Jon Ralston laments the campaign spin from members of both major parties

Sunday, Nov. 8, 2009 | 2 a.m.

There is a distinction between stupidity and ignorance.

One is unavoidable and forgivable; the other is avoidable and unforgivable, at least when it comes to political discourse and participation. But the consequences of ignorance include stupid behavior, which often means an almost hypnotic fixation for or against a politician or candidate, too often fueled by demagogues given the privilege of an elected title, the ability to pay a candidate filing fee or the access to a microphone or an IP address.

I know this is a familiar lamentation. But the greatest epidemic in Nevada (and America) is not H1N1 — it is rampant ignorance, thus making the state’s electorate (and surely this is true across the U.S.) ripe for the pickings of skilled consultants and charlatans.

This has become relevant here because of two debates — I use the term loosely — over the state’s stimulus spending and its long-term economic fix, issues that should be seminal to Nevada’s most important races. These colloquies have been polluted by spinning and avoidance and, worst of all, vitriol turned mindlessly on political figures or parties.

I’d like to say that only one side is responsible but my long search for bipartisanship has finally been fulfilled — Democrats and Republicans have collaborated on making a mockery of these issues, especially in races for U.S. Senate and governor.

Before I dissect the execrable behavior, two forces have contributed to the coarsening of the debate and require vilification.

First, talk radio, as the irresponsible blather about the Harry Reid car bomb proved, is an exemplar of tales told by idiots — or, at best, ignoramuses — full of sound and fury and signifying nothing. That is, if only millions of folks, desperately looking for meaning and ingenuously mistaking for a sage anyone who can bloviate on the airwaves, didn’t listen and follow.

Second, the political parties and their agents — the national committees — are noxious machines vomiting a toxic stew of spin, nastiness and hyperbole. They add nothing to any debate and only hope to take advantage of gullible Fourth Estaters willing to copy and paste their nonsense.

It’s no wonder some believe (fear?) the atmosphere is ripe for an independent candidate, serious or otherwise (Mayor Oscar Goodman). Voters often are ignorant, thus susceptible to good thespians. But would it be so stupid for them to buy into a third-party contender considering the level of the current conversation?

Consider the stimulus debate. Every Republican in that primary for Harry Reid’s seat has followed the national talking points and lambasted the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act as an abject failure that will pile trillions of debt onto our grandchildren and bankrupt the nation. Fine. Maybe.

But not one has provided any details of what should have been done. And when provided with evidence the stimulus is working — check the stock market lately? — they simply repeat their talking points.

That’s not stupid. It’s just ignorance, or a reasonable facsimile thereof.

But the other side bears a different kind of culpability — that of desperation to reverse sliding poll numbers, for the Democrats and Reid, by spinning out of control. Although his opponents and enemies refuse to give Reid credit for inserting a debt cancellation provision or for being able to engineer tens of millions in grants recently for green jobs, the majority leader and his allies can’t just stop with the facts. The latest is the Democratic Party’s claim that the stimulus has created or saved 37,000 jobs here, which was obtained by adding the actual number (5,667) to the 31,000 jobs Harrah’s executive Jan Jones claimed were saved. That’s simply embarrassing.

Reid’s seminal argument for his reelection is that après him, le deluge for Nevada. If he can’t make the case through facts, sans spin, that he is indispensable, then he deserves to lose.

This pathology also can be found in the nondebate over the state’s fiscal future, mirroring every other lack of substantive discussion for decades. All of the gubernatorial candidates have slogans — Brian Sandoval’s “Reason to Believe Again,” Mike Montandon’s “New Nevada,” Rory Reid’s “New Economic Vision for Nevada” and Jim Gibbons’ “No New Taxes.” But beyond the puff, there is no smoke, much less fire on how to deal with a looming $2 billion deficit.

Reid the Younger, alas, may have set the tone by saying he will wait for a new revenue study — a fig leaf if ever there were one. But at least Reid has a vision booklet and promises position papers. So far, the others have only pablum.

I know it’s a tired rant, that I’m likely whistling the dark. But it’s still a year until the election, and I won’t shut up until they do.

Jon Ralston hosts the news discussion program “Face to Face With Jon Ralston” on Las Vegas ONE and publishes the daily e-mail newsletter “RalstonFlash.com.” His column for the Las Vegas Sun appears Sunday, Wednesday and Friday.

Discussion: 16 comments so far…

By Future

11/8/09 at 5:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

Jon Ralston, when not attacking "Talk Radio", for something he does all the time in his factious conversation monologs fancies himself as an expert on Jobs.

Stop whining Jon.

"Consider the stimulus debate. .. the national talking points and lambasted the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act as an abject failure that will pile trillions of debt onto our grandchildren and bankrupt the nation. Fine. Maybe.

But not one has provided any details of what should have been done."

Fine. Maybe. And that is where Jon blows it again. Jon should stick to being a political hack.

Jobs generation is about is created an environment for private sector Small Business to hire.

All of the Obama, Reid, and Pelosi stimulus is geared to payback voters, unions, wall street, and big business. There is nothing in the stimulus for Small Business.

While job losses have slowed hiring has not kicked in.
Simply put every dollar a small business can keep out of the government's hands is a dollar that can be used to expand and hire people.

The facts continue to come in that the Bush era financial system intervention rather than the Obama era jobless stimulus bill has brought us out of the recession.

We need an honest assessment of what worked per Nancy Pelosi's test that the stimulus bill be timely, targeted and temporary.

Why -- because Obama wants to spend another $200 billion doing what has already failed to produce jobs. Obama used the stimulus to payback political supporters like union teachers, healthcare workers, government workers, and autoworkers - and corporations like General Electric and Goldman Sachs

What is known is the trajectory of the rate of job losses had already changed from a peak in December 2008 -January 2009 -- before Obama took office and passed the stimulus. Every month since January 2009 the job losses have been less and the economy GDP went positive in May of 2009. The only appropriate part about the stimulus was money to ameliorate the pain of unemployment like extended benefits as is done for every recession.

The NY Times says the main reason that the unemployment rate has soared is the hiring rate has plummeted. While the loss rate has slow there is still a LOSS so there is an increase in unemployed -- 10.2% in October - and under employed every month. Nearly 16 million people are now unemployed. In all, more than one out of every six workers -- 17.5 percent -- were unemployed or underemployed in October. The peak layoff rate this year was the same as it was during the 2001 recession, which was a fairly mild downturn.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/07/busine...

While hiring short term government positions - What Obama has not done is created an environment for private sector Small Business to hire.

If Obama wants to increase jobs Obama has to start to support U.S. Small Businesses.
By fremmasmind

11/8/09 at 5:42 a.m.

Suggest removal

It is sad that Brian Greenspun choses not to have a comment box after his weekly "Where I Stand" editorials, so Jon you must excuse me for using your comment box to post a comment on Brians editorial today.
Brian when you talk about Harry Reids' political clout in saving thousands of jobs here in Nevada, I can appreciate your stance in patting Harry on the back for his political help during the City Center crisis. Yes he did what a good Senator would do and helped to keep construction workers on the job. My fellow union brothers appreciate this act of political strength. There are many of us though that are having a hard time understanding that since Harry has been the Majority Leader in the Senate, and even before, he has done nothing to protect the American jobs being taken away by illegal immigrants. Instead of upholding our American laws on the books, Harry is sponsoring Senate Bill S. 729, commonly known as the "Dream Act". This bill will enable any child brought into the U.S., who may be as old as 30 now, a pathway to citizenship. Sadly enough Brian you praise Harry for saving City Center jobs which clouds Harry Reids' other intentions of giving U.S. citizens jobs away to immigrant children when they grow up and will even enable the child when he/she turns 21 an avenue to bring in his relitives with a greencard through family member.
Millions more Brian. Is this what we as Americans need now while some of us are suffering from job losses and the remainder of us are worried about unemployment after this constrution bubble disappears? That our Harry Reid is not for his constituents 100%? Face it Brian our American citizens future is not in safe hands when politicians like Harry Reid are not "for the people".
By fremmasmind

11/8/09 at 5:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

Good post future. Isn't it a coincidence that at the end of Daddy Bush's term there was a recession, and after George W's term we had another recession. Were these planned or just a coincidence?
By dwms

11/8/09 at 6:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

Thank you, Sun, for succinctly drawing attention to arrogance v. ignorance. When both result in crimes to the constiuents, we approach the elected officials.

According to the catastrophic liability carriers for the elected officials, arrogance (intentional ignorance) is fraud - an intentional criminal act. Ignorance is neglect. If left long enough, neglect becomes fraud.

Some responses we have received from the elected officials when confronted with State of Nevada statistics regarding the 230% increase in number of children's deaths due to abuse and neglect - "That's not true", "You may wish to consult your Priest", "Be very careful", "I'll email you when 'I' have questions".

Sun, what is the term when the arrogance and ignorance results in catastrophic claims on the elected officials liability coverage for billions in damages. Outrageous?
By Future

11/8/09 at 8:03 a.m.

Suggest removal

""Isn't it a coincidence that at the end of Daddy Bush's term there was a recession, and after George W's term we had another recession. Were these planned or just a coincidence?""

Don't forget the Jimmy Carter Recession and the Clinton Dot.com Recession.

When Bill Clinton came into office he inherited swiftly rising economy from the Bush 1.
In 1994 before the Clinton tax rate increase, total revenue was $1.258 trillion and a short six years later it was up 84% to $2.025 trillion. In fact it increased an astounding $198 billion (10.8%) in the year between 1999 and 2000, due to the back loading the tax rate increase law. This occurred while the GDP growth averaged 3.6% per quarter during the 1999-2000 periods.

This amount of money taken out of the consuming and investing public resulted in a precipitate decline in sales by and investments in the manufacturing sector. This is evident by:

The long 17-month contraction in the ISM manufacturing index starting in July of 2000, causing the lost of millions of manufacturing jobs, which helped drive the country into recession.
The March 24, 2000 to October 9, 2002 S&P 500 Index drop of 49.1% was caused in part by a need by people to sell stock to pay increased taxes.
Median Household income crest at $42,000 in 1999, and dropped in 2000 and 2001.
Corporate debt increased by 125% between 1995 and 1999 to $2.6 trillion; and corporate tax shelter trickery (Enron, Global Crossing, and Tyco) took off.
Real GDP was just 0.5% in 2001
The January COB 2001 Fiscal outlook was for a FY-2001 Federal total revenue of $2135 billion and a $286 million surplus. However, Clinton's last budget for FY-2001 showed a Federal total revenue decrease from $2.025 trillion (FY-2000) to $1.991 trillion (FY-2001), and actual decline in surplus from $236 billion (FY-2000) to $127 billion (FY-2001). Clinton's economic surplus projections for just nine months later were off by -$144 million (-7%).
By Future

11/8/09 at 8:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

""Isn't it a coincidence that at the end of Daddy Bush's term there was a recession, and after George W's term we had another recession. Were these planned or just a coincidence?""

Don't forget the Jimmy Carter Recession and the Clinton Dot.com Recession.

Under Bill Clinton the January 1999 CBO forecast for FY-2008 was revenue of $2.611 trillion and spending of $2.255 trillion.

Under George Bush revenue went up 3.4% per year, and the actual FY-2008 revenue was $2.523 trillion or within 3% of the 1999 CBO estimate despite the Clinton dot.com recession and 9/11. Clearly the Bush tax "rate" cut to recover from the Clinton dot.com recession and 9/11 - did not decrease revenue. The Bush tax "rate" cuts also shifted the revenue stream further to the rich so the lowest 45% pay no taxes.

Under George Bush outlays went up 7.5% per year, and the actual FY-2008 outlay was $2.978 trillion or 32% more than the Clinton forecast.

Appropriation the last four year of Bush was controlled by Speaker Nancy Pelosi's House and supported the last two years by the Leader Harry Reid's Senate. Bush never vetoed the budget items passed by Nancy and Harry.

You can easily draw to conclusion that we wildly over spent our planned revenue. The 8 year Bush investment included a 59% increase in veterans' benefits, 58% increase in education, 55% increase in health research and regulations, 51% increase in Medicare, 22% increase in highways and mass transit, 17% increase in Social Security, $700 billion for Medicare prescription drugs, and $600 billion on the war on terror.
-----------

As bad as that is, now contrast a Bush $2 trillion deficit over 8 years to the Obama forecast of $8 trillion over 8 year. That is before healthcare and cap and trade is added in.

That is $250 billion (2% of GDP) per year under Bush versus $1.0 trillion (8% of GDP) per year under Obama.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...
By hooloogoo

11/8/09 at 8:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

.
..
...Isn't about time we try a blond woman in the White House...????
..
.
By LarryVegas

11/8/09 at 4:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

I thought Bill Clinton already did that...
By lvice

11/8/09 at 5:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

First you say that the national parties "only hope to take advantage of gullible Fourth Estaters willing to copy and paste their nonsense." and then you go on to say "But not one has provided any details of what should have been done. And when provided with evidence the stimulus is working -- check the stock market lately? -- they simply repeat their talking points."

You just willingly cut and paste the Dems nonnsense. A basic economist can explain the complete disconnect in the stock market and the overall economy. (Is Sands suddenly making huge money? Look at their stock price over the last year.)
The economy is terrible, (how about that unemployment rate?)it is not getting better it's getting worse and you are still carrying the Dems water with their weak talking points.
By gmag39

11/8/09 at 7:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

larry,
Brunette.
By LarryVegas

11/8/09 at 7:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

gmager,
Are you telling me that Hillary is not a true blond?
By larry5

11/8/09 at 8:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

Yawn.
By mred

11/9/09 at 3:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

Thank you for you and the SUN hitting the talk radio nail on it's approprate head. People used to go to a "radio info website" to point out talk radio's excesses, and the stations had a number of the critical commentators blocked from the site,

Most stations have caller ID and voice-recognition, so people can be screened out.

I like to see interviews of local hate-talk owners/PD/managers of KDOX, KXNT and KDWN, to listen to their take on their role in the community.

I noticed KDOX dropped weekend talk in favor of "oldies music."

are we seeing the beginning of the end?
By darkhorse

11/9/09 at 6:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

All I know is there are a lot of people in houses that shouldn't be and neither side will take on ALL ILLEGAL immigrants and their burden on the economy. If you don't give people a reason to come they will stay home.
By NLV-Indep13

11/9/09 at 8:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

While the dB's coming out of talk radio are hard to ignore, the liberal left is just as guilty as the conservative right in their suppression of honest analysis and forthright discussion. Between the desire to reduce everything to substantiveless talking points, candidate platforms based on bumper sticker sloganeering, and outright falsifications, the American voter is being left with nothing more the Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum.
By gypc_dave

11/10/09 at 6:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

"Reid's seminal argument for his reelection is that apres him, le deluge for Nevada."

Franglais, Jon? This is still Nevada - stick to Spanglish.

« Previous Ten Next Ten »

Live chat: Tuesday, noon PST; Chat with Krista Creelman; Problem Gambling Center executive director Krista Creelman will answer questions about gambling addiction from Las Vegas Sun readers from noon to 1 p.m. Tuesday, Nov. ... Submit question