Skip to main content

View Diary: Robert Reich shocks Newt Gingrich with his aggressive pushback (163 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You're missing it, he's dodging it: MISDIRECTION (6+ / 0-)

    A very valid riposte would bring up the heavy financial burden red states place on the Treasury due to their Republican governators taking, cheating ways.

    TL,DR - Apples v Oranges, Newt:  stay on topic.

    trying to stay alive 'til I reach 65!

    by chmood on Mon Dec 16, 2013 at 10:29:48 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  No, the diary author made a point that Gingrich (0+ / 0-)

      had lied and it is clear that Gingrich's statement was not factual. However, Gingrich's point, which may have been a misdirection, was true that the overwhelming majority of mayors of the poorest cities are Democrats. I certainly understand that cities are impacted by state and federal governance, but local governments do have a big influence on what happens within their borders.

      "let's talk about that"

      by VClib on Mon Dec 16, 2013 at 11:13:31 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I wonder why this is the case? (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tonedevil, betson08, msdrown, RMForbes, bluezen

        How much "big influence" do city mayors have? What areas do they have impact on poverty? I assume they are 95% at the mercy of the state budget. They have no ability to tax, and if the city is impoverished, what help is it anyway?

        Why don't you lay it out for us, the Republican plan for lifting people out of poverty? I mean, beside the ideology that if you cut all benefits, then people will give up their dependency on big government benefits (like $251 / month) and will pull themselves up by their own bootstraps, even though their schools are crumbling, there is 50% unemployment, they are suffering from poor nutrition, zero healthcare and lack of housing.

        "You can die for Freedom, you just can't exercise it"

        by shmuelman on Mon Dec 16, 2013 at 12:10:59 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  shmuelman - cities have no power to tax? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          nextstep

          I believe the City of New York has an income tax, property tax, and a list of minor taxes and fees as long as my arm. Most cities have fewer taxes than NYC, but they could. There is no doubt that the inner cities have fared the worse over the past several decades and there is no easy answer to fix their problems. Some of the problems have been self-inflicted, but most have not. My guess is that the twenty poorest cities on the list, linked in the diary, will all follow Detroit into bankruptcy in the next decade. There may be exceptions, but most all of them can't cover their liabilities. Things are likely to get worse.  

          "let's talk about that"

          by VClib on Mon Dec 16, 2013 at 01:16:07 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  vclib -- as prez obama said to mitt romney, (0+ / 0-)

            by all means, please proceed . . .

          •  New York City is unique. (0+ / 0-)

            NYC can get away with income taxes and $10 packs of cigarettes. But how many cities in the US have that? And poor cities, an income tax souldn't help. I live in Denver and it has a $2 / month head tax, maybe it is $4 / month now. An insignificant sum. I think they make big money on photo radar, parking tickets, drunk arrests and all the other methods of coercion you they can use. They also have a legitimate real estate taxes.
            You may not be far off target regarding bankruptcy, but I am too ignorant to make predictions.

            "You can die for Freedom, you just can't exercise it"

            by shmuelman on Mon Dec 16, 2013 at 09:07:29 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  One of the major strategies we see out of the (0+ / 0-)

            gop/kochs recently is the "state against state" race to disassemble the Union.
            They are doing anything they can to dismantle any semblance of "federal revenue sharing" which was intended to smooth over the disparities between 'have-not' states and municipalities and 'have' states and municipalities, that were exacerbated by white flight and migration from the rust belt to the sun belt.

            As long as that trend continues, yes, you are going to see further declines in some major cities.

            When we start really on the road to clean energy and get small scale solar on track, more and better mass transit, etc, you'll see the cities rebound.

            Even though Detroit is the worst case scenario, even it could be bailed out and put back on track, if it weren't for the gop.

            You can't make this stuff up.

            by David54 on Tue Dec 17, 2013 at 06:21:08 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Are you the 'Fair Play for Newt' committee? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tonedevil, bluezen

        From the OP:

        Gingrich then lied and said every major city which is a center of poverty is run by Democrats.
        Gingrich's point was a) untrue and dishonest and should be parsed as such, and not as a serious and germane assertion of fact (caught you with that one, he did), and b) a tactical move away from Republican responsibility for - well, anything at all...that is, to divert Reich AND the flow of the conversation away from Reich's point.

        Deconstructing such points rather than following Reich's lead is how Dems traditionally lose against all odds.  Real policy debate?  Serious think-piece?  Dig into the differences between rural and urban poverty & how the red states!  Sunday-morning puffer jousting?  Worst.  Tactic.  EVER.

        Fortunately, I have no fear that Newt will return to power.  He really IS astonishingly unlikeable...and as smart as he may be, he's incredibly stupid about people in some very important ways.

        If you want to argue on his behalf, you might try picking better ground.

        trying to stay alive 'til I reach 65!

        by chmood on Mon Dec 16, 2013 at 02:41:06 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Correlation does not imply causation. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sngmama, bluezen, jobobo

        Cart may be before horse, or Newt may be south end of northbound mule.

        Urban poverty and cities' economic well being is a very complex picture which has little to do with the mayor or his/her party.

        Thump! Bang. Whack-boing. It's dub!

        by dadadata on Mon Dec 16, 2013 at 06:16:36 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  And have YOU seen the rural areas of Newt's GA? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Maverick80229, PinHole

        I have. My best friend lives in GA & there are plenty of run down destitute areas there that are mostly white AND who vote Republican.

        So if Newt can say all cities are poor and, thus, bad because they're run by Democrats, then we can say all rural Southern areas are poor and, thus, bad because they're run by Republicans, right?

        A village can not reorganize village life to suit the village idiot.

        by METAL TREK on Tue Dec 17, 2013 at 12:57:45 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  In the case of the cities someone has done (0+ / 0-)

          the research and published a list of the top twenty ranked in order of most poor which shows 17 of the 20 have Democratic mayors. That's a fact. We could speculate that poor rural areas are run by Republicans, but we have no data about the manner in which those areas are organized, towns, cities, counties, or what political party is the elected leader.

          We could say it, but we wouldn't know if it was actually true without some data to support it.

          "let's talk about that"

          by VClib on Tue Dec 17, 2013 at 08:43:44 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site