(Go to bottom (***) for the evilness of The Hamilton Project)
ManfromMiddletown's Pelosi Bars Labor from Meeting w/ Freshman Reps has now been unrecommended into oblivion. And Phoenix Woman's Nancy Pelosi is EVIL! is the only opinion now readily available to dailykos readers on the second of the following two meetings of the House Democratic Caucus, recently announced by incoming Speaker Pelosi:
- On Tuesday, December 5, at 9:00 a.m. we will hear a presentation on Iraq. Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski, Ambassador Richard Holbrooke, and Major General John Batiste will be among the presenters.
- On Wednesday, December 6, at 9:30 a.m. we will have a presentation on the economy by former Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin on the need for restoring fiscal discipline and building a competitive economy to create jobs in America.
That's sad, and doubly sad because it was the result of an effective effort to get people to unrecommend manfrom's diary and recommend the 'EVIL' one. This effort was grounded not in manfrom's content, but on standard dailykos double spin: 1., manfrom has the facts wrong (when manfrom had all the important facts right), and 2., the diary is angry, hysterical 'sky is falling' stuff (when it's thoughtful, measured, and so on).
Phoenix Woman goes to DemHillStaffer for the 'facts wrong' spin:
A number of errors
1. This isn't an orientation session for Freshmen - its part of an ongoing series of caucus meetings for all Members of Congress with leading thinkers on issues. For example, there's also one this week with military leaders on Iraq.
2. Labor wasn't banned from this session. Its for Members of Congress only and a special guest. To be banned implies that its open to people other than members of Congress. According to that logic, everyone who's not Bob Rubin is "banned." A better title would be "Pelosi Invites Rubin, not Labor, to Discuss Fiscal Responsibility."
3. Whatever you think of his trade policy, Rubin knows how to make the case for fiscal responsibility, which is the subject of his talk.
4. Labor has a friend in Nancy Pelosi, whose top lieutenant - George Miller, the author of the Employee Free Choice Act - is going to chair the Education and Labor Committee.
5. Why are we assuming the worst about Democratic leaders before she's even said one word opposing a pro-working family agenda?
Let's answer these accusations of 'error':
- Yes, DemHillStaffer's right, the meeting with Rubin is officially neither "an orientation session" nor a "series of seminars" specifically for new members. But practically speaking it functions as an orientation, and it is widely considered just that -- education for the incoming -- as indicated both here and here.
- According to William Greider at The Nation, labor asked for one of its own to join Rubin for the meeting, and this was refused. That sounds close enough to 'banned' for those not semantics obsessed, especially considering that 'banned' was used only in the title of the diary.
- What about the announcement's "a presentation on the economy" has confused DemHillStaffer?
- This kind of black/white thinking about Pelosi is not helpful. She may be a friend on some issues and not on others. It's important not to pretend: call her out when she is unfriendly, and back her when she's helpful. But here's the question that this controversy is about: Is Robert Rubin a friend of labor? Wouldn't you like Robert Rubin to be in a small group containing a balance of perspectives for this meeting, instead of flying solo? Note that the Iraq presentation has three speakers.
- ManFromMiddletown was not assuming the worst. Why do we have to get bogged down in this kind of exaggerated rhetoric? He was pointing out a single event, planned by Ms. Pelosi, that is an anti-working class event, this being evident to anyone with a pro-working-family bone in his or her body.
The education of new representatives is important, and I think populist, labor and 'fair trade' perspectives are lacking. Does anyone, seriously, disagree? And the Rubin presentation is only one example of this imbalance of perspectives. For example, last week the Kennedy School of Government four-day seminar for 36 newly elected members of Congress discussed the following political issues (as far as I can tell): "the U.S. budget, international economics, the use of U.S. power around the world, nuclear terrorism, worldwide population trends, and global warming." Again, where are labor's needs, where's the growth of inequality, where's the outsourcing of middle-class jobs in the pre-110th Congress education? They sure won't be in Rubin's presentation on "the economy" either.
***Finally, a brief introduction to why The Hamilton Project is evil:
The Hamilton Project calls for greater opportunity, but the fine print divulges the principal goal -- restoring fiscal balance with a cap on Social Security and Medicare, and dedicating higher tax revenues mainly to budget discipline. ...
Fiscal responsibility is necessary, but not an end in itself. Balance can be achieved with low social spending or more adequate spending, and with or without progressive taxation. ... If the main purpose of the Democratic Party has dwindled to responsible stewardship of a government ever less equipped to make a positive difference in the lives of ordinary people, Grover Norquist will have won his crusade to marginalize both government and Democrats.
Bob Woodward reported Bill Clinton’s outburst in early 1993, when Clinton’s advisers were insisting on the primacy of budget balance. "Where are all the Democrats?" the new president fairly howled in dismay. "We’re all Eisenhower Republicans."
Actually, that slights Dwight Eisenhower, who expanded Social Security, launched the interstate highway system, and increased federal research and education aid ... And under Ike, the top income tax rate for the wealthy was 91 percent. Ah, the progressive ’50s.
http://www.prospect.org/...
More on this topic and more, of course, in ManFromMiddletown's excellent diary.