Subscribe via RSS Feed

Brodertastic

[ 32 ] February 22, 2013 |

Ron Fournier wins the 2013 David Broder award for his column arguing “sure, Republicans are nuts. But why won’t President Obama cave to their wishes to avoid the sequester? Also, we need to destroy social programs to cut deficits, a political action absolutely vital even though no one outside of the Beltway supports it.”

Share with Sociable

Comments (32)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. cpinva says:

    yes, i think broder may even be jealous.

  2. JKTHs says:

    Cmon Erik you’re selling David Brooks short. You can’t be getting voter fatigue with him. He wrote the exact same column, blaming Obama for not proposing a “politically plausible” alternative. Course when you think about for all of two seconds, that translates to “please negotiate with yourself and cave entirely”

  3. Scott S. says:

    Why should Fournier care? He’ll still get paid, no matter what — and isn’t that what America is all about anyway?

  4. Brandon says:

    “If it’s about governing, the story changes: In any enterprise, the chief executive is ultimately accountable for success and failure.”

    protip: our government isn’t set up like a corporation

  5. brewmn says:

    I don’t think this is directed as Obama as much as it’s directed at Paul Krugman for his heretical statements suggesting that maybe Teh Deficit should not be the government’s Priority Number One. Those statements have really pissed of a lot of the People Whose Opinions Matter.

    • cpinva says:

      certainly true.

      “Those statements have really pissed of a lot of the People Whose Opinions Matter.”

      how dare dr. krugman bring empirical facts to the table, that’s so declasse’. that, and it gets in the way of all those lovely cocktail shrimp!

      true confession: i’m really irked at my parents right now. they insisted i get an education that would actually enable me to be gainfully employed. i spent four years, in a downward spiral of accounting, law, math, statistics and econ. on top of that, i then spent months studying for and passing the cpa exam. all that time wasted! i could have spent it partying, then become a highly compensated beltway pundit, which requires little in the way of actual knowledge of how things work.

      i’m not sure i can ever forgive my parents. do you have even the slightest idea how mind numbingly dull cost accounting is?

  6. Seitz says:

    It’s amazing that someone could rise to the level Fournier has reached without understanding the dynamic between a CEO and his employees, or alternatively the dynamic between a President and Congress.

    • BigHank53 says:

      This was why I would have actually supported a Trump candidacy. How long would it take his head to explode once he grasped that he couldn’t fire Congressmen, Senators, SC justices, state governors, and individual citizens?

      This is also why “run the government like a business” is such a pudding-headed idea.

    • cpinva says:

      that, and he and his beltway comrades have some strange notions about government spending. to read/listen to them, they appear to believe (and i’m only half way joking here) that government expenditures disappear into some “black hole of calcutta”, never to be seen or heard from again, except defense spending. it has no effect on the economy as whole (again, except for defense spending), and is thus simply “wasted” funds.

      either these people are truly, well and totally clueless, or they’ve adopted that facade, in order to get paid. either way, they’re a danger to themselves and others.

  7. John says:

    I think the paraphrase of Billy Joel is what takes this one over the top.

  8. Steve LaBonne says:

    People, you’re really trying a little to hard on this one. The simple reality is that Fournier is and always has been a Republican hack, so naturally he’s shilling for the Republican position. It’s what he does.

  9. Njorl says:

    Where do these people get the idea that Americans are “fed up” with the partisan wrangling? Are there 800,000 people on The Mall protesting against it? People disapprove of it. That’s all.

  10. “Someone needs to be the grownup.”

    Because being the grownup means letting the children do whatever they want, for the sake of peace. What?

    • Jesse Levine says:

      8 to 5 Obama does fold on revenue. 3 to 1 in favor of the chained CPI. Over/under on cuts to Medicare 700 million, Medicaid 300 million. I hope I’m wrong.

      • Let me get this straight: in the 2011 deal, when he was in a weaker political position, he got entitlement benefits specifically excluded from the sequester cuts.

        He didn’t do it in the April 2011 deal. He didn’t do it in the debt ceiling deal. He didn’t do it in the fiscal cliff deal. But now, he’s going to agree to change the cuts in the sequester to include the very things he refused to allow back then?

        And he’s going to do so as part of a deal that doesn’t include revenues. All this time, you’ve been saying that it was only the Republicans’ refusal to take a taxes-for-benefits-cuts deal that saved us from Neolibaggeddon, but now, in the strongest negotiating position he’s yet found himself, he’s going to give them away without getting revenues in return.

        That’s quite a prediction.

      • JKTHs says:

        I might take the over on Medicare just because it’s such a small number and there’s been plenty of small bore Medicare policies that would involve more money than that. Then again, if you mean Medicare benefits I’ll take the under.

        Frankly, I don’t think much of anything is going to happen until the debt ceiling, if even then.

  11. max says:

    But why won’t President Obama cave to their wishes to avoid the sequester? Also, we need to destroy social programs to cut deficits, a political action absolutely vital even though no one outside of the Beltway supports it.

    Now that is the One True High Broderism, unencumbered by tasteless logic. And with a display of the purest uncut Low Broderism from Brooks today, truly, it is a banner day.

    max
    ['All Things Bad and Wrong.']

  12. wengler says:

    I went to the Credit Union this week and looked at the board where they had the rates on treasury bonds.

    0.01s across the board.

    Yeah, let’s hack and slash. No one wants to lend money to the US government. I mean if the federal budget was a household budget, it makes much more sense to let the kids starve than have to pay dime’s interest on a thousand dollars.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.