ThinkProgress Logo

Politics

Beck Bites Back At Kristol: ‘I Don’t Even Know If You Understand What Conservatives Are Anymore’

After enduring Fox News host Glenn Beck’s finely-tuned delusions about the supposed alliance between Islamic extremism and socialism, fellow conservative Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol derided Beck for his unhealthy “hysteria.” “When Glenn Beck rants about the caliphate taking over the Middle East…and lists (invents?) the connections between caliphate-promoters and the American left,” he is “marginalizing himself” with the likes of the John Birch Society, Kristol wrote this weekend. Never one to smolder quietly, Beck launched a scathing, sarcastic rant against Kristol on his radio show this morning and accused “Billy” of “betraying conservatism and missing the significance” of his conspiratorial warnings about Egypt. Convinced Kristol can’t “understand what conservatives are anymore,” Beck said that conservatives like him are just doing “anything to keep their little fiefdom together“:

BECK:…I don’t even know if you understand what conservatives are anymore, Billy….People like Bill Kristol, I don’t think they stand for anything any more. All they stand for is power. They’ll do anything to keep their little fiefdom together and they’ll do anything to keep the Republican power entrenched. I’m sorry, the system doesn’t work….I think you’ve confused conservative principles with conservative progressive principles. Times have changed, Bill. Times have changed. It’s time to see the world how it really is.

Listen here:

Beck later feigned apology for his rancor because “I get really testy when I hear people who should get it come after me. It’s like really, have you done a minute of research, Bill?” Offering to “dumb it down,” Beck told Kristol exactly where he could find all the research to prove socialists and Islamists are in “phase 2″ of their plot to take over the world — “just watch the show in the next week,” Beck instructed.

Yglesias

Would Winning The Future Serve The Interests of the US Chamber Of Commerce?

At his speech before the US Chamber of Commerce earlier today, Barack Obama tried to affiliate himself with rich businessmen and also touted his commitment to innovation and entrepreneurship:

As a country, we have a responsibility to encourage American innovation. Companies like yours have always driven the discovery of new ideas and new products. But, as you know, it’s not always profitable in the short-term for you to invest in basic research. That’s why government has traditionally helped invest in this kind of science, planting the seeds that ultimately grew into technologies from computer chips to the internet.

And that’s why we’re making investments today in the next generation of big ideas – in biotechnology, information technology, and clean energy technology. We’re reforming our patent system so innovations can move more quickly to market. Steve Case is heading up a new partnership called Startup America to help entrepreneurs turn new ideas into new businesses and new jobs. And I’ve also proposed a bigger, permanent tax credit for all the research and development your companies do in this country.

Austan Goolsbee explains the Startup America initiative in more detail here:

The problem with this, it seems to me, is that while “I love businessmen” and “I love entrepreneurship and innovation” do go hand-in-hand relative to hard-core Maoism, relative to the range of actual policy options facing the United States they’re totally different things. Egypt, as you’ve probably heard, has been stagnating economically for the past 20 years. But if you went back in time to find a rich Egyptian businessman circa 1990, it’s not like he’s had a bad time of it. On the contrary, the very things that make the Egyptian economy un-innovative, un-competitive, un-entrepreneurial, and un-dynamic make it a comfortable place to be an incumbent businessman.

Innovation is very problematic for existing large firms. The PC was bad for mainframe makers. The Internet’s been bad for newspapers. Cable was bad for television networks. Hulu is bad for cable companies. Ikea’s been bad for wherever it was that recent college graduates used to buy furniture. Business and businessmen are key to economic growth, but the firms that “win the future” are generally the firms that are small or non-existent today. Business groups like the Chamber of Commerce represent the interests of the firms that spent yesterday winning the future. They’ll of course gladly accept subsidies for their own R&D, but they have little objective interest in encouraging innovation and entrepreneurship.

Climate Progress

Groupon and Liz Hurley trivialize Brazilian deforestation in a truly ‘tasteless’ Super Bowl ad

I am interested in your comments on these ads.

I thought the Tibet Super Bowl ad with Timothy Hutton was just dreadful.  I didn’t see the Hurley-deforestation ad until today.  File this under “What the heck were they thinking?”

Seriously, Groupon?  You really think that comparing deforestation to a Brazilian wax is good marketing?

One good thing did come from the ads — This AdRants headline:  “Groupon Trivializes Deforestation With Female Deforestation.”

For those who missed it, here’s the Tibet ad, which actually involves making light of people whose lives and human rights are at risk:

Read more

LGBT

Pawlenty: Rescinding Funds To Implement DADT Repeal Is ‘A Reasonable Step’

Last month, former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty (R) made waves when he suggested that he would reinstate the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy if elected President. This morning, Pawlenty went a step further, telling me that he would support rescinding the funds necessary for the Department of Defense to implement the repeal. Appearing at the Family Leader’s Presidential Lecture Series in Iowa, Pawlenty reiterated his argument for why the policy should not have been repealed and then, when pushed, agreed with me that taking away the funding “would be a reasonable step”:

PAWLENTY: We have to pay great deference, I think to those combat units, their sentiments and their leaders. That’s one of the reasons why I said we shouldn’t have repealed Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and I would support reinstatement.

TP: And rescinding the funds for implementation, implementation of repeal?

PAWLENTY: That would be a reasonable step as well.

Watch it:

Interestingly, the idea to rescind funding has also been suggested by the American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer, on whose radio show Pawlenty originally said he would like to bring back the DADT policy.

Politics

At Tea Party Event, Gov. Scott Unveils Budget That Raids Low-Income Health Services To Cut Corporate Taxes

Today, at a Tea Party event in tiny Eustis, Florida, Gov. Rick Scott (R-FL) unveiled his new state budget. Since his time on the campaign trail, Scott has been promising to pair steep budget cuts with reductions in both the corporate and property tax rates. “It’s not daunting. It’s going to be fun. It’s going to be exciting,” Scott said when asked about tackling his state’s budget woes. He has said that he plans to make Florida the “most fiscally conservative” state in the nation.

True to his word, Scott’s budget slashes corporate taxes, while raiding Medicaid services for low-income residents in order to come up with savings:

Gov. Rick Scott on Monday afternoon will unveil a proposed state budget that includes deep spending cuts of an estimated $5 billion and will ask lawmakers to approved a dramatic reduction in property taxes…He also wants to trim about $700 million in corporate income taxes in Florida, which already has one of the nation’s lowest rates. [...]

Another big target for savings: the growing health insurance program for the poor and financially challenged, Medicaid. More than half of Medicaid’s $20.3 billion tab is picked up by the federal government, which can halt some wholesale changes. Scott and the Legislature can cut up to half of the program’s so-called optional services, many of which are popular and are designed to save money, however. Regardless, the state would lose hundreds of millions in federal matching money.

Scott already presides over a state with one of the most regressive tax systems in the country. The average tax rate on a low-income individual in Florida is 13.5 percent, while the average tax rate on the someone in the richest one percent of Floridians is a paltry 2.6 percent. Instead of finding new sources of revenue, Scott decided to cut into services designed to help those who are already bearing the burden of financing the state, while lavishing tax breaks on corporations.

Republican lawmakers in Florida have already cast doubt on whether or not Scott’s spending cuts will actually come to pass, and Republican school officials worry that his plan to reduce property taxes will be “devastating” to the state’s schools. Ultimately, as the Orlando Sentinel reported, the GOP leadership in the legislature has said that it’s “unlikely to approve tax cuts this year.” This is likely a wise course of action, considering what happened the last time the Tea Party got its hands on a local budget.

Cross-posted on The Wonk Room.

Update

According to the text of the speech Scott delivered at the unveiling, he plans to cut $4 billion out of Medicaid while reducing the corporate income tax from 5 percent to 3.3 percent. Scott envisions completely phasing out the corporate income tax by 2018.


Update

,Scott’s cuts may also result in the closing of one-third of Florida’s state parks.

Yglesias

Auto-Paternalism

Megan McArdle asked earlier today “Are there folks who support food paternalism on the grounds that they, themselves are too fat and need to be protected from choice?”

In a lot of ways, this strikes me as by far the most sensible case for paternalism. It seems to me that if DC were to re-legalize smoking in bars, that would dramatically increase the odds of me returning to being a regular smoker and I don’t want to see that happen. Similarly, I lost 70 pounds in 2010 and I’m hoping to keep that weight off. But I also know that I’m someone with a weakness for over-indulging in salty snacks relative to my second-order desires about weight, and would welcome paternalistic measures that made me less likely to chow down on Combos.

My guess is that this kind of desire for self-regulation via government fiat is an important source of support for paternalistic regulation. The irony and tragedy of it is that the demand for this sort of thing probably could, in principle, be met through the private sector. I bet a dozen clever libertarian bloggers could sketch out dozens of different possible schemes for doing this. Pre-committing to not overeating ought to be doable. But in practice, it’s not and basically nobody seems to be working on ways to make it happen.

Economy

At Tea Party Event, Gov. Scott Unveils Budget That Raids Low-Income Health Services To Cut Corporate Taxes

Today, at a Tea Party event in tiny Eustis, Florida, Gov. Rick Scott (R-FL) unveiled his new state budget. Since his time on the campaign trail, Scott has been promising to pair steep budget cuts with reductions in both the corporate and property tax rates. “It’s not daunting. It’s going to be fun. It’s going to be exciting,” Scott said when asked about tackling his state’s budget woes. He has said that he plans to make Florida the “most fiscally conservative” state in the nation.

True to his word, Scott’s budget slashes corporate taxes, while raiding Medicaid services for low-income residents in order to come up with savings:

Gov. Rick Scott on Monday afternoon will unveil a proposed state budget that includes deep spending cuts of an estimated $5 billion and will ask lawmakers to approved a dramatic reduction in property taxes…He also wants to trim about $700 million in corporate income taxes in Florida, which already has one of the nation’s lowest rates. [...]

Another big target for savings: the growing health insurance program for the poor and financially challenged, Medicaid. More than half of Medicaid’s $20.3 billion tab is picked up by the federal government, which can halt some wholesale changes. Scott and the Legislature can cut up to half of the program’s so-called optional services, many of which are popular and are designed to save money, however. Regardless, the state would lose hundreds of millions in federal matching money.

Scott already presides over a state with one of the most regressive tax systems in the country. The average tax rate on a low-income individual in Florida is 13.5 percent, while the average tax rate on the someone in the richest one percent of Floridians is a paltry 2.6 percent. Instead of finding new sources of revenue, Scott decided to cut into services designed to help those who are already bearing the burden of financing the state, while lavishing tax breaks on corporations.

Republican lawmakers in Florida have already cast doubt on whether or not Scott’s spending cuts will actually come to pass, and Republican school officials worry that his plan to reduce property taxes will be “devastating” to the state’s schools. Ultimately, as the Orlando Sentinel reported, the GOP leadership in the legislature has said that it’s “unlikely to approve tax cuts this year.” This is likely a wise course of action, considering what happened the last time the Tea Party got its hands on a local budget.

Update

According to the text of the speech Scott delivered at the unveiling, he plans to cut $4 billion out of Medicaid while reducing the corporate income tax from 5 percent to 3.3 percent. Scott envisions completely phasing out the corporate income tax by 2018.


Update

,Scott’s cuts may also result in the closing of one-third of Florida’s state parks.

Alyssa

Down the Aisle

I absolutely love my dear friend who I am being a bridesmaid for this spring, but I will admit I laughed until I cried and sent this trailer to my fellow bridesmaid as soon as I saw it:

This is such a day of “I’m getting older.” But it is exhausting to watch movies about weddings all the time that are always from the perspective of the bride, or the Desperate Bridesmaid Just Waiting To Have Her Faith In Love Rekindled. As I’m sure those of you who have been in friends’ weddings know, it’s not so much about looking for a fella’. It’s about bonding with your friend, about navigating the same-gender group of people you’ve been thrown together with. How you relate to other women or other men seems to be vastly, vastly more important than how you deal with a potential partner.

And I’m glad that this movie gets the raunch and weird emotions of all of this. Part of a wedding is bonding together as your friend moves off into another life stage, sometimes not at the same time that you are. There’s a lot of joy and tenderness in that, but also some ribbing and a lot of nostalgia. One thing I wrote about in my sports dialogue with Hampton last week is that women are perfectly capable of raunchy fun, and I should have emphasized that there is a way of female raunchiness that really has nothing to do with imitating men or finding a place among them. This movie, though it’s directed by a man, is written by women, and seems to get that.

Politics

Marco Rubio Dismisses Rand Paul’s Tea Party Caucus As A ‘Little Club’ Run By Washington Politicians

Last month, the newly formed Senate Tea Party Caucus held its first meeting, but conspicuously absent were some high-profile senators who got elected last year with the strong backing of the tea party, including Marco Rubio (R-FL). Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) founded the caucus soon after arriving in Washington, but Rubio has long questioned the need for a formal caucus, saying he prefered the movement be left to grass roots activists, not Washington politicians. But in a radio interview Friday, Rubio leveled even harsher words at the caucus, dismissing it as a “little club[]” run by politicians that could cause the real movement “to lose its energy”:

HOST: When Michele Bachmann began to create this Tea Party Caucus, I got this really bad taste in my mouth. … You and I see eye-to-eye on this, right? It’s a grassroots movement, right? [...]

RUBIO: Now, specifically about the Tea Party Caucus, the concern that I’ve expressed, is that what I think gives the tea party its strength and its legitimacy in the American political process is that it’s a grassroots movement of everyday Americans. … My fear has always been that if you start creating these little clubs or organizations in Washington run by politicians, the movement starts to lose its energy. Basically, the media will jump on that and start paying attention to that instead of the grass roots movement which is really what has given the tea party its voice. … I don’t want us to anything that kind of changes its grassroots nature.

Listen here:

In the other chamber of Congress, a number of leading House Republicans have criticized Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) for founding the House Tea Party Caucus (which inspired the Senate version). House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) refused to join the caucus, saying the tea party movement is “certainly not of Washington and in that respect it’s better left with the people.” Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), who also refused to join despite his closeness to the tea party, said the movement “should be kept outside Congress.” “The more you try to put structure around the tea party, the more compromised it will be,” Chaffetz wrote warned.

Yglesias

The Freedom To Build

A few years ago, Virginia Republicans passed a developer friendly bill mandating that each locality designate an “urban development area” in which medium-density construction would be permitted. It doesn’t require that higher density structures actually be built, but it does require that they be permitted. Similarly, it doesn’t require that mixed-use development be built, but it does require that it be permitted. Naturally, a conservative Virginia state legislator has teamed up with a local Tea Party group is looking to overturn this and has founded an outfit called the Campaign for Liberty in defense of stringent development restrictions.

Stephen Smith, who has a good post on this, seems surprised. But there’s really nothing surprising about it. Freedom-talk is an important influence in American rhetoric, but it—and especially its self-consciously antiquarian cousin liberty-talk—has nothing to do with any analytically respectable conception of freedom. It has to do with safeguarding the perceived self-interest, lifestyle, and social status of the right sort of people. This is a country where the free market position is that for-profit colleges should have a right to unrestricted government subsidies. So why shouldn’t “liberty” mean the liberty of rich suburbanites to ban medium-density construction? Here’s a group of people being forced to do something they don’t like and they don’t like being forced to accept urbanization any more than conservatives like being forced to let gay couples get married or the conservatives of yore liked being forced to integrate the Montgomery bus system. Change feels coercive to people.

Older

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up