Home2020 Elections3/23 Judge Orders WI governance keys to be Returned to Tony Evers & More: OT
newest oldest most voted
Notify of


NY is heading to disaster


On Monday, the New York Times reported another apparent reason Trump has refused to utilize the DPA: corporate lobbying. As the Times reported, “The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the heads of major corporations have lobbied the administration against using the act. They say the move could prove counterproductive, imposing red tape on companies precisely when they need flexibility to deal with closed borders and shuttered factories.”

CNN’s John Harwood reported on Monday that the Chamber opposed the used of the DPA because “no one can tell us what problem they are solving by invoking the DPA” and companies might be forced to “turn their attention to dealing with the legal questions and following the DPA.”

As the Times reported, the direct issue that would be handled by using the DPA would be the prevention of widespread shortages, as industry executives have refused or are unable to act on their own in sufficient numbers and coordination:

Carla Bailo, the president of the Center for Automotive Research, told the Times that auto companies such as General Motors and Ford—that have shuttered their own car manufacturing operations as part of efforts to protect workers from the spread of the disease—could actually ramp up ventilator production “in as little as three to six weeks” if asked.

The deadly shortages will likely hit sooner than that, which is why every day Trump does not utilize the act will likely be another day of health care rationing that will lead directly to large numbers of deaths. The number of confirmed cases in New York alone has exploded to more than 20,000 with 125 having already died, and Cuomo warned that his hospitals will likely need an additional 15,000 to 34,000 ventilator-equipped intensive care unit beds in the days ahead.

Again, in his press conference on Sunday, Trump rejected the premise when he was confronted with the reality of shortages and rationing, laying the responsibility—and blame—for the situation with others who don’t actually have the power to do anything about it.


T and R, Ms. Benny!!




I good Idea but you have to consider who is the democratic leadership.

The same ones that are pushing Biden on us.



Oh Boy! Nothing better than republican infighting.👏👌👇


GOP Rep. Matt Gaetz (Fla.) accused Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) of “screwing all Americans” over last week’s reports that Burr dumped more than $1.7 million in stocks shortly after a January briefing on the coronavirus outbreak.

Gaetz took to social media to slam the senator for allegedly selling his stocks before the markets tanked while simultaneously reassuring the public.

The Florida Republican argued that if former Rep. Katie Hill (D-Calif.) had to resign following a sex scandal with a staffer, Burr should be held accountable for his actions.


Even a stopped clock…



There is a very dangerous line of thinking that is common in Democratic circles in times of emergency. It goes something like this: In times of crisis, it is important for Democrats to behave responsibly and not exploit the situation for political gain. Therefore, they should negotiate with Republicans to get something rather than hold out for unrealistic, utopian demands and risk disaster.

The problem here is that so-called “utopian demands” are really just the bare minimum of what is necessary to actually address the crisis, and letting Republicans get their way will lead to a disaster that is only somewhat less bad than what would happen if we do nothing. Moreover, Democrats have all the political leverage in this situation, because Trump will take most of the blame if the economy collapses. The only way to actually rescue the whole American population is to exploit that political leverage.

The coronavirus situation thus far bears a marked resemblance to what happened with the bank bailout passed in fall 2008. The Bush administration, led by Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, wanted a preposterously unfair rescue — shoveling hundreds of billions of dollars of cash and credit into the banks to restore the pre-crisis status quo, but doing little or nothing for the rest of the population. Because Democrats controlled the House, and because many Republicans refused to vote for what looked like big-government socialism anyway, and because Barack Obama was widely expected to be the next president, Democrats had enormous leverage over Paulson.

But instead of pushing for a better response that would aid workers and hold Wall Street accountable, Obama whipped Democratic votes for Paulson’s bill, which eventually passed in modified form after it failed the first time. Democrats refused to exploit their leverage because they thought it would be irresponsible. In Reed Hundt’s book A Crisis Wasted, administration insiders were clear about this choice. “We could have forced more mortgage relief. We could have imposed tighter conditions on dividends and executive compensation,” admitted economic adviser Austan Goolsbee. As Obama told a group of liberal writers in 2010, they “didn’t do what Franklin Delano Roosevelt did, which was basically wait for six months until the thing had gotten so bad that it became an easier sell politically.”

As historian Eric Rauchway writes in his book Winter War, Obama’s line here is a straight-up lie told by Herbert Hoover. In reality, Hoover did not want sensible, bipartisan solutions to fix the Great Depression — he wanted Roosevelt to abandon his New Deal program, which Hoover viewed as creeping communism that would “break down our form of government [and] crack the timbers of our Constitution.” But again, the point of Roosevelt’s New Deal was to fix the Depression and prevent it from happening again — especially by instituting harsh new financial regulations. Indeed, once Roosevelt was in office he quickly and easily fixed the banking panic that had been sweeping the nation for months using tools Hoover had dismissed out of hand.

The sensible, pragmatic, responsible thing to do in 1932 and in 2008 was to tell Republicans to either do as they were told or go pound sand, and the same is true today. Democrats should propose a solution that is both fair and big enough to address the crisis, and tell Republicans to take it or leave it. As the crisis gets worse and worse, and the bodies start piling up, Republicans almost certainly will fold — indeed, at least one Republican senator has already argued the Republican plan should be more fair. Among other things, Democrats should demand much larger checks to individuals that will go out automatically in future crises, an even bigger upgrade to unemployment insurance funded by the federal government, budget backstops for state and local governments who are getting slammed, wartime-style mass state purchasing of medical equipment, and requirements that any company that gets rescued keeps its staff on payroll. But to make that demand, House Democrats will actually have to write a bill doing so.

Gutless centrists will no doubt characterize this as “taking the American people hostage.” In reality, it is Republicans who are taking the people hostage to try to get through a giant bailout for the rich. Democrats, should they choose to play the same kind of hardball, would be trying to save the American people in the only way it can be done — through politics.


This is what I’m thinking as well. Both Dems and Repugs will try to paint this as hostage-taking, but the Dems can reasonably say that only one side’s plan will make rich people richer. Should be a slam dunk, but my expectations for establishment Dems (who delight in selling the rest of us out) are low, sadly.


Nice article with a Sci fi touch

COVID-19: Prepared for the Wrong War