B: I take heat, from time to time, for being a partisan. Let me be clear: I’m not a Democrat because I like wearing a sweater with a triumphant donkey on it, or because I’m drawn naturally to blue bumper stickers. I’m a Democrat because I fall into the liberal half of the political spectrum, and for liberal policies the Democrats are the only horse (or donkey) in town.
But if I’m honest, I’m more liberal than the Democrats. I don’t blindly follow whatever the party says, because I often think they don’t go far enough. As an example, the best way to wring the remaining wasted money out of the healthcare bureaucracy would have been a single payer system. The Democrats might be the liberal party in our system- but they’re realistically only center-left on the spectrum. I wanted to say all that because I know people take whatever I say with a grain of salt, and I don’t want to be written off as a younger George Soros.
I don’t stump for any particular party; I want what’s best for the country. You, and I’m talking to the interviewer here, not those of you reading at home (or at work)- but I think you do, too. I think most Democrats in office this last couple of years have, as well. Honestly, that’s why, even when health care reform was unpopular- largely because of a campaign of misinformation by the opposition- they passed it. Not because they’re arrogant, but because they thought it was the best thing to do for the country.
Republicans, if you want a point of contrast, refused to participate in crafting the bill at all. Their strategy for the past two years has been to stall the legislative process on everything; if at the end of two years you can claim your opponents haven’t accomplished anything, great- if you can claim they’ve been partisan and hardly accomplished anything, even better. Tactically, their plan was sound.
But by and large I think most of us don’t vote for a party or its agenda- and certainly not for what’s solely in their best interest- but because we want our country to be great. We can have honest disagreements about what that means, about philosophies that differ on what are the best ways to help the economy or the vulnerable. But those conversations are a necessary part of the process of our country finding its way- and without those conversations, the process falls apart.
Specifically, I wanted to talk about a particular proposal. During the Clinton administration, one reason the budget was balanced was a 1990 reform called “Paygo.” New spending or tax cuts had to be offset by higher taxes or spending cuts- any changes had to be budget neutral. In 2001 “Paygo” ended, and massive deficits boomed. When they retook control of the Congress, Democrats reinstituted pay as you go rules. But the current House Minority Leader, John Boehner
DI: Aw, come on, you didn’t pronounce it “boner”
B: Boehner has proposed a “Cutgo” reform, where new spending would have to be compensated for with spending cuts. However, there is no proviso for cutting taxes- so things like extending the Bush tax cuts, at a cost of $370 billion dollars a year, could be done without cutting the budget at all. And the “Pledge to America” includes other tax cut proposals, too.
This is dangerous. It paves the way for still higher deficits by masking the intention to cut revenue without cutting expenses. It’s reckless.
DI: Let me advocate for devilmancy, here. Aren’t the Democrats in favor of extending some of the tax cuts, and aren’t they also responsible for the deficits?
B: Democrats do want to extend some of the tax cuts, that’s true, and something I’m against- whether or not we’re talking about an income group I fall into.
But we’ve had deficits most years going back to Reagan, but the increases began in 2009, the last year George W. Bush’s presided over the budget. The deficit was forecast at $400 billion dollars, an increase over the previous year, but a moderate one. Then the economy tanked, and federal receipts were $600 billion dollars less than expected, bringing revenue below 2005 levels; the economy bottoming out also increased the number of the unemployed and the poverty of the destitute, accounting for most of the rest of the increase in the deficit. 2010 receipts are expected to be on par with 2005- estimated to within 8 billion dollars of each other, and the deficit is expected to remain relatively static year over year. Mandatory spending, covering programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and unemployment, is about equal to total federal revenue for this year, leaving non-discretionary spending in the cold (a full half of which is gobbled up by Defense).
Some of 2010’s weaker receipts reflect the poor economy, but $300 billion came from tax cuts buried in the reviled stimulus bill- that’s what the President means when he says he’s cut people’s taxes. And T.A.R.P., unpopularly known as the bailouts, was a bipartisan law, approved by three-quarters of Democrats and half of Republicans, and endorsed and signed into law by Bush. It’s also expected to turn a modest profit, once all the loans are repaid. These two measures together are a large part of the reason why business profits are up 62% from the start of 2009 to the middle of 2010. The economy is righting itself- though I understand how meaningless that is for someone who’s out of work. These facts are often obscured by a political conversation focused on spin and blame, but there aren’t two Americas: there’s one. We are united states, a united people, and it’s our debt, and our future at stake.
Some of our conflict stems from opposing views, but that’s why it’s so important to find avenues where we can work with our ideological opponents. In times of economic stagnation, Democrats might favor stimulative policies like those suggested by John Maynard Keynes. The opposing side usually follows the philosophy of Milton Friedman, and policies similar to the lassaiz-faire strategy associated with Hoover during the Great Depression- (though it’s a bit unfair to that President, who was far from a theoretical purist and did try a few mixed measures). Whether or not government spending can stimulate an economy might still be an open question, but the evidence to me points to potential, and I sense there’s a desire from most Americans for the government to help. And deciding on the best course is a conversation to have with ourselves and our leaders.
The deficit is a worrying thing, and neither party is blameless here. The Democrats want to extend some of the Bush tax cuts- the bulk of them, really. But if we’re concerned about the debt and taxes- and at this point we all should be- we need to have adult conversations about it. We need leaders who will seek difficult answers, rather than settle for simple distractions.
I’m not telling you to vote the way I will. I just want you to think, as you go out there to vote, about what’s going to be best for our country and its future. And it is our country: we share in its rights, its privileges, and its responsibilities. And I hope, for all our sakes, that we make the right choice.
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Ground Zero
ID: I was beginning to think there wouldn’t be another segment.
Batman/Bruce: I made a commitment. You’ll get your interviews. They just have to happen on my time and on my schedule. Clark could move faster than a speeding bullet- I actually have to schedule you around meetings and sleep.
ID: Still, I’d have thought with your nighttime duties curtailed, you’d have more time, not less.
B: So did I. But I hadn’t anticipated the economy going sideways, or the fact that there was going to be more for me to do logistically now that people know who I am.
ID: Okay, but you called me, and I assume you didn’t just do it because you wanted to bitch, so what’s up?
B: I wanted to talk about the “mosque.”
ID: Oh Lord.
B: We’ll start at the beginning. It isn’t a mosque, it’s an interfaith community center funded by Muslims- though what difference that does or should make I can’t contemplate. That’s why I wanted to have this conversation with you in particular. You have a way of provoking that might be useful. I’d like nothing more than for there to be some sinister plot we could all rally against
ID: Crab people.
B: But I just don’t see it.
It only really makes sense as a distraction, a don’t look at the evil bastard behind the curtain who doesn’t really want to discuss the quality of his efforts as a representative, but would rather publicly bash a minority group instead. It’s not even a straw man argument; it’s a piñata.
The only even plausible exception I’ve heard of in this case is that somehow a Muslim group, any Muslim group, building this close to Ground Zero is tantamount to the terrorists lording over their “conquest.” This is wrong, for any number of reasons.
I don’t want to call people who are against the community center bigoted, because I refuse to believe that’s true of so many Americans. They’re mistrustful. People with a different perspective perpetrated a horrible crime in our country- in my backyard. Gotham’s practically on top of New York, so this means something to me. But now there are people with a similar perspective, who want to set up shop nearby. I understand a certain degree of mistrust, but it’s wrong to conflate all Muslims with terrorism. There isn’t some secret cabal behind terrorism where every Muslim gets a vote.
I’ll contrast it like this: I’m at least a little culpable for the innocent people who died in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, because I was an American citizen while Bush was President and our nation engaged in those conflicts- so are you, and most of the people reading this. And for the most part that’s a fact of war: innocent people die, often in far larger numbers than the combatants. But when I’m in Kuwait, or Egypt or Lebanon, and I’m conducting business, people don’t treat me as an arm of the US government, they don’t spit curses at me for being part of a group who has harmed a part of their group.
Mistrust is a genuine, gut reaction, and I can’t fault a single person for having it. In my other, costumed life, I’ve been one of the most distrusting people on the planet, but the American compact is that we will trust our fellow citizens not to abuse their rights, that we agree to respect the rights of all our fellow citizens. Being wary doesn’t make you a bigot; pretending like that mistrust justifies mistreating another group of people- using it as a pretense to deny them something that is otherwise legal- that does. And part of our obligation as Americans is to take our fellow citizens by the hand and pull them back from that precipice, bring them back to that place where we can all feel safe and secure in our rights, in our country and in ourselves.
ID: You seem pretty passionate about this, and I don’t just mean passionate about civil liberty kind of passion. I, I thought you and Superman were off someplace else, doing, whatever my notes will tell me later that you were doing [note: they didn’t].
B: Clark was off gallivanting. I wasn’t. I told him that out where he was going I was a liability, or at least no more use to him than I could be at the other end of a satellite phone line, and that there was some business in Gotham I needed to attend to. So I was in my city.
In fact, when the first plane struck, I was still in bed; I’d had a long night. Alfred woke me up, at 8:47. He was holding my costume in one hand, crumpled in his fist, and said, “They’ve flown a hijacked plane into the World Trade Center.” For the briefest instant I felt like the suit, an empty symbol, before I got up and put it on. I told Alfred I’d need reinforcements.
He’d set the plane to warm up, and by the time I’d reached her it was ready. I flew at top speed, which we’ll just say is a lot; we’ll be generous and say my plane is part of the 5th generation of fighter jets along with the F-22 Raptor; realistically I’d say it’s more like 5.5.
But I was too late. I arrived in time to see the second plane hit the South Tower. I offered to chase after Flight 77, but was told that the passengers were going to try to retake the plane, so I stayed over New York until a pair of F-15s arrived, then I flew back to Gotham, where I stayed in the air until I was out of fuel.
ID: So… wow. I had no idea.
B: I had offices in the World Trade Center; I knew people. But it’s making a fundamentally unAmerican mistake to hold all Muslims responsible. Muslims are Americans, around 1% of the population. Muslims were victims, too, on September 11th. Muslims worked to save people in the Twin Towers, and some of those died.
There is no clash of civilizations; we’re at war with practitioners of a methodology- people who use terrorism as a means of coercion. I don’t find many occasions to agree with George W. Bush, but most people would say he was a stalwart fighter of terrorism, and he said, “Islam is peace.” He’s absolutely right, derived from “salaam,” perhaps better known by American from the phrase “salaam alaykum,” peace be upon you.
ID: But Muhammad (pbuh), was a man of war, a conqueror.
B: Yes he was, in the mold of David, the man after God’s own heart. But I’m not interested in discussing philosophy with you. The point is more that people misuse religion for their own purposes, and you will find rapists and murderers and worse in every faith.
But it’s wrong to hold every member of a group responsible for what a few people did.
As Americans, we are better than that. All of us. Even if a few of us need to be reminded of that from time to time. But it’s important to remember that these people who are so very wrong, they’re our brothers, our fellow Americans. It’s important for us to help them understand.
ID: Okay, so I don’t let you end on too dramatic a note: what if the Joker wanted to purchase a theater where he’d massacred an audience?
B: This isn’t Osama bin Laden putting down tent-spikes, so I’ll adjust your metaphor. It’s a little known fact that the Joker is Jewish- obviously not devout in any recognizable way, but that’s how he was raised, and I believe he was ethnically Jewish, that his mother was Jewish. Now would it be right to deny purchase of that land to Jews simply because a Jew committed an atrocity at the site?
ID: Hmm… Wait. Is the Joker really Jewish? What’s that shrug? You’re not really going to tell me, are you? Bastard.
Batman/Bruce: I made a commitment. You’ll get your interviews. They just have to happen on my time and on my schedule. Clark could move faster than a speeding bullet- I actually have to schedule you around meetings and sleep.
ID: Still, I’d have thought with your nighttime duties curtailed, you’d have more time, not less.
B: So did I. But I hadn’t anticipated the economy going sideways, or the fact that there was going to be more for me to do logistically now that people know who I am.
ID: Okay, but you called me, and I assume you didn’t just do it because you wanted to bitch, so what’s up?
B: I wanted to talk about the “mosque.”
ID: Oh Lord.
B: We’ll start at the beginning. It isn’t a mosque, it’s an interfaith community center funded by Muslims- though what difference that does or should make I can’t contemplate. That’s why I wanted to have this conversation with you in particular. You have a way of provoking that might be useful. I’d like nothing more than for there to be some sinister plot we could all rally against
ID: Crab people.
B: But I just don’t see it.
It only really makes sense as a distraction, a don’t look at the evil bastard behind the curtain who doesn’t really want to discuss the quality of his efforts as a representative, but would rather publicly bash a minority group instead. It’s not even a straw man argument; it’s a piñata.
The only even plausible exception I’ve heard of in this case is that somehow a Muslim group, any Muslim group, building this close to Ground Zero is tantamount to the terrorists lording over their “conquest.” This is wrong, for any number of reasons.
I don’t want to call people who are against the community center bigoted, because I refuse to believe that’s true of so many Americans. They’re mistrustful. People with a different perspective perpetrated a horrible crime in our country- in my backyard. Gotham’s practically on top of New York, so this means something to me. But now there are people with a similar perspective, who want to set up shop nearby. I understand a certain degree of mistrust, but it’s wrong to conflate all Muslims with terrorism. There isn’t some secret cabal behind terrorism where every Muslim gets a vote.
I’ll contrast it like this: I’m at least a little culpable for the innocent people who died in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, because I was an American citizen while Bush was President and our nation engaged in those conflicts- so are you, and most of the people reading this. And for the most part that’s a fact of war: innocent people die, often in far larger numbers than the combatants. But when I’m in Kuwait, or Egypt or Lebanon, and I’m conducting business, people don’t treat me as an arm of the US government, they don’t spit curses at me for being part of a group who has harmed a part of their group.
Mistrust is a genuine, gut reaction, and I can’t fault a single person for having it. In my other, costumed life, I’ve been one of the most distrusting people on the planet, but the American compact is that we will trust our fellow citizens not to abuse their rights, that we agree to respect the rights of all our fellow citizens. Being wary doesn’t make you a bigot; pretending like that mistrust justifies mistreating another group of people- using it as a pretense to deny them something that is otherwise legal- that does. And part of our obligation as Americans is to take our fellow citizens by the hand and pull them back from that precipice, bring them back to that place where we can all feel safe and secure in our rights, in our country and in ourselves.
ID: You seem pretty passionate about this, and I don’t just mean passionate about civil liberty kind of passion. I, I thought you and Superman were off someplace else, doing, whatever my notes will tell me later that you were doing [note: they didn’t].
B: Clark was off gallivanting. I wasn’t. I told him that out where he was going I was a liability, or at least no more use to him than I could be at the other end of a satellite phone line, and that there was some business in Gotham I needed to attend to. So I was in my city.
In fact, when the first plane struck, I was still in bed; I’d had a long night. Alfred woke me up, at 8:47. He was holding my costume in one hand, crumpled in his fist, and said, “They’ve flown a hijacked plane into the World Trade Center.” For the briefest instant I felt like the suit, an empty symbol, before I got up and put it on. I told Alfred I’d need reinforcements.
He’d set the plane to warm up, and by the time I’d reached her it was ready. I flew at top speed, which we’ll just say is a lot; we’ll be generous and say my plane is part of the 5th generation of fighter jets along with the F-22 Raptor; realistically I’d say it’s more like 5.5.
But I was too late. I arrived in time to see the second plane hit the South Tower. I offered to chase after Flight 77, but was told that the passengers were going to try to retake the plane, so I stayed over New York until a pair of F-15s arrived, then I flew back to Gotham, where I stayed in the air until I was out of fuel.
ID: So… wow. I had no idea.
B: I had offices in the World Trade Center; I knew people. But it’s making a fundamentally unAmerican mistake to hold all Muslims responsible. Muslims are Americans, around 1% of the population. Muslims were victims, too, on September 11th. Muslims worked to save people in the Twin Towers, and some of those died.
There is no clash of civilizations; we’re at war with practitioners of a methodology- people who use terrorism as a means of coercion. I don’t find many occasions to agree with George W. Bush, but most people would say he was a stalwart fighter of terrorism, and he said, “Islam is peace.” He’s absolutely right, derived from “salaam,” perhaps better known by American from the phrase “salaam alaykum,” peace be upon you.
ID: But Muhammad (pbuh), was a man of war, a conqueror.
B: Yes he was, in the mold of David, the man after God’s own heart. But I’m not interested in discussing philosophy with you. The point is more that people misuse religion for their own purposes, and you will find rapists and murderers and worse in every faith.
But it’s wrong to hold every member of a group responsible for what a few people did.
As Americans, we are better than that. All of us. Even if a few of us need to be reminded of that from time to time. But it’s important to remember that these people who are so very wrong, they’re our brothers, our fellow Americans. It’s important for us to help them understand.
ID: Okay, so I don’t let you end on too dramatic a note: what if the Joker wanted to purchase a theater where he’d massacred an audience?
B: This isn’t Osama bin Laden putting down tent-spikes, so I’ll adjust your metaphor. It’s a little known fact that the Joker is Jewish- obviously not devout in any recognizable way, but that’s how he was raised, and I believe he was ethnically Jewish, that his mother was Jewish. Now would it be right to deny purchase of that land to Jews simply because a Jew committed an atrocity at the site?
ID: Hmm… Wait. Is the Joker really Jewish? What’s that shrug? You’re not really going to tell me, are you? Bastard.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Justice
ID: Here’s a question for you, do you believe in the death penalty?
Batman: I’ll assume, despite the way you asked it, you’re wondering whether or not I agree with its tenets as a public policy. First, I’ll briefly pass over what its two main tenets are, just so we’re agreeing on the premise: first, that it acts as a deterrent; and second, that it gives closure to the victims of families- in essence that an eye for an eye is justice.
First, as far as the death penalty being used as a deterrent, I tend to concur with Levitt, in that its deterrence is minimal at best. Consider that in Gotham, gang mortality usually hovers around 2% annually, at least when there aren’t any major territorial disputes; year-to-year, there are about 3,000 people nationally on death row, and around thirty executions, so 1% of the people on death row are executed every year. It’s actually safer to be on death row than it is to be in a gang on the streets. Add to the preceding the fact that of all criminal convictions eligible for a death penalty, only about 2% actually receive a death sentence. And only about 12% of death sentences are ever carried out, and they take an average of 12 years before they are.
Bear in mind that 80% of all executions occur in the south- where murder rates are consistently higher, by the way- so people living elsewhere have much better odds. For good measure, consider that a national survey of police chiefs found that 80% didn’t believe that criminals contemplated punishment before committing a crime. The statistics are simply against the idea that the death penalty acts as a viable deterrence.
Now, most of your readers will probably be familiar, but I’ll state for your record that my parents were gunned down during a mugging, right in front of me. I was only eight years old. The mugger was a man named Joe Chill. Witnessing that violent act led me to create the Batman persona, to train myself to stop others from suffering at the hands of criminals. Years later, I found Chill again, only to watch as another criminal gunned him down in an alley, much the same way he did my parents.
And let me state, for the record, I fully intended to shoot Chill myself; I was armed to that very purpose. But when I saw Chill shot, I wasn’t given peace, or satisfaction- not even relief. It hollowed out the pit of my stomach, and I recognized that no man has the right to take a life. What Chill had taken from me, from my parents, he deserved punishment, maybe even vengeance, but murder- even for a murderer- is too far.
I still shudder to think of what he nearly made me into; I had never before been farther from the boy my parents raised than in that moment, and what still terrifies me, to this day, is the fact that I probably would have pulled the trigger myself. I probably would have crossed that line, and I don’t think I would have come back from that. I think I’d have spent the next several months murdering my way across Gotham’s underground, killing monsters and mobsters and all manner of bastards who undoubtedly deserve to die. But the cost to me as a person, and I’m not even sure I believe in a soul but the damage it would have done to my soul- I would have been irrevocably lost.
Watching Chill die stopped me from doing something drastic and horrible, but it didn’t give me closure. Closure would have been holding a gun to him and recognizing that I couldn’t stoop so low, that I was better than him, that the people he murdered raised me better than that, that no matter what he’d put me through, he hadn’t managed to alter the core of me. And I don’t have that- I’ll never have that.
As much as I hated him- as much as I still hate him- I couldn’t revel in his death, couldn’t savor it. And I wanted to. I wanted to rejoice; my parents’ murder was finally avenged, but I couldn’t. It wasn’t justice, just another pointless murder in an alley. And he didn’t deserve to die like my parents- that was too good for him.
ID: Are you all right? You’re shaking.
B: I’m angry- and clearly I’m still upset. But oddly enough, what sickens me most about the debate is the first part, how truly ineffectual it is. But the best argument, because at the end of the day it’s difficult to sway people with moral ideas, let alone sympathy for monsters, is that it doesn’t make fiscal sense. Particularly when our government is chest-deep in debt.
The cost of executing criminals is enormous. A death penalty investigation is 3 times more expensive. Death penalty litigation costs an estimated 16 times more. And the sentences themselves, including appeals and incarceration, is 21 times more expensive. The extra cost of merely trying a death penalty case is about $2 million dollars beyond what a normal prosecution would be. Dollar for dollar, that money is better spent on more officers on the streets- that’s a deterrence you can’t argue with.
ID: What about with men like the Joker? Men who kill indiscriminately, who there’s obviously no stopping through conventional means.
B: Two quick points: there are no other men like the Joker- period- and he doesn’t kill indiscriminately; he kills when he thinks it’s funny. But I’ve always been of the opinion that when conventional means fail, you should use unconventional means. Sever his spinal cord. Take away his fingers. While you’re at it, remove his tongue and jaw. Take away everything he uses as a weapon, everything he’s lost the privilege of keeping. I’m okay with cruel and unusual
ID: Particularly with someone as cruel and unusual as him?
B: Something like that. But really I’m a pragmatist.
I’ve done everything I’ve done to honor my parent’s memory; to take a life, even to take his life, would have been to stain their legacy forever. A different man, and, maybe even a better man, would simply put a bullet in him- but I can’t. And on moral grounds, I don’t think we should. Especially with the Joker, I think to resort to barbarism, to kill him rather than continue to show that reasonable men are better by refusing to kill him, I think he wins. He doesn’t carry the day, but he walks away with the moral victory, and I don’t think that’s something we can let him do.
But it couldn’t be me, it couldn’t be a vigilante meting out this crude justice on the criminally insane; in his mind that would just be two madmen dueling on the precipice of insanity. It has to be a function of government, a state action, sanctioned and sealed. Chaos and insanity cannot prevail over a rational society- because we can’t let it if we hope for a peaceful world where no one will lose their parents in a dark alley- and if I pray for anything, I pray for that.
Batman: I’ll assume, despite the way you asked it, you’re wondering whether or not I agree with its tenets as a public policy. First, I’ll briefly pass over what its two main tenets are, just so we’re agreeing on the premise: first, that it acts as a deterrent; and second, that it gives closure to the victims of families- in essence that an eye for an eye is justice.
First, as far as the death penalty being used as a deterrent, I tend to concur with Levitt, in that its deterrence is minimal at best. Consider that in Gotham, gang mortality usually hovers around 2% annually, at least when there aren’t any major territorial disputes; year-to-year, there are about 3,000 people nationally on death row, and around thirty executions, so 1% of the people on death row are executed every year. It’s actually safer to be on death row than it is to be in a gang on the streets. Add to the preceding the fact that of all criminal convictions eligible for a death penalty, only about 2% actually receive a death sentence. And only about 12% of death sentences are ever carried out, and they take an average of 12 years before they are.
Bear in mind that 80% of all executions occur in the south- where murder rates are consistently higher, by the way- so people living elsewhere have much better odds. For good measure, consider that a national survey of police chiefs found that 80% didn’t believe that criminals contemplated punishment before committing a crime. The statistics are simply against the idea that the death penalty acts as a viable deterrence.
Now, most of your readers will probably be familiar, but I’ll state for your record that my parents were gunned down during a mugging, right in front of me. I was only eight years old. The mugger was a man named Joe Chill. Witnessing that violent act led me to create the Batman persona, to train myself to stop others from suffering at the hands of criminals. Years later, I found Chill again, only to watch as another criminal gunned him down in an alley, much the same way he did my parents.
And let me state, for the record, I fully intended to shoot Chill myself; I was armed to that very purpose. But when I saw Chill shot, I wasn’t given peace, or satisfaction- not even relief. It hollowed out the pit of my stomach, and I recognized that no man has the right to take a life. What Chill had taken from me, from my parents, he deserved punishment, maybe even vengeance, but murder- even for a murderer- is too far.
I still shudder to think of what he nearly made me into; I had never before been farther from the boy my parents raised than in that moment, and what still terrifies me, to this day, is the fact that I probably would have pulled the trigger myself. I probably would have crossed that line, and I don’t think I would have come back from that. I think I’d have spent the next several months murdering my way across Gotham’s underground, killing monsters and mobsters and all manner of bastards who undoubtedly deserve to die. But the cost to me as a person, and I’m not even sure I believe in a soul but the damage it would have done to my soul- I would have been irrevocably lost.
Watching Chill die stopped me from doing something drastic and horrible, but it didn’t give me closure. Closure would have been holding a gun to him and recognizing that I couldn’t stoop so low, that I was better than him, that the people he murdered raised me better than that, that no matter what he’d put me through, he hadn’t managed to alter the core of me. And I don’t have that- I’ll never have that.
As much as I hated him- as much as I still hate him- I couldn’t revel in his death, couldn’t savor it. And I wanted to. I wanted to rejoice; my parents’ murder was finally avenged, but I couldn’t. It wasn’t justice, just another pointless murder in an alley. And he didn’t deserve to die like my parents- that was too good for him.
ID: Are you all right? You’re shaking.
B: I’m angry- and clearly I’m still upset. But oddly enough, what sickens me most about the debate is the first part, how truly ineffectual it is. But the best argument, because at the end of the day it’s difficult to sway people with moral ideas, let alone sympathy for monsters, is that it doesn’t make fiscal sense. Particularly when our government is chest-deep in debt.
The cost of executing criminals is enormous. A death penalty investigation is 3 times more expensive. Death penalty litigation costs an estimated 16 times more. And the sentences themselves, including appeals and incarceration, is 21 times more expensive. The extra cost of merely trying a death penalty case is about $2 million dollars beyond what a normal prosecution would be. Dollar for dollar, that money is better spent on more officers on the streets- that’s a deterrence you can’t argue with.
ID: What about with men like the Joker? Men who kill indiscriminately, who there’s obviously no stopping through conventional means.
B: Two quick points: there are no other men like the Joker- period- and he doesn’t kill indiscriminately; he kills when he thinks it’s funny. But I’ve always been of the opinion that when conventional means fail, you should use unconventional means. Sever his spinal cord. Take away his fingers. While you’re at it, remove his tongue and jaw. Take away everything he uses as a weapon, everything he’s lost the privilege of keeping. I’m okay with cruel and unusual
ID: Particularly with someone as cruel and unusual as him?
B: Something like that. But really I’m a pragmatist.
I’ve done everything I’ve done to honor my parent’s memory; to take a life, even to take his life, would have been to stain their legacy forever. A different man, and, maybe even a better man, would simply put a bullet in him- but I can’t. And on moral grounds, I don’t think we should. Especially with the Joker, I think to resort to barbarism, to kill him rather than continue to show that reasonable men are better by refusing to kill him, I think he wins. He doesn’t carry the day, but he walks away with the moral victory, and I don’t think that’s something we can let him do.
But it couldn’t be me, it couldn’t be a vigilante meting out this crude justice on the criminally insane; in his mind that would just be two madmen dueling on the precipice of insanity. It has to be a function of government, a state action, sanctioned and sealed. Chaos and insanity cannot prevail over a rational society- because we can’t let it if we hope for a peaceful world where no one will lose their parents in a dark alley- and if I pray for anything, I pray for that.
Sunday, May 23, 2010
Batman XXX
ID: I know it's pandering, but this last year we've lost a lot of momentum, so I want to talk about your porn.
Batman: (sigh). It's sad that this is what it took for you to get your affairs in order.
ID: Heh. It's at least a little ironic that Superman actually filmed a porno movie, one you immediately bought up the rights to then shelved, and now, your alter ego at least, is starring in not one but now two pornographic adventures. I mean, over the years there have been knock-offs, probably the most notable having been “Dickman and Throbbin,” but this is actual, honest to god Batman porn. Why haven't you stopped this?
B: I don't think I could, honestly. If I tried for a defamation suit, or sued for libel or damages, the case would probably go along the same lines as when Jerry Falwell sued Larry Flynt- okay as parody on Free Speech grounds. Now, at first I talked to Lucious [Fox] about quietly buying up a majority stake in Vivid video, and we were about midway through that deal when we found out another company was making a similar film; the genie was out of the bottle at that point.
ID: But let's be clear, here, there's been Batman porn for years, it's just been relegated to internet drawings, and to the kinkier fetish and bondage sites.
B: That's right. But the reason the Vivid movie was a bigger threat is I spent most of my life crafting Batman to be something more than human, something difficult to comprehend. Watching Batman have sex is the opposite- a Batman who has sex is human, with weaknesses, who can be killed.
ID: But, and I don't think I'm really letting anything too sensitive out of the bag, but you've always been human, right? So's the current Batman. Of course, by only human what we really mean is that you were the peak of human physical conditioning and intelligence, like if Stephen Hawking were put into Bruce Lee's body by way of Brad Pitt's face- and even then, you're greater than even the sum of all those parts.
B: I'll assume you're not coming onto me
ID: Not a bit- my girlfriend would kill me- but you have to admit, objectively, you're a pretty spectacular specimen of the human condition.
B: I've er, boned up on Dale DaBone's work [the actor playing Bruce in Batman XXX], and while I might be impressive, I'm not that spectacular.
ID: Oh my god; I can't believe the first penis joke of the interview was not made by me.
B: Well, if nothing else, having multiple porn yous running around in tights will teach you to have a sense of humor about yourself.
ID: But if I can steer things for a moment back into serious territory: what do you think the tights community will think of this?
B: Honestly, I think this has been a long time coming. We're all public figures, at least according to parody laws, so this has been legal at least going back to the Falwell case. And particularly because of the reception Vivid has received pre-release, they decided to open a whole superhero imprint. So I'm just the first of many, it would seem.
ID: Axel Braun [the director] is no Sleez, but he does seem to have a passion for the subject matter.
B: And I'm not entirely certain it's a bad thing. With Batman, I think I had to compensate, maybe overcompensate, for the fact that I was human and was trying to exist in a world with true superhumans. But most of the members of the community, and most of the league, they're actually the opposite. In an earlier time, most of them would have been worshiped as gods, and while I do believe that no amount of appreciation for their work and their sacrificies could ever be enough, I do think that there's a peril there.
Take Clark, for example. He had for all intents and purposes his own cult. He deserved love, and respect, and honor, but worship? He didn't want that, and he did everything possible to dissuade his followers. But because outwardly he had this godlike appearance, and godlike abilities, it was impossible for people to get to know his humanity, to understand that inside Clark was the most human person I've ever met. And I've always thought that makes our heroes that much more heroic: they're people, with desires, fears, faults, and yet they still get up and do what they do to help people. Being human makes them better heroes, not worse.
So I think, while these films are likely to challenge some in the community, and I'm sure there will be more than one fist fight over dalliances real and implied, I think the end result might just be a world that better understands the people who are willing to lay down their lives in its defense. If the cost is making my butler blush every now and again- I think that's something I can live with.
Batman: (sigh). It's sad that this is what it took for you to get your affairs in order.
ID: Heh. It's at least a little ironic that Superman actually filmed a porno movie, one you immediately bought up the rights to then shelved, and now, your alter ego at least, is starring in not one but now two pornographic adventures. I mean, over the years there have been knock-offs, probably the most notable having been “Dickman and Throbbin,” but this is actual, honest to god Batman porn. Why haven't you stopped this?
B: I don't think I could, honestly. If I tried for a defamation suit, or sued for libel or damages, the case would probably go along the same lines as when Jerry Falwell sued Larry Flynt- okay as parody on Free Speech grounds. Now, at first I talked to Lucious [Fox] about quietly buying up a majority stake in Vivid video, and we were about midway through that deal when we found out another company was making a similar film; the genie was out of the bottle at that point.
ID: But let's be clear, here, there's been Batman porn for years, it's just been relegated to internet drawings, and to the kinkier fetish and bondage sites.
B: That's right. But the reason the Vivid movie was a bigger threat is I spent most of my life crafting Batman to be something more than human, something difficult to comprehend. Watching Batman have sex is the opposite- a Batman who has sex is human, with weaknesses, who can be killed.
ID: But, and I don't think I'm really letting anything too sensitive out of the bag, but you've always been human, right? So's the current Batman. Of course, by only human what we really mean is that you were the peak of human physical conditioning and intelligence, like if Stephen Hawking were put into Bruce Lee's body by way of Brad Pitt's face- and even then, you're greater than even the sum of all those parts.
B: I'll assume you're not coming onto me
ID: Not a bit- my girlfriend would kill me- but you have to admit, objectively, you're a pretty spectacular specimen of the human condition.
B: I've er, boned up on Dale DaBone's work [the actor playing Bruce in Batman XXX], and while I might be impressive, I'm not that spectacular.
ID: Oh my god; I can't believe the first penis joke of the interview was not made by me.
B: Well, if nothing else, having multiple porn yous running around in tights will teach you to have a sense of humor about yourself.
ID: But if I can steer things for a moment back into serious territory: what do you think the tights community will think of this?
B: Honestly, I think this has been a long time coming. We're all public figures, at least according to parody laws, so this has been legal at least going back to the Falwell case. And particularly because of the reception Vivid has received pre-release, they decided to open a whole superhero imprint. So I'm just the first of many, it would seem.
ID: Axel Braun [the director] is no Sleez, but he does seem to have a passion for the subject matter.
B: And I'm not entirely certain it's a bad thing. With Batman, I think I had to compensate, maybe overcompensate, for the fact that I was human and was trying to exist in a world with true superhumans. But most of the members of the community, and most of the league, they're actually the opposite. In an earlier time, most of them would have been worshiped as gods, and while I do believe that no amount of appreciation for their work and their sacrificies could ever be enough, I do think that there's a peril there.
Take Clark, for example. He had for all intents and purposes his own cult. He deserved love, and respect, and honor, but worship? He didn't want that, and he did everything possible to dissuade his followers. But because outwardly he had this godlike appearance, and godlike abilities, it was impossible for people to get to know his humanity, to understand that inside Clark was the most human person I've ever met. And I've always thought that makes our heroes that much more heroic: they're people, with desires, fears, faults, and yet they still get up and do what they do to help people. Being human makes them better heroes, not worse.
So I think, while these films are likely to challenge some in the community, and I'm sure there will be more than one fist fight over dalliances real and implied, I think the end result might just be a world that better understands the people who are willing to lay down their lives in its defense. If the cost is making my butler blush every now and again- I think that's something I can live with.
Revelations
ID: I'm sitting down with the Batman, billionaire industrialist Bruce Wayne. He contacted me shortly after the passing of his friend and confidant, the late Superman, Clark Kent. To anyone live in a cave not inhabited by bats this last year, his identity was revealed by "accident" during an interview with Kent. Now, in quick succession, he has three revelations to share. Whenever you're ready, Bruce.
Batman: I'm quitting.
ID: You wear a lot of hats and cowls and such; care to elaborate.
B: Being Batman. I'm stepping down from it. My first Robin, who many of you will know better as Nightwing, will be stepping into the role.
ID: Now why is that? I understand why he'll be taking your place in the League, and even why he'll be assuming your place at the head of your impromptu bat “family,” but why not just leave it at that, let him still be Nightwing?
B: Vanity, I suppose. Because the Batman is my legacy, and I'd rather see it outlive me. But there's also other facets to that question. For example, why does Nightwing want to take the title and costume- because he does- and that's another reason why I want him to take over. And finally, because I think Batman matters. Not that Nightwing doesn't matter or hasn't, but I think Batman is symbolic, because there are people who Nightwing has been punching in the face his whole life who will still, for incomprehensible reasons, fear him more in a pointy-eared cowl.
ID: Okay, that's one. The second has to do with why you're quitting now.
B: I have AIDS. I've been living with the HIV virus for years, but recently the disease has progressed to the point of full blown AIDS. I'm still in physically good shape, but my immune system is compromised to the point where I would be a liability to my friends and colleagues if I did not relinquish my cowl.
ID: That's two down. The third revelation?
B: I believe I'm a homosexual. I've had long-term romantic relationships with women, and let me state unequivocally right now that each of those have been legitimate. The women I've dated I've cared for genuinely, and when I said I loved them, I meant it. Some might argue that that would make me bisexual, and, historically, I would agree, but I think, in light of all sorts of things, that I am and will continue into the foreseeable future to be a homosexual.
ID: And that brings us to our first official question of the interview: why are you here? You could have given a press conference, could have bought a giant laser and carved these three facts on the moon and signed it with a bat symbol, so why are you talking to me?
B: Mostly because I appreciated what you did for my friend. Despite your own inclinations, I think you dealt with him fairly, and tried to maintain his sense of dignity throughout. On the one hand, I think those qualities ought to be rewarded; on the other, I think I'd like to be similarly treated. But mostly, I think, it centers around one question: in a world without a Superman, who's going to notice that the original Batman's retired?
Really, this has been a long time coming. I've been sick for years, and been taking and trying all manner of treatments. But in that time I couldn't talk myself into giving up- I thought, and this was probably mostly vanity, that the world needed me. I think, in hindsight, I needed to be a part of the world far more.
Another factor is that the people who know me, my impromptu bat family as you called them, intervened. In a nutshell they told me that they've talked to doctors, and from this point on I'd be taking time off my life. I'm not exactly terminal, at the moment- people with AIDS can live relatively long, healthy, full lives, but if I continued to put the kinds of stresses being Batman does on my body, I'd be dead very soon- assuming that I wasn't done in prematurely by any number of the toxins several of my more colorful adversaries routinely make use of that my body is no longer equipped to fight. So basically we made a deal, whereby they would continue the work we've been doing so long as I retired.
ID: What was your other option?
B: I think they were going to taking turns kicking the hell out of me until I came to my senses.
ID: But do you think they could have? Aren't you the goddamned Batman?
B: I used to be.
Batman: I'm quitting.
ID: You wear a lot of hats and cowls and such; care to elaborate.
B: Being Batman. I'm stepping down from it. My first Robin, who many of you will know better as Nightwing, will be stepping into the role.
ID: Now why is that? I understand why he'll be taking your place in the League, and even why he'll be assuming your place at the head of your impromptu bat “family,” but why not just leave it at that, let him still be Nightwing?
B: Vanity, I suppose. Because the Batman is my legacy, and I'd rather see it outlive me. But there's also other facets to that question. For example, why does Nightwing want to take the title and costume- because he does- and that's another reason why I want him to take over. And finally, because I think Batman matters. Not that Nightwing doesn't matter or hasn't, but I think Batman is symbolic, because there are people who Nightwing has been punching in the face his whole life who will still, for incomprehensible reasons, fear him more in a pointy-eared cowl.
ID: Okay, that's one. The second has to do with why you're quitting now.
B: I have AIDS. I've been living with the HIV virus for years, but recently the disease has progressed to the point of full blown AIDS. I'm still in physically good shape, but my immune system is compromised to the point where I would be a liability to my friends and colleagues if I did not relinquish my cowl.
ID: That's two down. The third revelation?
B: I believe I'm a homosexual. I've had long-term romantic relationships with women, and let me state unequivocally right now that each of those have been legitimate. The women I've dated I've cared for genuinely, and when I said I loved them, I meant it. Some might argue that that would make me bisexual, and, historically, I would agree, but I think, in light of all sorts of things, that I am and will continue into the foreseeable future to be a homosexual.
ID: And that brings us to our first official question of the interview: why are you here? You could have given a press conference, could have bought a giant laser and carved these three facts on the moon and signed it with a bat symbol, so why are you talking to me?
B: Mostly because I appreciated what you did for my friend. Despite your own inclinations, I think you dealt with him fairly, and tried to maintain his sense of dignity throughout. On the one hand, I think those qualities ought to be rewarded; on the other, I think I'd like to be similarly treated. But mostly, I think, it centers around one question: in a world without a Superman, who's going to notice that the original Batman's retired?
Really, this has been a long time coming. I've been sick for years, and been taking and trying all manner of treatments. But in that time I couldn't talk myself into giving up- I thought, and this was probably mostly vanity, that the world needed me. I think, in hindsight, I needed to be a part of the world far more.
Another factor is that the people who know me, my impromptu bat family as you called them, intervened. In a nutshell they told me that they've talked to doctors, and from this point on I'd be taking time off my life. I'm not exactly terminal, at the moment- people with AIDS can live relatively long, healthy, full lives, but if I continued to put the kinds of stresses being Batman does on my body, I'd be dead very soon- assuming that I wasn't done in prematurely by any number of the toxins several of my more colorful adversaries routinely make use of that my body is no longer equipped to fight. So basically we made a deal, whereby they would continue the work we've been doing so long as I retired.
ID: What was your other option?
B: I think they were going to taking turns kicking the hell out of me until I came to my senses.
ID: But do you think they could have? Aren't you the goddamned Batman?
B: I used to be.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
HCR Passed
Batman: I’m proud of our Congress today. I’m a democrat, and I’ve never really seen a problem saying so in public. I give a lot of money to democratic candidates, I’m fairly active in the party. So in that regard I’m not Clark. But I didn’t have much of a dog in the healthcare fight.
I abandoned private insurance for my workers a long time ago; the administrative fees insurers charged was making the already steep curve of healthcare less and less affordable, and Wayne Enterprises is a large enough company that we were able to create our own insurance pool. And wherever possible, we don’t hire outside contractors; anyone we can have in-house we do. So I really had no stake in healthcare reform.
Then Clark got sick. He never used his health insurance, but within a week of his diagnosis with cancer, the Planet’s insurance company tried to cancel his plan. Perry White, the Planet’s EIC, called them up and told them Clark Kent’s policy staid, or they were going to lose the entire Planet account. That’s just the kind of guy Perry is. A few days later and the story had worked its way up to me; I haven’t owned the Planet very long- a few years- I bought it out from under Lex Luthor when he was on one of his tirades. I personally called the insurance company and cancelled the Planet account, and brought them into the Wayne insurance pool.
But the damage was done. Clark had seen the nasty side of the insurance industry. Not that there was much the insurance could have done for him. The vast majority of his treatment, which obviously wasn’t successful, took place in either S.T.A.R. facilities or WayneTech.
As the year of healthcare reform wore on, Clark became more and more animated. He wanted to help people, and he realized that this one bill could help more people than he could in the time he had left. It’s the first time I’ve seen him drag politics into the League meetings, and he took more than one of our junior members to task for repeating demonstrably false claims about the bill. It was one of the few areas where I think Clark was unaware of his own strength, but I remember he cornered Hawkman for basically quoting Sarah Palin about death panels. And Clark, when he got upset, he had this way of getting breathy, and suddenly the air all around you was warm and moist and you would immediately start to sweat, and he boomed “There are NO death panels.” It was because he could hold a thousand times as much air in his lungs than a normal human being, and did, without thinking about it. And Hawkman would have dropped his mace if it hadn’t been on a leather strap around his wrist.
But I’m beginning to stray from the point. I wasn’t particularly animated about healthcare reform, because I knew that single payer and a public option were a pipe dream, even with a pseudo-supermajority in the Senate. But I am absolutely a democrat, so I supported the President and the Congress on those grounds.
But a few months ago, the prognosis was grim; Scott Brown’s election had a lot of people adopting defeatist language, and precedent said the democrats were going to fold like a cheap suit.
But because of Clark I started paying more attention to it. I’ve always been a proponent of insurance reform, and have on more than one occasion thought about starting an insurance company within WE- one that operated on a non-profit basis. But beyond the fact that such an organization usually has selection bias issues which make it tougher to realize the cost savings necessary to cut premiums accordingly, I honestly believed that the only real solution was for the government to step in and either regulate intensely or nationalize it. But because of Clark, healthcare reform became something I paid attention to; I even read Jonathan Cohn’s TNR blog religiously. Every rise or dip in the polls
And almost surprisingly, the democrats didn’t fail. Over the years I’ve grown accustomed to the democrats being on the right side of an issue, but lacking the courage of their convictions to do a damned bit about it. Obama’s gambit, allowing Republicans to show just how mean and ugly and petty they could be, without really opposing them, worked out, and Nancy Pelosi, who I think was the real hero behind healthcare reform, was able to deliver the votes in the house. The democrats didn’t fail. For the first time in a while, I’m actually proud of my party.
Now, we should discuss logistics, since this is likely coming out before the first segment of our interview, because while we taped that ages ago, it turns out that, in a world without its Superman, and equally in a continually struggling economy, there was a lot that needed my attention. And
DI: Judging by the uncomfortable silence and piercing glare, I take it that’s my cue- but I’ve been dealing with some personal shenanigans, some of which have to do with being an often freelance writer whose main printed magazine folded in part because of the lousy economy. So the delay was mutual- though much more my fault than Mr. Wayne’s.
B: You don’t have to call me “mister;” Bruce works just fine.
DI: Actually, your eyes kind of scare me. I think “mister” is good for now. But we are going to be starting up the ongoing interview with Mr. Wayne soon, just as soon as a few things stabilize.
B: Though it was never meant to be a weekly occurrence anyway. Billionaire industrialist, adventurer- I want to be as open and accessible as possible, but sometimes other demands in my life have to take precedence. Still, I’m looking forward to it.
I abandoned private insurance for my workers a long time ago; the administrative fees insurers charged was making the already steep curve of healthcare less and less affordable, and Wayne Enterprises is a large enough company that we were able to create our own insurance pool. And wherever possible, we don’t hire outside contractors; anyone we can have in-house we do. So I really had no stake in healthcare reform.
Then Clark got sick. He never used his health insurance, but within a week of his diagnosis with cancer, the Planet’s insurance company tried to cancel his plan. Perry White, the Planet’s EIC, called them up and told them Clark Kent’s policy staid, or they were going to lose the entire Planet account. That’s just the kind of guy Perry is. A few days later and the story had worked its way up to me; I haven’t owned the Planet very long- a few years- I bought it out from under Lex Luthor when he was on one of his tirades. I personally called the insurance company and cancelled the Planet account, and brought them into the Wayne insurance pool.
But the damage was done. Clark had seen the nasty side of the insurance industry. Not that there was much the insurance could have done for him. The vast majority of his treatment, which obviously wasn’t successful, took place in either S.T.A.R. facilities or WayneTech.
As the year of healthcare reform wore on, Clark became more and more animated. He wanted to help people, and he realized that this one bill could help more people than he could in the time he had left. It’s the first time I’ve seen him drag politics into the League meetings, and he took more than one of our junior members to task for repeating demonstrably false claims about the bill. It was one of the few areas where I think Clark was unaware of his own strength, but I remember he cornered Hawkman for basically quoting Sarah Palin about death panels. And Clark, when he got upset, he had this way of getting breathy, and suddenly the air all around you was warm and moist and you would immediately start to sweat, and he boomed “There are NO death panels.” It was because he could hold a thousand times as much air in his lungs than a normal human being, and did, without thinking about it. And Hawkman would have dropped his mace if it hadn’t been on a leather strap around his wrist.
But I’m beginning to stray from the point. I wasn’t particularly animated about healthcare reform, because I knew that single payer and a public option were a pipe dream, even with a pseudo-supermajority in the Senate. But I am absolutely a democrat, so I supported the President and the Congress on those grounds.
But a few months ago, the prognosis was grim; Scott Brown’s election had a lot of people adopting defeatist language, and precedent said the democrats were going to fold like a cheap suit.
But because of Clark I started paying more attention to it. I’ve always been a proponent of insurance reform, and have on more than one occasion thought about starting an insurance company within WE- one that operated on a non-profit basis. But beyond the fact that such an organization usually has selection bias issues which make it tougher to realize the cost savings necessary to cut premiums accordingly, I honestly believed that the only real solution was for the government to step in and either regulate intensely or nationalize it. But because of Clark, healthcare reform became something I paid attention to; I even read Jonathan Cohn’s TNR blog religiously. Every rise or dip in the polls
And almost surprisingly, the democrats didn’t fail. Over the years I’ve grown accustomed to the democrats being on the right side of an issue, but lacking the courage of their convictions to do a damned bit about it. Obama’s gambit, allowing Republicans to show just how mean and ugly and petty they could be, without really opposing them, worked out, and Nancy Pelosi, who I think was the real hero behind healthcare reform, was able to deliver the votes in the house. The democrats didn’t fail. For the first time in a while, I’m actually proud of my party.
Now, we should discuss logistics, since this is likely coming out before the first segment of our interview, because while we taped that ages ago, it turns out that, in a world without its Superman, and equally in a continually struggling economy, there was a lot that needed my attention. And
DI: Judging by the uncomfortable silence and piercing glare, I take it that’s my cue- but I’ve been dealing with some personal shenanigans, some of which have to do with being an often freelance writer whose main printed magazine folded in part because of the lousy economy. So the delay was mutual- though much more my fault than Mr. Wayne’s.
B: You don’t have to call me “mister;” Bruce works just fine.
DI: Actually, your eyes kind of scare me. I think “mister” is good for now. But we are going to be starting up the ongoing interview with Mr. Wayne soon, just as soon as a few things stabilize.
B: Though it was never meant to be a weekly occurrence anyway. Billionaire industrialist, adventurer- I want to be as open and accessible as possible, but sometimes other demands in my life have to take precedence. Still, I’m looking forward to it.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Preview: Massachusetts
[NOTE: This was recorded Tuesday night]
B: I know we haven’t actually posted the first segment, but I want to talk about Massachusetts. Living in New England, Delaware, specifically, it’s in my backyard.
That was actually one of my more amusing moments, reading your interview with Clark, when he admitted he was a Democrat. I always told him it was pretty obvious, really. I think the only person who ever thought he was a Republican was his mother. But I’m a Democrat. And a lot of Democrats are terrified.
Massachusetts is a Democratic stronghold. All of their statewide offices are held by Democrats. The Kennedys are a legacy in Massachusetts. Even a few weeks ago, it was inconceivable that a Democrat wouldn’t win the seat Ted Kennedy left open when he died of brain cancer.
But it was only inconceivable because the Democrats lacked imagination. First off, Martha Coakley was a terrible candidate. It’s the problem with primaries- they have a tendency to pick candidates that may not fare as well in general elections: like John Kerry, to recall the other senator from Massachusetts.
Second, Americans are worried. It isn’t about health care, really, or the rest of Obama’s agenda, either. It’s about the economy, stupid. 10% unemployment scares people. They see layoffs everywhere they look, and it’s impossible not to wonder if they’re next. And if they do get a pink slip, they know just how difficult it will be to find another job.
Third, where the Democratic agenda has landed them in hot water is in its focus. When people are worried about feeding their kids, the absolute last thing that people want to think about is being generous and charitable. And that’s the frame the Democrats have been using during the healthcare debate. What would have made the legislation ten times more palatable would have been nixing all the talk of covering the uninsured, and instead focusing on reforms that make insurance more affordable, and make coverage portable even in the event of a job less. That’s not to say that the rest of the bill is meaningless, but the way it’s discussed has been fatally flawed- even terrifying to some people. Massachusetts is the one state in the nation where healthcare really shouldn’t be a factor in an election like this, because Massachusetts already has this kind of healthcare reform, and it’s popular, too.
Fourth, even when Democrats have done things that directly effect jobs, like the stimulus, they forget to talk about it. The stimulus didn’t create too many jobs, but it saved thousands of state and local government jobs, kept thousands of state and local governments from having to make really painful cuts to services when the bad economy would have made those cuts that much worse.
Fifth, Americans don’t like a supermajority. There’s a belief in this country that a balanced Congress can synergize the best ideas of the right and the left. Look at what happened in Georgia. In the general election there was a fairly tight race for the Senate, tight enough that neither candidate got 50% of the vote, so there was a mandatory run-off contest. But in the interim, Democrats had won what was one vote shy of a supermajority. Subsequently, the Democrat lost by five times what the deficit was in the general election.
Massachusetts wasn’t about anything other than the electorate worrying about themselves, and I don’t mean that in a disparaging way. Things have gotten bad enough that most Americans worry about falling into that widening sinkhole of people without jobs, with foreclosed homes, without insurance, basically without hope. If Democrats don’t want to be spanked come November, they’ll find a way to make Americans hopeful again.
ID: … oh, you’ve stopped talking. Okay. Uh. How might they do that?
B: Probably the best way would be to change the filibuster.
ID: To play Devil’s Advocate for a moment, wouldn’t using the nuclear option piss off the electorate?
B: The real question is whether or not Americans would prefer Senatorial gridlock, which is the current status quo, or getting the business of the people done. The filibuster is decidedly undemocratic, because it allows a minority to prevent the majority from legislating. I’m not saying we have to do away with it entirely, but lowering it to 55 would certainly change the dynamic.
And the filibuster isn’t sacrosanct. It was changed several times in the last century. The ability to vote for cloture, the end of a filibuster, didn’t exist until 1917. In 1949, the cloture requirement was changed from 67 senators to 60. And until 1975 filibustering required that opponents of a bill continue debating twenty four hours a day, seven days a week, to maintain a filibuster. The nuclear option has actually been used three times, though this “precedent” was retroactively removed. And really, debate over the nuclear option has been ongoing since 2005, when a Republican majority started talking about using it.
ID: So you’re saying for the Democrats to legislate effectively, they should emulate Republican tactics?
B: I’m saying a good idea is a good idea. In 2008 Republicans used the filibuster a record 139 times, almost double the Democrats’ usage when they were in the minority. This means that twice a week Republicans stopped debate on a bill.
Republican strategy is focused on preventing Democrats from legislating effectively. And they can do that so long as the filibuster remains intact.
ID: But you’re a billionaire. Shouldn’t you be a Republican?
B: If I were only concerned with the size of my fortune, maybe. But I believe the primary role of government is to be an advocate for its people, to serve as a check on the power of others with influence on American life. And compared with the power of other nations, compared with the influence of corporations like my own, I think the American people need a strong advocate.
The first actual segment of this interview will be coming shortly, but in the meantime, well, he couldn't help himself.
B: I know we haven’t actually posted the first segment, but I want to talk about Massachusetts. Living in New England, Delaware, specifically, it’s in my backyard.
That was actually one of my more amusing moments, reading your interview with Clark, when he admitted he was a Democrat. I always told him it was pretty obvious, really. I think the only person who ever thought he was a Republican was his mother. But I’m a Democrat. And a lot of Democrats are terrified.
Massachusetts is a Democratic stronghold. All of their statewide offices are held by Democrats. The Kennedys are a legacy in Massachusetts. Even a few weeks ago, it was inconceivable that a Democrat wouldn’t win the seat Ted Kennedy left open when he died of brain cancer.
But it was only inconceivable because the Democrats lacked imagination. First off, Martha Coakley was a terrible candidate. It’s the problem with primaries- they have a tendency to pick candidates that may not fare as well in general elections: like John Kerry, to recall the other senator from Massachusetts.
Second, Americans are worried. It isn’t about health care, really, or the rest of Obama’s agenda, either. It’s about the economy, stupid. 10% unemployment scares people. They see layoffs everywhere they look, and it’s impossible not to wonder if they’re next. And if they do get a pink slip, they know just how difficult it will be to find another job.
Third, where the Democratic agenda has landed them in hot water is in its focus. When people are worried about feeding their kids, the absolute last thing that people want to think about is being generous and charitable. And that’s the frame the Democrats have been using during the healthcare debate. What would have made the legislation ten times more palatable would have been nixing all the talk of covering the uninsured, and instead focusing on reforms that make insurance more affordable, and make coverage portable even in the event of a job less. That’s not to say that the rest of the bill is meaningless, but the way it’s discussed has been fatally flawed- even terrifying to some people. Massachusetts is the one state in the nation where healthcare really shouldn’t be a factor in an election like this, because Massachusetts already has this kind of healthcare reform, and it’s popular, too.
Fourth, even when Democrats have done things that directly effect jobs, like the stimulus, they forget to talk about it. The stimulus didn’t create too many jobs, but it saved thousands of state and local government jobs, kept thousands of state and local governments from having to make really painful cuts to services when the bad economy would have made those cuts that much worse.
Fifth, Americans don’t like a supermajority. There’s a belief in this country that a balanced Congress can synergize the best ideas of the right and the left. Look at what happened in Georgia. In the general election there was a fairly tight race for the Senate, tight enough that neither candidate got 50% of the vote, so there was a mandatory run-off contest. But in the interim, Democrats had won what was one vote shy of a supermajority. Subsequently, the Democrat lost by five times what the deficit was in the general election.
Massachusetts wasn’t about anything other than the electorate worrying about themselves, and I don’t mean that in a disparaging way. Things have gotten bad enough that most Americans worry about falling into that widening sinkhole of people without jobs, with foreclosed homes, without insurance, basically without hope. If Democrats don’t want to be spanked come November, they’ll find a way to make Americans hopeful again.
ID: … oh, you’ve stopped talking. Okay. Uh. How might they do that?
B: Probably the best way would be to change the filibuster.
ID: To play Devil’s Advocate for a moment, wouldn’t using the nuclear option piss off the electorate?
B: The real question is whether or not Americans would prefer Senatorial gridlock, which is the current status quo, or getting the business of the people done. The filibuster is decidedly undemocratic, because it allows a minority to prevent the majority from legislating. I’m not saying we have to do away with it entirely, but lowering it to 55 would certainly change the dynamic.
And the filibuster isn’t sacrosanct. It was changed several times in the last century. The ability to vote for cloture, the end of a filibuster, didn’t exist until 1917. In 1949, the cloture requirement was changed from 67 senators to 60. And until 1975 filibustering required that opponents of a bill continue debating twenty four hours a day, seven days a week, to maintain a filibuster. The nuclear option has actually been used three times, though this “precedent” was retroactively removed. And really, debate over the nuclear option has been ongoing since 2005, when a Republican majority started talking about using it.
ID: So you’re saying for the Democrats to legislate effectively, they should emulate Republican tactics?
B: I’m saying a good idea is a good idea. In 2008 Republicans used the filibuster a record 139 times, almost double the Democrats’ usage when they were in the minority. This means that twice a week Republicans stopped debate on a bill.
Republican strategy is focused on preventing Democrats from legislating effectively. And they can do that so long as the filibuster remains intact.
ID: But you’re a billionaire. Shouldn’t you be a Republican?
B: If I were only concerned with the size of my fortune, maybe. But I believe the primary role of government is to be an advocate for its people, to serve as a check on the power of others with influence on American life. And compared with the power of other nations, compared with the influence of corporations like my own, I think the American people need a strong advocate.
The first actual segment of this interview will be coming shortly, but in the meantime, well, he couldn't help himself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)