Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.
Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.
Afro-Netizen
All Spin Zone
Altercation
Americablog
And, yes, I DO take it personally
Another Iranian Online
August J. Pollak
Baghdad Burning
Barry Lando
Bloggrrrlz Gallery
Blondesense
Bob Geiger
Body and Soul
Boing Boing
Booman Tribune
BOP News
Bush Watch
BUZZFLASH
Carpetbagger
Clean Air Blog
Cool Hunting
Corrente
CrooksandLiars
Cursor
Dahr Jamail
Daily Howler
Daily Kos
DC Media Girl
DemiOrator
Direland
Echidne of the Snakes
Elayne Riggs
Eschaton
Fact-esque
Falafel Sex, and Other Things Best Left Unsaid
Farai Chideya
Feminist Peace Network
Feministe
Feministing
Frameshop
Gristmill
Huffington Post
Hullabaloo
Informed Comment
James Wolcott
Jesus General
Lady Jayne's Blog
Liberal Oasis
Mad Kane
Mahablog
Majikthise
Media Girl
Media is a Plural
MediaCitizen
Metafilter
Michael Berube
MyDD
News Dissector
News For Real
Norbizness
Oliver Willis
Pacific Views
Pandagon
Political Animal
PopPolitics.com
PR Watch
Prometheus 6
Raed in the Middle
RH Reality Check
Robert Greenwald
Roger Ailes
Rox Populi
Sadly, No!
Seeing the Forest
Shakespeares Sister
Sirotablog
Sisyphus Shrugged
skippy the bush kangaroo
Slacktivist
SpeakSpeak
Stay Free!
Steve Gilliard
Talking Points Memo
TalkLeft
TBogg
Thatcoloredfellasweblog
The Bilerico Project
The Hutchinson Political Report
The Republic of T
The Revealer
The Sideshow
The Swift Report
Think Progress
This Modern World
TikvahGirl
Trish Wilson
War and Piece
Waveflux
What She Said!
Whiskey Bar
Working Families Vote 2008
Right-Wingers Aren't Stupid — They're Just Betting That You're Ignorant
Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form
A lot of liberal commentary about the opposition to Obama’s stimulus plan goes something like this: ‘Gosh, could it really be the case that conservatives are so dogmatic that they’d sacrifice a shot at economic recovery to adhere to their ideological predilections?’
The obvious answer is yes, of course they would, because the smarter ones understand that if the administration succeeds it’ll spell big trouble for the anti-governmentalism — always part of the American creed — that Reagan rode to popularity in the 1980s. With America becoming more diverse, and less religious, what would they have left with which to rally the troops without it?
(In fact, my own view — call it a little conspiracy theory — is that no group of otherwise successful individuals could possibly be as inept as the members of the Bush administration were, and to some degree their mismanagement was a stage show designed to prove once and for all that government was, in fact, the problem.)
But that raises a question: is obstructing the Obama administration’s efforts to kick-start the economy political suicide? Will the GOP forever be branded as “Republican’ts”? I'm not so sure.
They’re banking on most Americans’ lack of economic literacy (the proof is deriding a stimulus bill as “big government spending,” which, of course, is precisely what it’s supposed to be).
Because while you and I may know that even if the stimulus package does precisely what it’s supposed to (it likely won’t — it’s probably too small), there will still be significant lag time before it has much impact on employment and the other indices that economic reporters use to measure our economic health, it’s also safe to say that we’re not the most patient people in the world. We like our gratification instant and our economic recovery quick, and that gives conservatives an opening.
That's compounded by how difficult it is to argue at some point in the future that had something not happened, the outcome would have been worse than it is. If the stimulus package limits the peak unemployment rate to 9 or 10 percent, when it otherwise would have been 11 or 12, how do you prove that in any definitive way (there's economic modeling, but that's as much an art as a science)?
So not only did conservative lawmakers -- Blue Dog Dems and Republicans alike -- lessen the chance of success by limiting the size of the stimulus package and skewing it towards more of the tax cuts that provide the absolute least bang for the buck, they also have time on their side.
But... there's a "but" -- they’re taking a big risk nonetheless. Because they’re not only dealing with a very articulate Explainer-in-Chief, but also with an administration that has proven to be adept at playing the modern game of politics-as-marketing. So, we’ll soon be seeing a lot of these:

The first is the generic recovery emblem that’ll be slapped onto all sorts of projects, and the second is the symbol for the “Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery” — say it ten times fast — which you’ll see on transit projects.
Shnazzy branding, no? (If you’re a design nerd, the story of their creation is here).
And that's important, because as I've written several times in the past, people hate the idea of “Big Government” only in the abstract — they love driveable roads and functional schools and all the rest when it’s concrete, when it’s part of their communities (which, by the way, can also be said for “earmarks,” but that’s for another post).
So, I predict that these logos cropping up everywhere are ultimately going to be a big problem for the Right as it tries to derail efforts to kick start an economic recovery.
Tagged as: obama, conservatives, stimulus
Joshua Holland is an editor and senior writer at AlterNet.
| Also in PEEK | |||
| Thanks to Dems' Pussyfooting, Health Industry Stocks Shoot Skyward The bump does not appear to be indicative of broader economic improvement. Post by Byard Duncan. December 22, 2009. |
House Blue Dog Switches Party, Stiffing Democrats for $1 Million in Campaign Funds Rep. Parker Griffith enjoyed campaign support of $1 million from the Democratic Party. But that was a year ago, and this is now. Post by Adele Stan. December 22, 2009. |
Hey Progressives, the Health Care Fight Is Still On: Time to Push Back We're in the midst of a defining moment in the health care debate. Now's not the time to let up pressure. Post by Katrina Vanden Heuvel. December 22, 2009. |
|