miserable world of no-way-out politics<\/em>\u00bb.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00abThe economy needs another jolt, but Congress is in gridlock. Democrats, or most of them, realize that their political futures and the well-being of millions of households hang on whether unemployment can be brought down. Yet Republicans have the capacity to block even the smallest steps forward.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbHere’s what the Democrats’ agony looks like from the inside. Last Thursday, Senate Democrats devoted their weekly policy lunch to a simple question: What proposals to spur job creation have any chance of passing Congress, given Republican control of the House and the effective veto power the GOP has in a Senate where a simple majority no longer rules?<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbThe agenda was organized by Sen. Charles E. Schumer of New York. He doesn’t need a pollster to tell him that jobs are his party’s make-or-break issue. The voters gave us two mandates in 2010, not one, he said in an interview. They told us we should reduce the deficit and get rid of wasteful spending. We ignore that at our peril. But they also told us to create jobs, grow the economy and help the middle class stretch their paychecks. Washington, Schumer says, is ignoring the second instruction.<\/em> []<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbFor the moment, Republicans have no interest in moving the nation’s debate toward investments in job creation because they gain twice over from keeping Washington mired in discussions on the deficit. It’s a brute fact that Republicans benefit if the economy stays sluggish. And despite their role in ballooning the deficit during the Bush years, they will always outbid Democrats on spending cuts.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbSo is there any way out for those looking to Washington? The recent disappointing jobs numbers have at least had the salutary effect of reminding Democrats that they cannot agree to anything that further slows the recovery. The first principle has to be do no harm,’ said Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, a key House Democratic negotiator in the deficit talks. There is a danger of making things worse if you adopt very deep cuts in the short term.<\/em> []<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbBut there is another player in all this. The broad feeling among congressional Democratsa sentiment that moves toward impatience when it’s expressed off the recordis that President Obama needs to engineer a turn in the national conversation. Brown, for example, strongly defends Obama’s auto rescue and is happy the president is talking more about manufacturing lately. Yet he adds: The president has got to get this discussion more on jobs and less on the budget.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbObama believes and says in speeches, most recently last week at Northern Virginia Community College, that government has a major role to play in expanding opportunity. At the moment, though, the overwhelming message coming out of the nation’s capital (and one that defies economic logic) is that cutting spending is the only thing government can do to improve the economy.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tObserv\u00e9e en termes extr\u00eamement mod\u00e9r\u00e9s, \u00e0 l’image du style et des conceptions de Dionne, le jugement g\u00e9n\u00e9ral ne peut \u00eatre d\u00e9fini autrement que par le constat d’une situation de compl\u00e8te paralysie. Les chroniqueurs un peu plus percutants et audacieux que Dionne ont d\u00e9sormais leur formule de mobilisation pour exprimer leur sentiment, formule qui ne prouve rien ni ne pr\u00e9dit l’avenir mais a l’avantage de substantiver dans le confort quantitatif d’une statistique un sentiment de plus en plus g\u00e9n\u00e9ral et r\u00e9pandu : jamais, depuis FDR en 1936 et dans les conditions extraordinaires qui r\u00e9gnaient alors, un pr\u00e9sident US n’a \u00e9t\u00e9 r\u00e9\u00e9lu avec un ch\u00f4mage d\u00e9passant en chiffres officiels (\u00e0 modifier comme il se doit par au moins un doublement) les 7,4%. Actuellement, nous sommes revenus \u00e0 plus de 9% et la tendance n’est pas encourageante ; cela laisse pr\u00e9juger des possibilit\u00e9s quasi inexistantes de faire baisser substantiellement le ch\u00f4mage jusqu’\u00e0 la r\u00e9f\u00e9rence de moins de 7,4%, alors que la r\u00e9sultante des forces politiques antagonistes est une paralysie emp\u00eachant toute action dans ce domaine. Cela signifie-t-il l’\u00e9chec de BHO en 2012 ? C’est la nouvelle th\u00e8se en vogue, qui, si elle ne nous dit rien<\/strong> de ce qui se passera en 2012, contribue fortement \u00e0 affaiblir la position de BHO aujourd’hui, alimentant ainsi une spirale n\u00e9gative.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tLe Congr\u00e8s est bloqu\u00e9, notamment parce que les r\u00e9publicains ont mis en place une tactique politique efficace pour leur cause mais qui, \u00e0 cause de la situation tragique du pays, peut mener \u00e0 l’extr\u00eame \u00e0 une situation de type-Grande D\u00e9pression par la spirale infernale du ch\u00f4mage. Leur politique d’efficacit\u00e9 tactique devient une orientation nihiliste catastrophique pour la situation am\u00e9ricaniste, ce qu’ils nient \u00e9videmment et qui les laisse par ailleurs indiff\u00e9rents, une possible d\u00e9faite de BHO valant bien, c’est l’\u00e9vidence de la pens\u00e9e de l’\u00e9poque, une nouvelle Grande D\u00e9pression. Face \u00e0 cela, BHO assume comme d’habitude ses irresponsabilit\u00e9s diverses. Il c\u00e8de (aux r\u00e9publicains), h\u00e9site devant toute attitude un peu tranchante, g\u00e9mit dans ses discours sur sa situation d’\u00eatre pris en otage (alors que son parti n’est tout de m\u00eame pas dans une si mauvais position au Congr\u00e8s avec la majorit\u00e9 au S\u00e9nat). La dialectique du pr\u00e9sident avait un certain sens \u00e0 court terme, malgr\u00e9 la m\u00e9diocrit\u00e9 qui la caract\u00e9rise, lorsqu’il y avait de fortes r\u00e9alit\u00e9s qui conduisaient \u00e0 la probabilit\u00e9 de sa r\u00e9\u00e9lection, notamment une tendance au ch\u00f4mage ma\u00eetris\u00e9e, ou dans tous les cas la croyance dans ce sens Mais, face \u00e0 une tendance de d\u00e9gradation et une menace d’un retour \u00e0 un style-Grande D\u00e9pression, sa prudence et sa dialectique geignarde deviennent une couardise et une impuissance insupportables, qui militent contre lui. Finalement, ce pourrait \u00eatre bien \u00e0 cause de ce caract\u00e8re qui devient de plus en plus insupportable apr\u00e8s avoir fait une partie de son charme, encore plus qu’\u00e0 cause du ch\u00f4mage, que BHO pourrait n’\u00eatre pas r\u00e9\u00e9lu Ce serait, de toutes les fa\u00e7ons \u00e0 l’int\u00e9rieur d’une monstrueuse situation enfant\u00e9e par les murs et les pressions du Syst\u00e8me, une sorte de justice.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\tMis en ligne le 14 juin 2011 \u00e0 07H29<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Une nouvelle pr\u00e9diction-pr\u00e9vision qui court les commentaires des chroniqueurs am\u00e9ricanistes, c’est le constat que la r\u00e9\u00e9lection de Barack Obama est d\u00e9sormais compromise. C’est en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral un constat catastroph\u00e9, par go\u00fbt des situations acquises et par crainte du pire de tout (BHO battu) comme alternative au catastrophique continu\u00e9 (BHO r\u00e9\u00e9lu). (Etrange alternative, mais le rangement des… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[7928,8002,3354,3083,4027,2891,4172,5310],"class_list":["post-73088","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-7928","tag-bho","tag-chomage","tag-depression","tag-dionne","tag-grande","tag-reelection","tag-republicains"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73088","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=73088"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73088\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=73088"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=73088"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=73088"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}