[I’ve updated this on the flip, since it’s always nice to see one’s theories confirmed in today’s news.]
Not to go all poli-sci on you, but I’d like to suggest that the conservative approach to governance can be summarized in the following equation:
where
Or, in the vulgate:
Conservative
governance = no planning + privatization + insider looting = disaster to the power of an acute clusterfuck, where insider looting is the alpha and omega of Republican policy.
True for Iraq, true for Katrina, true for Walter Reed.
NOTE Another terminology note: I’m starting to use the word “conservative” where I would have used the word “Republican.” I’m not sure there’s a lot more we can do about trashing the Republican brand—they’re already doing a great job, and they don’t need our help. But the word “conservative” is still heard without the appropriate accompanying snicker, as if there were some sort of coherent, intellectually respectable conservative philosophy that didn’t… Well, that didn’t boil down the the equation above, plus tribalism and various psychosexual pathologies. Which sounds like a good subject for another equation, eh?
UPDATE True for the California power crisis (remember that?)
UPDATE And, today in WaPo, true for the Walter Reed fiasco:
The scandal over treatment of outpatients at Walter Reed Army Medical Center has focused attention on the Army’s decision to privatize the facilities support workforce at the hospital, a move commanders say left the building maintenance staff undermanned.
Some Democratic lawmakers have questioned the decision to hire IAP Worldwide Services, a contractor with connections to the Bush administration and to KBR, a Halliburton subsidiary.
Yep, Republican governance in action, with entirely predictable results!
Say, was Halliburton the politically wired contractor that built the police academy in Iraq that rained urine and feces on the trainees? Oh, no. I’m sorry. That was Parsons.
Front page
very cute
but as you know, it’s all greek to our media.
We are "our media"
And it’s not Greek to us.
Besides, they’re insiders, so they’re part of the looting.
I guess we need an equation that starts out “The coverage of a given story S is inversely proportional to the cocktail weinies consumed…”
No authoritarians were tortured in the writing of this post.
"UPDATE True for the California power crisis (remember that?)"
The California power crisis was not exactly a result of conservatism… it was a result of Gov. Davis’ refusal to allow utilities to charge more to consumers as the wholesale power the utilities were buying on the market was skyrocketing due to record demand during summer heatstorms and winter coldspells.
This was a big mistake firstly, because it bankrupted the utilities and forced the state to save them and take on massive decades-long contracts for overpriced power.
But also, it was just plain stupid, because the genius of ANY market is… as the price goes up, conservation kicks in. Governer Davis’ policy of not allowing the prices to rise did not send the necessary signal to consumers that they should do their best to save at the most important times to save: the peak-load times of summer and winter.
How is that a conservative issue? Some have tried to blame Enron for the California energy crisis; no it was not Enron’s fault… Enron played a small role in boosting power prices on the market… but on a simple supply and demand front, there SIMPLY was not enough power producable to meet California’s demand, so prices had to spike to unbelievable levels for at least a few hours in the peak-demand times to compensate… simple economics.
It was Gov. Davis’ unwillingness to deregulate the price that consumers paid, because of his fear that letting power prices rise would hurt the economy, that led to the power crsis distaster.
andrew, please provide us with links to "bankrupted" power
companies in CA. one will do. to the best of my knowledge, no power companies went out of business due to davis’ actions.
blah blah blah. the speculation in energy markets is part of the risk of business. in a semi-regulated market, you should expect quarters without profits, if that’s the market you want to be in. “regulation” means…making things regular. if you can’t stand the regulation, go to china, where they don’t mind daming ancient waterways and displacing millions so the power companies can reap huge profit.
enron played a “small role…” whatever. you corporatists are all the same, pathetic defenders of a system you don’t even understand. unlike you, i understand that the enron types will literall sacrifice my life for profit, if the choice were given to them. you, little fool, think that they will step in and care for you, and share their billions with you. so tell me- has that happened yet? i highly doubt one of the carlyle execs is a troll here. trust me, andrew- one day they will screw you over too.
unless you’re 11” cut and an “excellent top.”
Branding
You’re right about the Republican branding.
Doesn’t GOP stand for Graft, Oubliettes, and Pollution?
"Andrew, Please Provide Us With Links...." Okay check this one
Here the California Public Utility Commission reaches an agreement with PG&E to get PG&E out of its bankruptsy proceeding and regain its credit rating (the state bailed it out)… this is California’s biggest utility… but the other utilities too, were on the brink of bankruptsy or filed
http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/NEWS_RE…
“blah blah blah. the speculation in energy markets is part of the risk of business. in a semi-regulated market, you should expect quarters without profits, if that’s the market you want to be in. “
See, PG&E did do what it was ordered to do.. that is, it did not raise rates and kept supplying power for a loss.. You need to realize that when a company has a loss over a period of time…. it can survive ONLY if it still can get credit… it thus lives on credit… that’s how it makes it through the loss..
Once a company has so much loses that it loses its credit rating and cannot get credit… it has no choice but bankruptsy… the losses PG&E experienced were so great that it exhausted all, that is 100% of its cash and its credit… to the point that it had no choice…
As far as your allegations that I am a “corporatist” etc…well you just went way off the deepend and I regret on some level dignifying your reply with a comment.. but what we’re talking about here is simple supply and demand of power… something you obviously know very little about. Don’t forget that as you sit in front of that computer using power, that fridge, using power, that air conditioner, using power, your whole LIFE powered by a grid you know little about… well ALL of that power is GENERATED by a giant plant, or a dam, or a wind turbine, somewhere, that is owned, built, invested in, and maintained by SOME entity… and if you don’t like that, you can go to the woods or build your own power generation… but I doubt you have the know-how to do that, so chill the hell out man and think for once
andrew, there is so much that is fucked with what you linked to
please give me some time to respond.
and don’t look for my tears at an energy company’s concern. if that’s what you want, we must forever disappoint you.
Thank you for your links and response. i do take them seriously. i’m doing back breaking physical labor just now, so gimme a little time to research your claims and respond to them.
Um, aren't we assuming that the market for power is perfect?
And that no manipulation took place? I think not:
Note that the link is to Corrente not the the original source at the LA Times, which has now disappeared behing the wall of the paid archive — an argument for ALWAYS putting at least the money quotes in the blog, because in a year or two, that’s the only place where they won’t be down the memory hole.
No authoritarians were tortured in the writing of this post.
Um, Andrew, let me try to help you out here
The “insider looting” after “privatization” was done by Enron, not by PG&E. I grant that wasn’t crystal clear in the original post. But it should be now.
No authoritarians were tortured in the writing of this post.
CD, you and I are gonna get along juuuust fine.
“unless you’re 11” cut and an “excellent top.””
Oh honey, when you talk that way I just get to thinkin’ the wrong thang.
Good going.
PS Is that Lambert you’re talking about? Because if it is, I wonder why he’s so worried about measuring. Do you think he’d obey if I wore one of these?
Blue Gal
http://bgalrstate.blogspot.com
http://ristocrats.blogspot.com
GOP = Greedy Ostentatious Pharisee
Pharisees were quit smug about their own virtue because they followed all the rules of their religion obsessively, while ignoring the spiritual growth.
BTW
Publicans were people who contracted to perform various services for the Roman government. So technically it is correct to refer to the Republicans as the Publican Party.