November 22, 2002
CRUCIFIED ON THE CROSS OF CORPORATE INVERSION:
Eight Days (Peter Beinart, 11.21.02, New Republic)Future historians will note that it took a grand total of eight days. When the Republicans swept to victory on November 5, they rushed to reassure the nation that, this time, they would not overreach. They would govern as they campaigned: on an agenda that commands broad popular support. They would not reward their big-money backers at the public's expense. They had learned the lesson of 1994.Turns out they lied. Eight days into this new era of Republican dominance, George W. Bush's GOP has not merely succumbed to Gingrichism; they've surpassed it. The 1994 revolutionaries, after all, only sacrificed social justice to their K Street cronies. In a time of war, the Bushies have now sacrificed patriotism as well.
The issue is called "corporate inversion."
It's hard to decide which part of this is more hysterical, the claim, unsupported by even an example of what he's talking about, that the GOP sacrificed "social justice" in 1994, or the absurd notion that future historians will waste any ink on "corporate inversion". It may be worth noting that the accusation that John Sununu supported "corporate inversion" was the centerpiece of Jeane Shaheen's senate campaign here in NH. She lost. Posted by Orrin Judd at November 22, 2002 6:23 PM
What the devil is "corporate inversion", and why the devil should I care?
Posted by: Joe at November 22, 2002 8:39 PMThe historians of the future will write volumes about it.
Posted by: oj at November 22, 2002 8:53 PMI think it was Hayek, or maybe Michael Novak (Novak writing about Hayek?) who said that self-evidently all justice is social. A man alone on an island knows nothing of justice. (Now I'm thinking that was Tom Sowell . . .)
Posted by: Paul Cella at November 22, 2002 10:42 PMIf you combine Hayek, Novak, and Sowell don't you get Keyes?
Posted by: oj at November 23, 2002 7:30 AMJust because the left is incoherent doesn't mean they are wrong.
Corporate inversion involves giving special legal protections to large corporate donors.
As opposed to what the Dems do by giving special legal protections to trial lawyers and unions.
Both parties are corrupted by their desire for power.
