Republican leadership: unlikely. Painting an Obama picture. An invidious comparison. Plus more.
THE CABOOSE OF INEPTITUDE
Re: Peter Ferrara's Stimulus
Malpractice and the Trillion Dollar Deficit:
I read Peter Ferrara's piece with interest and have to say that
of his conclusions, I fear the latter (Dems eventually going
pro-growth) is the more likely. Sadly, I believe that the
Republicans (to use the PG version of an old phrase) cannot find
their bottom with both hands.
-- Reid Bogie
Waterbury, Connecticut
"Taking hundreds of billions out of the economy through government borrowing and then spending it does nothing to improve the economy on net. It does nothing to improve incentives for economically productive activity."
Yes, Conservatives understand the iron laws of incentives and disincentives. What we do not count on is how liberals perceive economic behavior. To us it is obvious that when tax rates are too high, when the tax system is used as an instrument of social engineering, and when there is little restraint on the human propensity to regulate every aspect of life, men and women are less productive and less apt to take risks. But to Liberals, when taxes are made "equable," when taxes and regulations are used to shape the world as it should be, all is for the good. When things don't work out that way, Liberals suspect there is some "bad faith" afoot across the fruited plain.
Liberals believe that they have the moral authority to manipulate the economy toward their received vision of equality and social justice. When the economy then goes afoul, it cannot be their fault or the fault of unsound policies. Instead, in the Liberal imagination, it has to be because "the usual suspects" are not doing their part. "They" can only be acting out of selfishness and greed.
Who says Liberals don't believe evil exists?
-- Mike Dooley
What about the children? Now, finally, we know what the Democrats
intend: Bury them under a mountain of debt, so that they will
abide us geezers when we recount our good old days of
spendthriftiness.
-- David Govett
Davis, California
WE'LL ALL LIVE IN OBAMAVILLES
Re: Jeffrey Lord's Obama
as Hoover: The Importance of Storytelling:
I'm more worried about Obama morphing into Roosevelt, (minus the wheelchair and cigarette holder) and copying his New Deal than I am about Obama as Hoover. Besides, the MSM will never allow Obama to be depicted as a Hoover redux.
I highly recommend FDR's Folly: How Roosevelt and His
New Deal Prolonged the Great Depression by Jim Powell. (I
have recommended this book before, but the recommendation bears
repeating.) I believe Mr. Powell was among the first to debunk
the myth of FDR as some kind of secular saint, and highlight just
how much damage his policies did to this country. Ironically,
tragically, the thing that saved the US economy was a long and
bloody World War -- first with the Lend-Lease Agreement and then
our entry into the War. The US is already embroiled in two
fairly important, but localized, conflicts. God forbid that
either, or both, metastasize into something bigger, and much,
much worse.
-- Gretchen L. Chellson
Alexandria, Virginia
SIDE BY SIDE WITH THE GIPPER
Re: Philip Klein's Learning
From the Bush Legacy:
As President Bush leaves office it is interesting to compare his conservative record to one of America's greatest Presidents -- Ronald Reagan. Unlike Reagan, President Bush has never raised taxes. Unfortunately, like Reagan, he couldn't make his tax cuts permanent, but until we permanently overhaul the system and adopt a flat tax system, all tax cuts are temporary and subject to change.
While President Reagan was pro-life, President Bush has gone to the mat for issues of life. Terry Schivo and the infant stem cell debate severely damaged Bush in the polls, but he never renounced his pro-life beliefs to increase his poll numbers. Reagan granted blanket amnesty and citizenship to millions of illegal aliens while the Bush administration has deported more illegal aliens than any modern President. President Bush appointed only conservatives to the Supreme Court. Reagan's were a mixed bag. Reagan's first two years in office were an expansion of the Carter depression (double digit unemployment, rampant inflation and skyrocketing interest rates) and his "reform" of the real estate market crashed the economy (fortunately it had time to recover before he left office). President Bush righted the economy and saw records set for economic growth and employment -- had it not been for the Clinton housing time bomb, we might not be in our current economic downturn.
Ronald Reagan promised to abolish the Departments of Energy and Education, the SBA and a host of bureaucratic fiefdoms. He expanded them and created a new bureaucracy with Veteran's Affairs. President Bush promised No Child Left Behind (that's reintroduced phonics to public schools) and prescription drugs to seniors and delivered. While it is understandable conservatives are cynical of political rhetoric they should know by now Bush says what he means and carries through on his word when possible.
Since the US has been guarding enough WMD at Muthanna, Iraq to kill a significant number of Americans conservatives should be careful in calling Bush a liar. We forget that, thanks to President Bush, Libya surrendered its massive WMD arsenal that included an advanced nuclear weapons program without a shot being fired. As for the Iraq war, in 5 years we have basically won the kinetic phase with approximately 4,200 deaths (some my friends and the children of my friends) and are on the way to creating a democratic government that is no more corrupt than that of Chicago in a country less deadly to Americans than Detroit, Baltimore City, Philadelphia and Richmond combined.
OCPatriot| 12.4.08 @ 12:36PM
Fear is the key
In the L.A. Times, Neal Gabler has an article that analyzes exactly what "conservative" Republicans have been doing, tracing their strategy back to Senator McCarthy, not to Senator Goldwater, who in 1964 lost in one of the biggest landslides in American electoral history and wrested the party from its Eastern establishment wing.
According to Gabler, the myth tells how Nixon co-opted conservatism, talking like a conservative while governing like a moderate, disenchanting true believers. Ronald Reagan, next, embraced it wholeheartedly, becoming the patron saint of conservatism and making it the dominant ideology in the country, even though he didn't practice it in terms of fiscal responsibility or size of government. George W. Bush picked up Reagan's fallen standard and "conservatized" government even more thoroughly than Reagan had, cheering conservatives until his presidency came crashing down around him. That's how Gabler believes the mythology tells it.
Gabler's thesis is that the real connection is from Sen. Joe McCarthy, to Nixon to Bush and possibly now to Sarah Palin. McCarthy attacked alleged communists and the Democrats whom he accused of shielding them, as well as the centrist American establishment, Eastern intellectuals and the power class, many of whom were Republicans, including moderate ones. McCarthyism became a means to play on the anxieties of Americans, convincing them of danger and conspiracy even when they didn't exist, which he used to build power and support. George H.W. Bush used it to get himself elected, terrifying voters with Willie Horton (and denigrating Dukakis as a commander-in-chief). His son used fear of 9/11 and convincing voters that John Kerry was a coward and a liar and would hand the nation over to terrorists, tried and true McCarthy tactics used very aggressively, and W. then used fear and stealth in pushing through totalitarian unconstitutional measures. The thread continued through McCain and then Palin, probably through Rove (who also coached W.), and I quote from Gabler, "That's why John McCain kept describing Barack Obama as some sort of alien and why Palin, taking a page right out of the McCarthy playbook, kept pushing Obama's relationship with onetime radical William Ayers."
What Gabler believes is that, because of this tradition, the Republican Party will continue to move rightward. Fear and blame; rabble-rousing; the Rush Limbaughs and Sean Hannitys and Bill O'Reillys; and now Palin. This is the direction the Party will take. Probably because it cannot be believed as the party of small government or fiscal responsibility or moral integrity; all credibility lost in the harsh reality of events; at least not until people forget and these actualities become memories and fade. It is a dangerous approach because it incites people to do violent things, especially as times become more stringent.
It is, I believe a shame, because some of the original precepts of fiscal responsibility and keeping government out of peoples' lives and moral integrity are well worth preserving. The Republican Party which stood for those princples was a Grand Old Party. But, I hate to say it, those are all too easily trumped by fear-mongering and, I might add, difficult to achieve. I would nominate the Republican Party today as the Party of Fear, as opposed to the Party of Solutions. And, if that's the direction it's going in, yes, it's a shame.
The consistent thing about guys like Jeb Bush, in line with the old Republican philosophy, is to be against something, not for it; to be in a position to scare people, not to advocate good positive things. Putting people and ideas down is the tack they have taken; witness McCain's whole campaign; witness Sarah's natural proclivities. So Jeb Bush starts off by surfacing and proposing that the Republicans start a "shadow government" to watch, and criticize, and follow what Obama's Administration does closely. What bothers me about this, deeply, I might add, is the fact that it is not being supportive in any way. No one is saying, if we want to survive, we have to work together, guys. No, the implication is that "they" (Democrats) are the enemy. And in this terrible time, when the country is literally falling apart, and everybody is unsettled, these isolated Republicans are settling in to be critical. As if they aren't losing their savings, too; as if they are exempt; as if, should the country really fail, they wouldn't be affected. Quite a blind spot. isn't it. They aren't even pretending to help, to support, to work with their counterparts to make things better for everybody, themselves included. How antedeluvian, how "old school", how traditional, how like McCarthy and all of the Republican demogogues, to stand back and continue criticizing the Democrats who are working very hard, very earnestly, to fix what went wrong with this country. So Jeb Bush is nothing more than another toxic Republican, joining in the long line of negative right-wing naysayers and destroyers, no better than Limbaugh and Hannity and O'Reilly. Pretty disgusting, I'd say. Stand on the sidelines and criticize while the Titanic goes down; criticize everything the crew and captain does. Disgusting, guys, absolutely disgusting.
For more, see: www.ocpatriot-runningcomments.blogspot.com.
Paul| 12.4.08 @ 1:17PM
Chaplain Tomlinson: I appreciate your hearty defense of our President Bush, but your comparing him favorably vs. President Reagan is getting a bit too facile.
1. When Reagan raised the cap gains tax rate it was as a bargaining chip to get the marginal income tax rate down to 28%. I mentioned this to you you several months ago, you may recall.
2. No, Reagan did not disband the Dept of Education, but if you were in Mass. during the 1996 Kennedy - Romney senate race you'd have been amazed at the viciousness of the attacks Romney endured when he made the same proposal. And with a House under Democrat control Reagan would not have been successful in doing so. In any case Bush 43 saw the quixotic nature of this and abandoned it as well.
3. Reagan accelerated the emasculation of the Interstate Commerce Commission during his time in office; it was disbanded in 1994.
4. Reagan also put the Civil Aeronautics Board out of business in 1984.
5. Reagan dereugulated domestic oil prices in 1981.
6. Reagan put the FAA controllers union in its place - big time - in 1981.
Best Regards
frost| 12.4.08 @ 3:45PM
Going thru some notes in my computer from 4 1/2 years ago, back before General Portaeus' surge, when a series of McClellans were still goofing up a winable war -- shortly before I came to the reluctant conclusion that Dubya's gotta be tied with Jimmy Carter as the AllTimeWorst president ever; hell, his spending even exceeded LBJ, and that's saying a bunch. Anyway, from that file in May, '04, these observations (since compounded by other multiple goof-ups too numerous to mention, Mr. Tomlinson): Dubya's become a whore, no better than the worst of congress -- backed Kennedy's huge spending plan on education, the gigantic "farm bill" with Tom Daschle's amendments, signed the campaign finance law -- the 15+ Billion-dollar AIDS in Africa fiasco… among other things. Then, there were steel price supports. He also "folded" after opposition to ANWR was stated by the Greens, Democrats and stupid Republicans; didn't have the courage to push for more US oil. Worse? Bush inherited a horrible CIA and miserable intelligence; he finally replaced George Tenet, a horrible CIA boss, and presented him with the Medal of Freedom? This delusional president was heard to "express confidence" in the CIA -- then, was blocking an investigation of the intelligence failures? That's bad.
Further, he's agreed to those tax-rebate measures which include $$$s to "low income" people who haven't paid taxes. And he pushed again for an extension of unemployment benefits (Urban League speech 7/28/03); having an "audience" with Jesse Jackson when conservative blacks can't get a hearing or any backing. He failed to speak up on the U-of-Michigan affirmative action policy and other rulings by the Supremes, which included the states' rights position on sodomy.
The prescription drug pandering by Republicans has turned out to be another sad joke, and Dubya's been very quiet about that addition to creeping Socialized Medicine.
He was "in bed" with Mexico's Vicente Fox, and the border continues to be a sieve, and until he gets the INS working, if he ever does, and has the courage to shut down all illegal immigration, he's simply not doing his job! He never even spoke up on the subject of Drivers Licenses for Illegal aliens which, in so doing, is tantamount to giving it his blessing. Immigration "reform" it's called? And, oh, speaking of the "border" - pardon the departure - Dubya didn't back Miguel Estrada's judicial nomination sufficiently well - left him "hung-out-to-dry" - the Republican Senators didn't care enough to force an end to the Democrats' filibuster, which could have been done easily by simply working 'round-the-clock.. And, as if that weren't enough, finally (again), how 'bout that double standard with Israel? Sure, we can defend ourselves, but we ask the Israelis to reserve more patience than we would? But, wait-a-minute! "Defending ourselves" with a dopey color-threat system, searching Norwegian grandmothers (with a fear off offending Arabs through the legitimate profiling of potential terrorists) and the goofy incompetent, Norman Manetta as Transportation Secretary? His "covering" for the Saudi Arabians (spies supporting terrorists?) and calling 'em friends?.
And other things, like a major increase in the National Endowment for the Arts? Give me a break. Sorry George -- you ain't got my vote.
And, more recently (5/26/04) these additional points which add up to being a Disaster --
Cozying up to the UN and not pushing the Oil-For-Food corruption fiasco - a total; fraud with kickbacks, payoffs and "percentages." Then, the government's suit against the State of Oregon on the Assisted Suicide law (which had been approved by voters), which AttnyGen. John Ashcroft had railed against in earlier speeches. This suit was one of the very few ruled upon by the Ninth Circuit Court with which I agree; our government has no business trying to dictate what its individual states' citizens decide.
Okay, that was a partial critique from a number of years ago. He finally got things turned around in Iraq, 'way too late, and we're still fronting those abysmal costs -- he appointed a few judges, cut a few taxes, but, again, he's been totally inept, still tied with Carter for the dubious aforementioned distinction. God, he's been an awful president. And now, Obama?!? We'll be in Costa Rica in two weeks.
Alan Brooks| 12.4.08 @ 6:31PM
FDR, considered one of our greatest presidents, was a CONGENITAL LIAR. Even Truman thought so but Harry was too "nice" (whatever nice means) to say so very often. Truman was lucky FDR died so soon, if Truman had had to serve under him in peacetime it would have been unbearable for the honest Truman.
So being very dishonest doesn't always hurt an image in the history books. Nixon was rehabilitated. Carter, who was/is smarmy to the point of being very dishonest is loved like, um, Mandela...
frost| 12.4.08 @ 7:02PM
A gullible fool, Jimmy Carter's only meaningful achievement was helping Ronald Reagan get elected. For this and only this may we be grateful to him. Undoubtedly, the most dishonest politician I’ve ever read of is Jimmy Carter, period... said Bob Novak (one of the very few columnists I trust)
And, I can't help but wonder why do we even worry about Obama? If a guy like Jimmy Carter didn't ruin this country, no one can.
Remembering that it was H. L. Mencken who observed that ex-presidents should be hung in the interests of public sanitation, this additional quotation, if you can take one more: "Sometimes, when I look at all my children, I say to myself, 'Lillian, you should have stayed a virgin.'" - Lillian Carter (mother of -)....
A lan Brooks| 12.4.08 @ 7:21PM
Amy Carter ought to be sterilized, just to be sure.
C Marshall| 12.4.08 @ 9:10PM
Gee, OCPatriot, who knew Neal Gabler was such a deep thinker. I always thought he was a hack movie critic. It's mythology alright, liberal mythology.
ruth| 12.5.08 @ 1:43AM
OCPatriot, what a knee slapper!!! Your Obamassiah hasn't even been inaugurated and already you are haranguing us about our negativity. This after 8 years of your side screeching BUSHITLER!! Shut Up!
ruth| 12.5.08 @ 1:59AM
Mr. Tomlinson, I understand your defense of President Bush, but I do believe that it is a leader's primary duty to communicate with the people. I don't know why the president withdrew from us, but what good did it do him or the country to allow the hostile left/mainstream media define him and his policies? I think he bears a good deal of responsibility for our party's turmoil, and I think the saddest part is that it was so unnecessary. He is a good man who, I believe, is being unfairly maligned. We all are the poorer for his unwise decision to not use the bully pulpit more.
Pingback| 7.1.09 @ 1:37PM
Obama's honeymoon is over - now it's his recession - US Message Board - Political Di links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 7.9.09 @ 10:38PM
Great Yard Sign Explaining President Obama's Change - Page 3 - US Message Board - Po links to this page. Here’s an excerpt: