on Jul 26, 2005 5:01:22 PM
» Dems 2008: Netroots Love or DLC Baggage from Swing State Project
If you've been within earshot of the liberal blogosphere, you've probably heard of the collective eye-rolling that followed the fact that Evan Bayh, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Mark Warner and Tom Vilsack all groveled before Al From at this week's DLC mee... [Read More]
Tracked on Jul 26, 2005 5:51:05 PM
» Dems 2008: Netroots Love or DLC Baggage from Swing State Project
If you've been within earshot of the liberal blogosphere, you've probably heard of the collective eye-rolling that followed the fact that Evan Bayh, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Mark Warner and Tom Vilsack all groveled before Al From at this week's DLC mee... [Read More]
Tracked on Jul 26, 2005 5:56:40 PM
» Dems 2008: Netroots Love or DLC Baggage from Swing State Project
If you've been within earshot of the liberal blogosphere, you've probably heard of the collective eye-rolling that followed the fact that Evan Bayh, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Mark Warner and Tom Vilsack all groveled before Al From at this week's DLC mee... [Read More]
Tracked on Jul 26, 2005 5:59:55 PM
» You Down Wit' DLC? from Electoral Math
he DLC national conversation has brought another round out of the circular firing squads. This really has to stop. On both sides. [Read More]
Tracked on Jul 27, 2005 3:34:14 AM
Comments
Fantastic title
Posted by: TJ | Jul 26, 2005 12:40:28 PM
I thought it was “fucked up beyond all recognition”...
Posted by: Andew Cory | Jul 26, 2005 1:14:27 PM
Yes, yes, yes.
This strategy of DLC attacks on 'libruls' makes me sick. The DLC has become the left wing of the Repub party, and the more we point this out, the better for the country.
Don't ask me why Hillary went to the meeting....
Posted by: JimPortlandOR | Jul 26, 2005 1:15:10 PM
I think it is a fair contention that Democrats are very much associated with Medicare (and similar programs)
If Medicare is badly broken, and if Democrats seem content with that, indeed supporting keeping it in it's current state, why would you expect to 'reenter power'?
If public preception becomes that the cornerstone of the Great Society is broken and democrats don't care about fixing it, then what are you offering to induce the public to put you in power? More of the same? Bigger, better, more broken programs?
I have said before, not seriously addressing the issues of the day as a sort of 'temper tantrum' because you are not in power is not a good strategy for Democrats.
Posted by: Dave Justus | Jul 26, 2005 2:00:35 PM
So Dave, explain something to me: how do we seriously address the issues of the day? I mean it, what's the strategy? We do have a variety of bill and plans for Medicare, but none can make it to the floor. We don't have television stations and nobody wants us on to talk about overhauling health care? So how do we do it? Not in a theoretical sense, but in a real way?
Posted by: Ezra Klein | Jul 26, 2005 2:10:15 PM
Ezra, why bash Baer for looking down on Democratic defenders of Medicare when you yourself went and castigated those liberals who buy organic for looking down on po' folk who can't afford the morality of free range chicken? Just curious.
FWIW, Medicare isn't fucked as a program at all. Ask any senior who is on Medicare yourself if you don't believe me. The problem of course is that medical costs overall have skyrocketed, which means Medicare pays more for medical care. Duh, or as the liberal elites say, Q.E.D.
Posted by: David W. | Jul 26, 2005 2:26:26 PM
C'mon Ezra, get wise! Serious and sober policy proposals are the road to electoral success in this day and age!
The DLC is right. The age of slash and burn politics, of personal attacks and cheap slogans, well, that's over. Today the public is begging for wonkery, carefully analyzing the relative proposals of both parties. If Republicans, with their earnest and carefully considered reforms, are met with mere Democratic obstructionism, why, imagine the optics!
Save us, DLC! Save us!
Posted by: Realish | Jul 26, 2005 2:33:03 PM
"Ezra, why bash Baer for looking down on Democratic defenders of Medicare when you yourself went and castigated those liberals who buy organic for looking down on po' folk who can't afford the morality of free range chicken?"
And this is an operative analogy...how? One argument is on the neutral morality and economic message of organic food, the other is about bad political strategy. When they put their rings together they make...what? Captain Incoherent?
Posted by: Ezra Klein | Jul 26, 2005 2:42:26 PM
"Today the public is begging for wonkery, carefully analyzing the relative proposals of both parties."
Very funny stuff, Realish. I hope others appreciated your snark.
Posted by: rasher | Jul 26, 2005 2:43:10 PM
The DLC's personal attacks and other wankery are just downright ridiculous. At least when people like Markos or Atrios criticize them, they aren't necessarily personal attacks, but they're reasoned criticisms based on reality and the desire to win. Personal slams and attacks on the netroots in general seem utterly ridiculous to me. I'm sure Paul Hackett is just the type of guy the DLC would want, but why has he had to rely on the netroots for support? Because the DLC is full of insiders. They need to open their arms, endorse the other wings of the party with plans to build on the common ground we have, not deepening the rifts.
Posted by: Chris Woods | Jul 26, 2005 2:47:19 PM
Yeah, that was rather good. Though it does provethat my blog won't be winning us elections anytime soon!
Hey! Voter! Here's another of my ideas for restructuring the delivery and billing efforts of health care services! Vote Democrat!
Posted by: Ezra Klein | Jul 26, 2005 2:47:58 PM
"The DLC is right. The age of slash and burn politics, of personal attacks and cheap slogans, well, that's over."
-- Unless of course it is Republicans or the DLC doing it, and then it's all hunky-dory....riiiiiight. I'll remember that the next time some DLC hack or some nice civil, genteel Republican starts equating anything essentially to the left of Nixon with communism, treason and heresy
"Today the public is begging for wonkery, carefully analyzing the relative proposals of both parties."
--Whatever you are smoking, I want some. The party that actually proposes anything has no power to accomplish anything in the current climate and the party which currently does have the kind of leverage to accomplish anything never ventures out beyond a few pat, well rehearsed but otherwise vapid and uninformative talking points
"If Republicans, with their earnest and carefully considered reforms..." ---Whaaaaat?!!! I just shot Mountain Dew out of my nose and on to my keyboard..."fanatical and obsessive" would be a better description for the sort of quid-pro-quo that exists between the Republican party and its fattest contributors, to say nothing of the fact that "reform" is typically a rebuilding or restorative process, and tht is not what i have seen from this current incarnation of the GOP---
"...are met with mere Democratic obstructionism, why, imagine the optics!"
---Again, so like slash and burn attacks and cheap slogans, obstructionism is only acceptable when employed by Republicans, right?
PUT
THE KOOL-AID
DOWN!
Posted by: Mister Lovegrove | Jul 26, 2005 3:05:15 PM
Neeever mind...man, use the snark delimiter or something,,,,aaagh
Posted by: Mister Lovegrove | Jul 26, 2005 3:07:10 PM
Not to nitpick -- okay, to nitpick -- I always thought the R in FUBAR stood for "recognition."
I'm just sayin'.
Posted by: nobody | Jul 26, 2005 3:46:06 PM
Actually, the DLC is not the left wing of the Republican party, it's more to the center. As for Hillary, don't forget she was a Goldwater girl when Barry ran for Prez and judging from the way she messed up Clinton's healtcare initiative, she hasn't strayed very far ideologically.
mort
Posted by: Moriarity | Jul 26, 2005 4:04:51 PM
"Not to nitpick -- okay, to nitpick -- I always thought the R in FUBAR stood for "recognition.""
$hit, Ezra. There goes your whole argument;)
Posted by: Lewis Carroll | Jul 26, 2005 4:06:55 PM
This is, oddly enough, a contested point. From Wikipedia: "FUBAR - Fucked Up Beyond All Recognition/Repair/Reason/Redemption."
From Whatis.com: FUBAR is an acronym that originated in the military to stand for the words "f***ed up beyond all repair."
Posted by: Ezra Klein | Jul 26, 2005 4:13:12 PM
"And this is an operative analogy...how? One argument is on the neutral morality and economic message of organic food, the other is about bad political strategy."
It's simple enough Ezra - kicking liberal ass over alledged organic food snobbery is no different than kicking liberal ass over alledgedly resisting efforts towards Medicare reform. In both cases, it isn't the issue that really matters, it's the kicking of ass to one's left that does. Baer gets your goat because you are someone who is sincerely for decent health care, just as you got the goat of those people who are sincerely for eating organic food.
Posted by: David W. | Jul 26, 2005 4:28:55 PM
Ezra, did you research the true meaning of the 'R' in FUBAR before you posted? I wouldn't put it past you.
Posted by: Neil the Ethical Werewolf | Jul 26, 2005 4:30:08 PM
The DLC is FUBAR (read the R to be recognition, repair, reason, and redemption.)
BTW: Ezra made Atrios' front page....
Posted by: JimPortlandOR | Jul 26, 2005 4:31:06 PM
FUBAR is an acronym that originated in the military to stand for the words "f***ed up beyond all repair." This is often softened to "fouled up beyond all repair" in reference to hardware. The programming and documentation equivalent is "fouled up beyond all recognition." Sometimes the last word is "recovery" or "reconciliation" or "reason."
Posted by: jakester | Jul 26, 2005 4:38:32 PM
that was from whatis.com but obviously Ezra got it first. sigh. Anyway: seriously. Has the DLC been paying attention for the past 6+ years? At what point do they think the GOP is going to start working WITH us to craft sound policy? I mean, even IF we got a great bill to pass the House, and an almost identical great bill to pass the Senate, you know DeLay and fiends will completely alter the bill in conference committee.
Have they even thought about documenting the atrocities, as atrios likes to put it?
Nonetheless, between this rift and the AFL-CIO/SEIU split, the inevitably fracturing of the Dems predicted after November's elections is coming to pass. Not sure there's much we can do about it. Just keep speaking truth to power and some day righteousness will win out, I spose.
Posted by: jakester | Jul 26, 2005 4:44:35 PM
Kenny Baer just deserves bashing in general. He frequently writes in way over his head on topics he is clearly not well informed about. What is he? Why does anyone listen to him? I'm kinda sick of these mealy "democrats" who do nothing but attack liberalism, is if that will somehow help to defeat the conservatives in power. Of course it will not, and neither will being a Republican-alike. All of this DLC nonsense has got to stop somehow. They've got to realize that a god damn decade has gone by since their ideas were influential or politically useful. Time and time again, the public says they want a clear choice between candidates, and let the democratic process sort it out from there. Time and again, the public gets a choice between a real Republican and a fake Republican. Why do we keep running with these people? You can have a stark difference of candidates, even, such as Bush vs. Kerry, but the hostile, conservative media will do everything they can (save the majority of Editorial boards) to slander and smear the D. candidate. So you just end up with a real Republican untouched by the media, vs. a fake Republican who is also "lacking values" and involved in "scandals", whether there's anything to it or not, whether the Republican is involved in any scandals or not.
Its really like these guys just went on autopilot for the last 10 years and are just waking up now, and their first instinct is to just spout the same crap they were spouting before they went to sleep. Times have changed, people. I get annoyed at the far left too, myself included, I'm annoyed by knee-jerk anti-business philosophies, etc. But the DLC has nothing to offer idea-wise, we've all heard it all before, and rejected it before.
Posted by: Onceler | Jul 26, 2005 5:13:22 PM
Ezra,
If I was in charge of progessives (which is unlikely to happen, since I am not one) I would not focus right now on power politics in congress. Simply put, you don't have the power to play that game.
That doesn't mean you can't offer solutions. You are well aware of the coservative think tanks that were spawned during the nadir of Republican power. All they did was offer solutions that had no chance of ever being enacted. But they were serious solutions connected to a serious philosophy. You can disagree with both the philosophy and the solutions, but they were serious about things and not just focused on how to win the next electoral game.
Coservative solutions, in a variety of flavors, were widely known even though they didn't control the levers of power and their solutions had no chance of actually coming into being. I even recall crazy talk about having school vouchers and privatizing social security...
The trick I think for you is two things. Identify both what needs to be changed in, for example medicare, and more importantly, WHY it needs to be changed. The WHY should be philosophical. Presumably, Medicare as it now exists does not match up with your core principles of how the program should work. Identify and publicise those core principles and explain how your changes would more align the program with those principles and over time you will build a much stronger philosophical movement. Liberals often seem to me to be lazy intellectually (not stupid) but too often they let sheild their core beliefs from any challenge.
Medicare is good because it is a liberal program and liberal programs are good Q.E.D.
Lastly, I would advise you to remember that theory and politics are two different things. With theory we design our 'perfect' solution and demand purity and completeness. In politics, you have to compromise sometimes and it is important not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Posted by: Dave Justus | Jul 27, 2005 8:55:35 AM
Ezra, kudos to you for putting your finger on what's aggravating about the DLC. I think it all goes back to the "Third Way" mentality that believes one draws credibility from eschewing plain jane liberalism in favor of pro-business centrism - and I say this largely as a centrist with pro-business leanings. The Third Way notion is "hopelessly irresponsible" these days, just like eschewing achievable insider Democratic liberalism in favor of radical outsider Naderism was hopelessly irresponsible in 2000. We're all progressives now.
I also have to throw jeers in the direction of the Atrios/Kos crew who consistently use the obnoxious tone the DLC often strikes as an excuse to engage in a pissing match rather than any contemplation of the DLC's ideas. I agree with Dave Justus - when you're out of power you're sposed to be fomenting your new ideas and strengthening your coalition, not sneering at each other's politics. I sure wish somebody in the blogosphere would take it upon themselves to put both obnoxion and counter-obnoxion to bed.
Posted by: Eric E | Jul 27, 2005 9:00:50 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
