As’ad AbuKhalil — Newly-Elected Progressives Confront AIPAC Test

Already backpedaling on campaign rhetoric. 

After they won their primaries, some young progressives curbed their pro-Palestine rhetoric. Now they are in Washington getting oriented. Next up: early test votes in the new year sponsored by the pro-Israel lobby, writes As`ad AbuKhalil.

Consortium News

Newly-Elected Progressives Confront AIPAC Test
As’ad AbuKhalil | Lebanese-American professor of political science at California State University, Stanislaus

See also at Consortium News

Another case of failing up.

Clapper Admits Gross Intelligence Failure on Iraq WMDs But Still Escapes Justice

Ray McGovern

Jonathan Easley — Sanders: Clinton will play vital role in future of the Democratic Party

Writing the obituary of the Democratic Party. I guess they didn't get the message. Rivals Barack Obama's idiotic "bipartisanship" that destroyed his presidency as it ate up his political capital.

The Hill
Sanders: Clinton will play vital role in future of the Democratic Party

Jonathan Easley

Here's why if Bernie Sanders gets elected he will be neutralized by the very Progressives he's trying to help

Here's the problem with most Progressives: they're a danger to their own cause. They're weak, meek and constantly prone to surrender.

I'll give you a perfect example. Shitlib punchable face, Matt Yglesias, who writes for Vox now, put out this impassioned piece about why Bernie Sanders REALLY has the greatest economic plan of all time; a plan that is REALLY going to create jobs and get the economy going.

You want to know what shitlib punchable face Yglesias said that plan is? He says that Bernie Sanders will use the power of the presidency to get a new Fed Chairman who won't be afraid of inflation and that will allow the Fed to get over its inner anxieties and...STIMULATE...with more monetary policy!!! Yeah!!!

Check it out:

"Here's one more reason to take Bernie Sanders's candidacy seriously: He has put forward statements and arguments on what is by far the most powerful lever a president has on the American economy — the chronically neglected subject of monetary policy."

"Politicians rarely talk about the Federal Reserve even though it's the main agency that regulates the pace of job creation."

"Sanders's core insight, which he laid out in a New York Times op-ed that ran on December 23, is that if you want to talk about jobs and the economy, you need to talk about the Fed. And if you want to understand sluggish wage growth over the past 15 years, it's important to note the Fed's structural biases in favor of Wall Street preoccupations with financial stability and inflation control."

Do you fucking believe this shit?

The most powerful lever a president has on the American economy?

The main agency that regulates the pace of job creation?

This is Sanders' core insight? (I thought Kelton was advising him?)

Could you imagine if FDR tried to use his "lever" over the Fed to fight WWII?

What an ass that Yglesias is along with the rest of the shitlib community.

No word of fiscal policy. No word of an economic plan that includes rebuilding our roads, bridges and infrastructure. Nothing about more basic R&D or, more for health care (by the way, Bernie is for more health care, but paying for it via raising taxes). No word about investing in alternative energy or education. Nothing. They're such fucking cowards!

You see why we need Trump? Bernie, while he has some good ideas (and presumably Kelton is advising him???) he is too weak and almost certainly prone to the influence of all the "beta" shitlibs in the progressive movement, whereas no one will boss the boss--Trump--around.

Dean Baker...perfect example of why the Progressive movement goes nowhere.

I'm having this crazy Twitter argument with Dean Baker. (See thread below.)

The guy is supposedly a progressive and I know he means well, but this is why the movement goes nowhere. These guys contradict themselves and end up arguing in support of the interests of the other side.

Baker wants to create jobs by boosting exports. Fine. Very admirable, but to do that you have to create demand for those exports. Lots of demand. How do you do that? Typically through currency devaluation or, wage suppression.

There's another way, too, and that is to literally "give" foreigners dollars so they can buy the goods that we produce. That's done by massive amounts of deficit spending targeted to the foreign sector. (Maybe we can rebuild all the infrastructure of the entire foreign sector, using their labor and resources.)

In the first approach, when you devalue your currency or, suppress wages, it's like a tax. You end getting less for more. You lose in real terms. So, yeah, you  might create demand for exports and jobs, however, those jobs leave people with the ability to afford less, not more, at least in the aggregate.

And Baker admits that. He says a weaker dollar is "negative for real wages." (So why is he pushing it?)

In the second approach, where you literally give money to foreigners via deficit spending isn't it jsut a better idea to deficit spend for the benefit of your country's own residents? Isn't it better  if they have the means to consume the fruits of their own labor? I think so.

So what, really, is Baker's plan? Create jobs by boosting exports, by creating demand, by weakening the currency, which is negative for real wages. Did we gain anything? NO.

There  you  have it: a leading figure of the Progressive movement giving really stupid advice. No wonder why the movement goes nowhere. Ironically he's probably against the TPP and other trade deals, yet in essense that's exactly what he's arguing FOR. We'd be outsourcing to cheap labor, but our own CHEAP LABOR. The standard of living of the worker goes down.

The best part of my Twitter discussion with him is when he gets testy and says this:

@mikenorman that' s fine that there are better ways, but it doesn't mean S**t, because we're not doing them.

— Dean Baker (@DeanBaker13) May 9, 2015

He's crying now. Like a baby. "No one is listening to me and they're not doiong anything. Whaaaa...whaaaaa." So what does he do? Like all liberal-progressives he proposes inadequate or flawed ideas. Capitulates, basically. Grand bargains. And he ADMITS IT!

Conservatives would never do that.

When you have reasonable sounding people  like Dean Baker advocating for the very same things that big corporate advocates for every day, don't expect a lot of change. The other side must be laughing their asses off..

It is difficult to see how we get back to full employment and wage growth, without a lower trade deficit http://t.co/4iodfQQPTG

— Dean Baker (@DeanBaker13) May 8, 2015

Higher dollar and resulting trade deficit slows job growth in April http://t.co/4iodfQQPTG

— Dean Baker (@DeanBaker13) May 8, 2015

The privatization of the Port of Piraeus, which Syriza opposed, is now going forward

Hat tip to my good friend and MNE contributor, Roger Erickson, for this.

(Reuters) - The Greek government will sell its majority stake in the port of Piraeus within weeks, the country's deputy prime minister told China's official Xinhua news agency, a flip-flop from the leftist government as it seeks funds from its creditors.

The Syriza government of Alexis Tsipras took power in January on promises to end painful austerity, saying it would halt a string of privatisations including the sale of a 67 percent stake in the Piraeus Port Authority (OLP). Read article.

#NoBALLS

Well, okay, first of all I called this from the very beginning. I called the eventual capitulation by Syriza, by Tsipras, by Varoufakis. Go back and read my blog entries starting from January 26.

But enough of patting myself on the back. If you care anything about breaking the global grip of the oligopoly, the neoliberal rape, the plutcratic plunder, then this has to make you want to puke. Another sellout by the phoney, cowardly, BallLESS, (add your own adjective), liberal, progressive, left wing.

They go down so easy, don't they? No stomach for fighting. No stomach for just about anything except getting down on their knees and giving hand jobs to the elites. So quick to cede power and control to the plutocracy...willingly...on a silver fucking platter. Each and every time.

I'm just wondering what Syriza will do next? Re-fire those rehired workers?

And by the way, we'll be getting another taste of it here in the U.S. Guess who's being anointed Senate Minority Leader? Chuck Schumer (D-NY), friend of Wall Street and war, those two great, liberal Democratic values.

Schumer had in the past “succeeded in limiting efforts to regulate credit-rating agencies, for example, sponsored legislation that cut fees paid by Wall Street firms to finance government oversight, pushed to allow banks to have lower capital reserves and called for the revision of regulations to make corporations’ balance sheets more transparent.”
His behavior has changed very little since the crisis.

When Senators Sherrod Brown (D-OH) and Ted Kaufman (D-DE) introduced an amendment to break up the largest banks, they were able to recruit the support of a handful of GOP senators, but Schumer worked alongside the Obama administration to kill it. He insists that capital gains tax rates stay lower than those of other income, a direct gift to fund managers. Read the rest of the article here.

Who needs the GOP when you have guys like Schumer?

Joel Kotkin — The three faces of populism

More than at any other time in recent memory, American politics now are centered on class and the declining prospects of the middle class. This is no longer just an issue for longtime leftists or Democratic or right-wing propagandists. It’s a reality so large that even the most detached and self-satisfied Republicans must acknowledge it.…
So, if populism will become a dominant theme in the next election, what form will it take? Populism itself is more a sentiment than a program; it reflects people’s deep-seated fears about the future and a festering resentment of the seemingly unassailable power of financial and other corporate elites. 

But the ways of addressing these concerns are often contradictory and almost impossible to agree upon. Right now, we see three distinct types of populism. Two variants, that of the Obama administration and its critics further on the left ["progressives"], share an allegiance to Democratic Party orthodoxy on issues such as climate change, racial redress, feminism and other social issues. 

The third – and, as of now, least-coherent – variant could be described as constitutional conservatism, one that seeks to improve middle-class prospects by reducing federal regulations and taxes and by decentralizing power away from the Washington leviathan…

Over the coming years, party factions that can form a convincing and broad-based populist agenda will have an advantage. Any party that believes, as some Democratic shills now say, that things are “pretty awesome” misses broad-based public sentiment, which remains very negative about the state of the country and the economy. Growing inequality, reduced opportunity – particularly for the new generation – will remain the defining issue of our time. It is time for the political class, in both parties, to confront this reality.

Orange County Register | Opinion
Joel Kotkin: The three faces of populism

Joel Kotkin | R.C. Hobbs Fellow in Urban Studies at Chapman University in Orange and the executive director of the Houston-based Center for Opportunity Urbanism

Note that Orange County is one of the most conservative counties in the United States.

Beverly Mann — Why The Democrats Lost

Unless the Democrats, en masse, do a complete sweep of their party’s consultants and operatives, and unless they nominate for president someone who never bought into the sales pitch of those people, the party will lose next time. And the time after that. And the time after that.

The Democrats cannot win unless they explain Keynesian economics and inform the public of the dramatic reduction in federal spending and federal employment since 2010—and the consequences of it. Obama will not (or, intellectually, cannot) do that, so others must.

Amen. But the problem is that the Democrats are just as clueless as Obama. They are reading the polls that the public is concerned with the deficit and thinking that this is the way to win elections. No one other than a handful of people actually understand the economics.

Both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama are proud that they outdid Reagan in deficit reduction and reducing federal employment. That's what HRC will run on if nominated, which at this point is virtually a certainty if she wants it and remains in good health.

Angry Bear
Why The Democrats Lost: Because they cannot win unless they explain Keynesian economics and inform the public of the dramatic reduction in federal spending and federal employment since 2010—and the consequences of it. Obama will not (or, intellectually, cannot) do that. So others must.

Beverly Mann

Steven Rosenfeld — Will Democrats Try To Kill The Party's Progressive Wing To Regain Power?

The GOP went after its more principled wing. Will Democrats follow?

Absolutely. Didn't the election show that the votes are on the right? (snark)

AlterNet
Will Democrats Try To Kill The Party's Progressive Wing To Regain Power?
Steven Rosenfeld

Salon
“I hear you”: President Obama responds to midterm rout of Democrats, lays out centrist agenda

Luke Bunker

Obama said, the two parties could find common ground on “tax reform that closes loopholes,” which would allow for a lowering of corporate tax rates.… 

Finally, the president called for cooperation on international trade agreements.

Just what the public signaled it wants. Not.

Obama also announced that he will soon ask Congress to authorize American air strikes against the Islamic State militant group; a chorus of bipartisan critics had decried the administration’s decision this year to launch the strikes without seeking congressional approval. The president reaffirmed that the U.S. was engaged in the struggle against the Islamic state for “the long term.”

War is always popular — without boots on the ground.

bunnygirl60 on MMT for progressives

MMT for progressives.

Daily Kos
How to Clear the Room of Progressives

Let's Get Fiscal, Fiscal. I Wanna' Get Fiscal...bunnygirl60

Bill Black — The Dangerous Lure of Austerity to Progressives Seeking to Reduce Pentagon Spending

I spent today in Washington, DC presenting and attending a conference put together by Ralph Nader on left-right convergence. The theme was that there were many issues on which large elements of the left and right agreed and could change existing policies if they worked together. I spoke about the desirability of effective financial regulation to break the Gresham’s dynamic and prevent or at least minimize the damage of future financial crises and the desirability of prosecuting the elites that run financial “control frauds.”

The disturbing aspect of the conference was on the left. The irony is that the disturbing nature was hi-lighted by Grover Norquist’s talk. Norquist’s theme was that the standard for such collaboration should not be compromise and quid prop quo agreements to create a winning coalition, but strong agreement by both sides on a common policy. Both of the speakers from the “left” on cutting Pentagon spending emphasized the need to do so due to “the budget” and “the debt” crisis. Several members of the audience who identified with the “left” expanded on that theme. The representatives of the “right” eagerly pushed the same meme....

In their zeal to cut Pentagon spending, they championed austerity policies that cost millions of jobs and are designed to severely cut blue-collar wages.

It is, of course, perfectly possible to cut the Pentagon budget and increase net spending by making larger spending increases for higher priority government programs. Jamie Galbraith has long run an organization of economists, which I support, that takes this position. The “left” should never support austerity or adopt its myths of a “budget” or “debt” “crisis” and should be particularly vigorous in rejecting the right’s effort to turn children against their parents and grandparents on the basis of the lies about “burdening our kids.” The thing that devastates children is austerity.

New Economic Perspectives
The Dangerous Lure of Austerity to Progressives Seeking to Reduce Pentagon Spending
William K. Black | Associate Professor of Economics and Law, UMKC

The real problem: Democrats/Progressives, embrace neoliberalism and free market fundamentalism

Good post over at Daily Kos that talks about how Democrats/Progressives, etc have really been the enablers of Republican free market fundamentalism because Dems, themselves, believe in it, too!

All of us here in the MMT community see this and understand this and have been frustrated by it for so long, however, until we get a Democratic Party or a Progressive movement that once and for all casts off its neoliberal bindings then nothing will change.

Check out this paragraph...

"The problem is that the neoliberals are still firmly in control of the Democratic Party. No Democratic leader is willing to admit the idea of having free-trade agreements with 3rd world nations means a race to the bottom with wages. No Democratic leader is incline to propose rolling back 40 years of disastrous deregulation. Instead Democrats push things like legalized gay marriage, which while being a positive development for civil rights, is exactly what the "culture warriors" of the Republican Party want. It continues to distact people away from the item that the vast majority of people are most concerned with - jobs and wages. Before anything else, the Democrats need to challenge the most basic premise of the far-right -market fundamentalism."

The rest of the post can be accessed here.

Look at who Democrats nominated in 2008 and who they reelected: Obama. The neoliberal doctrine intensified under his watch. He's negotiating secret trade deals, cutting deficits, raising taxes on working people and looking away as labor unions get decimated even more.

And who is the "dream candidate" of the Democratic Party for 2016? Hilary Clinton...the ultimate neoliberal. Her husband was the welfare cutting (real welfare, like, for needy people), Glass-Steagall ending, Wall Street deregulating, surplus running, king of all time who is still revered by Democrats.

Stephanie Kelton — How to Talk About Debt and Deficits: Don’t Think of an Elephant*

Many economists (perhaps even those who agree with us) refuse to talk about the national debt and government deficits the way we do on this blog. Instead of boldly challenging the assertion that the U.S. faces a long-run debt (or deficit) problem, headline progressives typically do what Jared Bernstein did in his column today — i.e. they pay “obligatory” tribute to the Balanced Budget Gods, thereby reinforcing the case for austerity at some point in the not-so-distant future when we will be forced to to deal with this very bad thing called the government deficit. Followers of my work here and on Twitter know that I refuse to pay homage to the Balanced Budget Gods. Instead, I prefer to shift the burden of proof onto those who contend that the U.S. faces a long-term debt or deficit problem....

Charles Hayden: "God Bless our Warrior-Queen."

Amen to that.

New Economic Perspective
How to Talk About Debt and Deficits: Don’t Think of an Elephant*
Stephanie Kelton | Associate Professor of Economic and Department Chair, University of Missouri at Kansas City

Ryan Grim — Democracy Alliance, Network Of Rich Liberal Donors, Signals Shift Away From Partisan Political Activity

The secretive network of liberal donors known as the Democracy Alliance has chosen longtime progressive activist Gara LaMarche to be its new leader, according to at least five people in and outside the organization familiar with the decision....

Those who want the Democracy Alliance to focus on progressive movement building see LaMarche's selection as a victory. Known as a member of Soros' inner circle for his earlier work with the billionaire's Open Society Foundations, LaMarche also spent a number of years at the American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights Watch. Most recently, he served four years as head of Atlantic Philanthropies.....
LaMarche directed more than $20 million toward the health care reform fight in 2009 and 2010, propping up, among others, the coalition known as Health Care for America Now. Without Atlantic Philanthropies' investment, Obamacare might not have passed...

The Huffington Post
Democracy Alliance, Network Of Rich Liberal Donors, Signals Shift Away From Partisan Political Activity
Ryan Grim

NYC mayoral candidate Bill DeBlasio: the final test as to whether or not true progressives really exist

Bill DeBlasio is the front runner (by far) in the NYC mayoral election. He is known as a staunch progressive, however, that is what was said about Barak Obama and we all know how that turned out.

For me, this is the final litmus test as to whether or not true progressive candidates leaders really exist at all. Sure, they exist in campaigns, but once in office it becomes, back to the status quo and screw everyone, with the exception of the rich and powerful.

I am hoping DeBlasio (who is a lock to win) finally causes this not to be the case, however, the fact that he has been endorsed by teh Clintons (Bill and Hilary) and Obama himself, is an ominous sign.

Dale Pierce — What Is Modern Monetary Theory, or "MMT"?

Truthout crossposted Dale Pierce's "What Is Modern Monetary Theory, or 'MMT'? "from NEP. Good deal. Progressives read Truthout. 

Comment over there and set the deficit doves straight.

Truthout
What Is Modern Monetary Theory, or "MMT"?
By Dale Pierce, New Economic Perspectives | News Analysis

Dean Baker — Deficit Delusions: Putting to Rest the Clinton Legacy

Not the whole story, but at least it is a start in breaking through the myth about the virtue of budget surpluses that is hamstringing progressives.

CEPR
Deficit Delusions: Putting to Rest the Clinton Legacy
Dean Baker
(h/t Stephanie Kelton via Twitter)

Joshua Holland — 7 Theories Why Obama Keeps Getting Burned (Or Doesn't!) Negotiating with Republicans

You decide. Or maybe there is an eighth, ninth....?

AlterNet

7 Theories Why Obama Keeps Getting Burned (Or Doesn't!) Negotiating with Republicans
Joshua Holland

Eric W. Dolan — Progressive warns of ‘nuclear war’ if Democrats back safety net cuts

Progressive warns of ‘nuclear war’ if Democrats back safety net cuts (via Raw Story )

Progressive activists fired a shot across the bow of congressional Democrats on Wednesday, warning them to protect Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid or face a primary challenge. Adam Green, the co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, said Democrats would face a “nuclear war…