Warning Label for the 118th Congress

Gil Troy is a professor, Distinguished Scholar of North American History at McGill University, and American presidential historian who has written nine books, including “Leading from the Center: Why Moderates Make the Best Presidents” and “The Age of Clinton: America in the Nineties.” 

An interesting take on extremists, on BOTH sides of the aisle, and how the moderates can and should lead the way.

20 thoughts on “Warning Label for the 118th Congress

  1. This writer has to work way too hard to find progressive extremists to make his point. There is NOTHING on the left remotely similar to the MAGA crowd.

    He seems to say that those unwilling to rest on well-earned progressive laurels are extremists even when they speak the truth about the need for further progress. He cites this true statement by Bernie Sanders – “Sixty-five years after Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, education has remained separate and unequal” – as evidence of extremism on the left. Give me a break.

    Furthermore, people typically identified as “extremists” on the left – say Bernie Sanders or AOC – are pushing policies that enjoy very widespread support. The word “extremist” loses all meaning when applied to majority views.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. I agree with Paul.

    When the left commits “extremism,” it’s out of a desire to help people, even if the help is outside of our budget capabilities.

    When the right commits “extremism,” they literally shit the capitol floor, break down windows and doors, threaten to hang members of Congress, and shoot up the home of Democrats because they lost an election.

    It’s not the same thing.

    Today’s Republican Party would call Eisenhower a “woke Libtard.” You have CPAC and other conservative groups openly meeting with neo-Nazis. People who tried to overthrow the government are now seated on House Committees.

    And I do agree that moderates should lead the way. But when one side is so far out of balance, where is the middle ground?

    Liked by 3 people

  3. Nope.

    With moderates we simply lose our freedom and slide toward financial ruin a little more slowly.

    If it’s not too late already, we need a Congress that takes an originalist view of Article I section 8.

    Anything less and in a decade all of our revenue will go to paying interest on the national debt.


      1. When a spending addict goes to a financial expert to get out of trouble, the first thing they do is cut up their credit cards.

        Democrats, in the lame duck session, passed a spending bill that is unsustainable. We need to immediately reduce spending to pre-pandemic levels, and then continue to cut further over time. We can’t continue to spend like this another year as interest rates rise.

        Controlling only the House, the GOP has no other lever to apply the brakes.

        Had Pelosi’s Democrats not saddled the incoming Congress with the spending that caused them to lose the House, such brinkmanship would not be necessary.

        The alternative is just a bigger default later.


        1. The Democrats lost very marginally for an off-year election over bullshit like CRT and “grooming.” Not fiscal policy.

          Whatever changes in policy the majority party want to make, extortion based destroying the full faith and credit of the United States is not only wrong and stupid, it will fail and it will prove to be politically damaging to the Republicans and not to the Democrats.

          It is the GOP tax cuts that are “not sustainable.” That is the source of the lion’s share of the debt.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. …”justifies a bit of brinkmanship.”

            No it doesn’t. Using the full faith and credit of the US government is nothing more than performative idiocy. he true “platform” of the clown party.

            None of them want smaller government as you advocate for. They want the power and then to “own the libs”. Smaller government does not mean NO government. Governing takes level headedness, compromise and a deep concern for the well-being of the county and its citizens. The GOP has displayed NO concern for any of it.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. “Trump’s tax cuts did not result in a decline in income tax receipts”

            Voodoo economics again. No magic increase in growth occurred because of them, only massively increased federal deficits. And that was before the pandemic. Your “alternative facts” are beyond tiresome. Can you never defend your opinions with actual facts. Plus you are leaving out the Bush tax cuts and the Reagan tax cuts – BORROW and spend has been the policy of the Republicans for decades.




            Liked by 1 person

          3. “Controlling only the House, the GOP has no other lever to apply the brakes.”

            Defaulting on the obligations already incurred is not a legitimate “lever.” Period.

            The Republicans have 100% control over spending. I predict they will not cut a damn thing in the end just as they did not when they massively cut taxes on the wealthy in 2017. The very first bill these clowns passed was to gut the IRS with at least a $150 billion increase in deficits. You can pretend they are serious until you turn blue. They are not.

            Liked by 1 person

          4. “There was no decrease in revenue.”

            The relevant comparison is with what the cumulative revenue would be without these pointless tax cuts. Duh! I will trust the CBO’s analysis of the impact.

            In addition, the data you are pointing at is NOT in constant dollars AND it includes payroll taxes.

            Liked by 1 person

  4. It just amazes me that the GOP become budget hawks when they control the WH. But as soon as a Democrat enters the Oval Office, it is time to cut spending, cut taxes and balance the budget, and threaten the good faith and credit of the US government to do so.

    Twenty five percent of our current debt was incurred during the years of 2017-2020. Who was in the Oval Office during that time frame?


    Liked by 1 person

    1. SO what?

      Trump gets to use COVID as a partial excuse for his ballooning of the deficit, but Biden, having to fix the horrendous government response of the previous administration, can’t?

      But because you didn’t read the link:
      “An estimated $3.7 trillion of added debt during the Trump administration can be attributed to Covid-19 relief measures passed with bipartisan support. A series of tax cuts passed during the Trump administration has also added significantly to the national debt. ” So by basic math, less that half of the $7.8 Trillion.

      You let Trump take credit for the economy that was starting to improve during Obama’s years, while denying Obama had anything to do with it. You want it both ways. I will NOT sit idly by and let you attempt to do so.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. GDP growth was flat the last 2 years of Obama’s term.

        But the primary mistake you make is to assume that tax rates have no effect on investment

        That’s why tax receipts continued to increase after Trump’s tax reductions.
        increased commerce made up for the lower rates. It is a fallacy to assume that those increases in commerce(prior to COVID) would have happened anyway.


          1. Is this a rhetorical trick? You think this data supports your baloney? The numbers still do not lie. There is no inflection point to be seen. And no flat part of the curve on Obama’s last two years. The only deviation from slow steady growth for decades were generated by the failed administrations of GWB and DT.

            Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s