Class warfare, Elizabeth Warren style

vruz: how about President Warren in 2016? (and no, I’m not being serious, but if you push the question too much I have a few words for you:  Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum, Rick Perry…)

—via sarahlee310:timekiller-s:Greg Sargent:

This must-watch clip of Elizabeth Warren aggressively rebutting the GOP’s “class warfare” charge is burning up the internet, and once you watch it, you’ll understand why.


As Steve Benen rightly notes, very few Democrats are able to make the basic case for the social contract quite this effectively. And this is coming from someone who only started campaigning seriously a few weeks ago. So she may have lots of room to grow.

Here’s why I think this video is so important. As I wrote the other day, a Warren candidacy could test the electoral limits of true populism in a way that few other Dems have been willing to venture. Here we’re seeing the beginnings of this — this is a candidate who is starting out with her own voice.

Republicans are planning to paint Warren as a liberal Harvard elitist — they’re already referring to her as “Professor Warren” — because they believe that she will have trouble winning over the kind of blue collar whites from places like South Boston that helped power Scott Brown’s upset victory.

But as this video shows, Warren is very good at making the case for progressive economics in simple, down-to-earth terms. Despite her professorial background, she sounds like she’s telling a story. She came across as unapologetic and authorative, without a hint of the sort of defensiveness you hear so often from other Democrats when they talk about issues involving taxation and economic fairness….

I may have already posted/reblogged a quote from this. It is worth watching it all.

Reblogged from GET OFF MY LAWN!

Even worse are the president’s befuddling, muddled attempts to lure Republicans into bipartisanship by negotiating with himself before even offering a proposal. Everyone in the world except Obama seems to understand what Republicans will do. They will support most of his bad ideas, then either block the good ones or bargain for even deeper concessions from Obama as the price for agreeing to a tiny fraction of his good ideas.

But Obama’s hodge-podge bipartisanship also loses the opportunity to present a coherent message that government action—emphatically including running a deficit until the economy is well on the road to recovery—is needed to boost demand for goods and services. That’s what’s needed to get big corporations to invest the trillion-plus dollars in profits they’re hoarding and hiring more employees. That means more direct government employment, contracting, investment and income support so that sales improve for private businesses that can then hire more people and feel greater confidence about the future and invest.

Instead, he presents a confused picture of what ails and what might revive a troubled economy—making unnecessary concessions to Republicans’ mistaken arguments that the problem is too much regulation, too high tax rates, or too little profit. And especially when he also continues to talk about trimming Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, despite his punchy demands to “pass this jobs bill,” he has to leave a lot of the working and middle class majority wondering, “Which side is he on?”

Reblogged from Diadoumenos

Why America Can’t Have Nice Things

—via felixsalmon

Federal Nondefense Investment plus State and Local Investment plus Private Investment in Structures. Basically total public and private investment in our built environment.

markcoatney sez: Yes. This is kind of terrifying