Conservative Blather Should Not Be Taken Too Seriously

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Andrew Sprung kind of likes the idea that conservatives are so unnerved by Obama’s success in the fiscal cliff negotiations:

To his enemies, he now bestrides Capitol Hill like a colossus while the GOP leadership walks under his huge legs and peeps about to find themselves dishonorable graves. I don’t think they’re right. But I find it refreshing. Bracing. You might almost say exhilarating. Start with Charles Krauthammer….

What follows is a typically hysterical reaction from Krauthammer toward the prospect of millionaires seeing their effective tax rates go up by a few percentage points. But for what it’s worth, I wouldn’t take this too seriously. Does this mean that Krauthammer really thinks Obama has won a world historical victory? I doubt it. He’s simply doing what pundits and politicians always do: portraying events in a way most likely to rally the troops for the next battle. Krauthammer wants to scare conservatives into holding firm in the next round of negotiations, and the best way to do that is by pretending that Round 1 was a loss of brobdingnagian proportions. One more like that and liberals will have routed us completely!

This is just blather. In broad terms, the fiscal cliff deal was peanuts. The sequestration negotiations will probably turn into peanuts too. The plain fact is that although both sides talk a good game, Democrats are afraid to raise taxes very much and Republicans are afraid to cut entitlements very much. That’s why Dems won’t even consider things like carbon taxes or financial transaction taxes, and why Republicans generally refuse to offer concrete entitlement cuts. Even Paul Ryan’s famous budget punts on Social Security completely, doesn’t touch Medicare in the medium term, and does its level best to painstakingly obscure the fact that it would cut Medicare in the long term.

The next few years are going to be trench warfare. No one is likely to win or lose in any big way.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend