Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2009 > January > 21 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USWhere next?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Today marks the first full day in the wilderness for Republicans and for conservatives — the start of the long process of defining the principles on which the party stands. And, when that is done, finding a way to frame the message to a nation that has begun to divide roughly 50-50 on whether we want more or less government.
Those who carry its financial burden want less, as do those who accept the responsibility to provide for themselves and their families. Those who want more see government as the second provider to the family — or in many cases the first — as well as the co-signer on every note, whether the note is a mortgage or a business loan.
Dependency has grown to the point, too, that banks, auto companies, developers and others in the private sector are lining up to transfer risk and bad debt to taxpayers. Pocket profits, pawn off risk. Not a bad deal if we’re all willing to pay the ultimate tax burden that’ll be required.
There are many ways to read President Barack Obama’s inaugural address of Tuesday, specifically as it relates to the economy and to the government activism to come. One way is to read it as a free enterprise system call to action. Another is to read it as a blueprint for a federal government of gigantic proportions. You decide:
“Everywhere we look, there is work to be done. The state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act — not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and the digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together.
“We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do.”
U.S. House Republicans, while too few to represent any real check on a Nancy Pelosi majority determined swiftly to enact and to expand her vision of government social programs, have begun to develop and promote alternatives. That’s a start.
Conservatives in defeat can’t stop everything they find objectionable — such is the consequence of losing elections. But they can, as House Republicans are doing on the proposed $825 billion “stimulus” proposal, begin to use alternatives to define again what conservatives stand for in government.
And if the majority Democrats over-reach, as is their custom, the public will embrace the alternative ideas of the party in exile.
.JPG)
Services »
Comments
By ron
January 21, 2009 8:29 AM | Link to this
Good morning,So far conservatives have been able to stall the confirmation process of Hillary Clinton for Secretary of State.Wow!What a party.!What an astute poitical move.Such forethought went into this maneuver.From here Conservatives can build up a voting block of immense proportions.Maybe even have the public clamoring for the overthrow of Obama by St.Valentine’s day.Way to pick your fights boys.
By Billy
January 21, 2009 8:40 AM | Link to this
Jim, if you and your brethren on the right were honest with yourselves about things, you’d admit that Obama is in no way a Marxist. He’s not going to nationalize all the country’s industries or anything. He’s not going to try to drastically alter our economic system. Yes, the government might spend more, but is government spending inherently bad? If the government paying companies to improve infrastructure both ensures a public need is met (roads, bridges, levees) and provides jobs for those who otherwise might end up homeless and hungry, is that really so bad?
This blind faith in a “free market” — that, much like Reagan’s presidency, has never existed in reality quite the way it does in the minds of the right — is unfounded. And if you believe so strongly in it, then when people lose their jobs, their homes, their ability to feed themselves, your response should be, “Let them starve. It’s the market at work. If they want to live, they can find a soup kitchen.” Of course, in keeping with the idea of government spending being bad, no faith-based groups will be getting tax dollars for their charitable works, right? Or is that somehow excusable?
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
January 21, 2009 8:46 AM | Link to this
Good morning all. Welcome to a brave new world, where there is no perceived virtue in stable currency or fiscal restraint. President Bush – insufficiently schooled in matters economic - was co-opted by the big spenders in both parties, but most notably in the Kennedy education bill, the Daschle agriculture bill in the early years (when the democrats controlled the Senate) and by the massive Paulson bailout bill (when both houses were controlled by democrats. President Obama, with even less economic understanding, pours gasoline onto the fire. Cater redux.
However, “wilderness” is not quite the right term. 51 members of the house of representatives are “blue dog democrats” – that’s right, they have adopted the Reagan era term for fiscally conservative democrats. While there probably are not 40 reliable votes against unlimited corporate welfare in the Senate, there is a potential majority in the house to stop the lunacy.
Conservative efforts have already done good. President Obama now seemingly sees the folly of allowing the expiration of the Bush tax cuts. Thus the vague talk of delay, seemingly of the entire leftist agenda. (As we have previously written in this space, the declared agenda of democrats is poison for the entire productive economy,)[http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/shared-blogs/ajc/thinkingright/entries/2008/10/27/barackobamaentersthefinal.html#comment-191586003] and even the discussion of such an agenda leads to job losses – no intelligent employer accepts potential ruin from the status quo where the political activism will destroy him. It will not escape President Obama’s notice that the stock market dropped 400 points after inauguration yesterday, an unprecedented inauguration day collapse. The productive economy clearly votes “no confidence” in democrat proposals.
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
January 21, 2009 8:49 AM | Link to this
Apologies for typo - should read “Carter redux.”
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
January 21, 2009 8:52 AM | Link to this
Second try - I screwed up my link.
Good morning all. Welcome to a brave new world, where there is no perceived virtue in stable currency or fiscal restraint. President Bush – insufficiently schooled in matters economic - was co-opted by the big spenders in both parties, but most notably in the Kennedy education bill, the Daschle agriculture bill in the early years (when the democrats controlled the Senate) and by the massive Paulson bailout bill (when both houses were controlled by democrats. President Obama, with even less economic understanding, pours gasoline onto the fire. Carter redux.
However, “wilderness” is not quite the right term. 51 members of the house of representatives are “blue dog democrats” – that’s right, they have adopted the Reagan era term for fiscally conservative democrats. While there probably are not 40 reliable votes against unlimited corporate welfare in the Senate, there is a potential majority in the house to stop the lunacy.
Conservative efforts have already done good. President Obama now seemingly sees the folly of allowing the expiration of the Bush tax cuts. Thus the vague talk of delay, seemingly of the entire leftist agenda. As we have previously written in this space, the declared agenda of democrats is poison for the entire productive economy, and even the discussion of such an agenda leads to job losses – no intelligent employer accepts potential ruin from the status quo where the political activism will destroy him. It will not escape President Obama’s notice that the stock market dropped 400 points after inauguration yesterday, an unprecedented inauguration day collapse. The productive economy clearly votes “no confidence” in democrat proposals.
By Copyleft
January 21, 2009 8:57 AM | Link to this
The Republicans have earned their exile. And the fools who continue to obsess over the economy as the measure of all things will continue to whine about policies that both help the working class AND restore our economic growth, because they don’t favor capital enough.
I believe Obama pointed out yesterday, “A nation cannot long prosper when it favors only the prosperous.” Another New Deal is what’s needed to get our economy moving, and that includes doing terrible, awful things to CEOs and millionaires—like eliminating their special favors and privileges.
Can’t come soon enough! Welcome to the trenches, President Obama.
By Dutchman
January 21, 2009 9:00 AM | Link to this
Billy asked what was so bad about government spending. Well, I can think of several. 1) it is coming out of the pocket of the working person. There is an old saying, big government = big spending. All taxes finally wind up on the back of the person who works for a living. 2) Government inefficiencies. A classic example is about 27 cents out of every dollar of government welfare funding makes it to the people that need it. 3) Cities, Counties and states all have the power to tax. Why should the federal government bail out a states failed or underfunded rebuilding effort? Why should people in Washington state pay for a infrastructure project in Florida? 4) As we have seem in our own Atlanta, the City is running out of places to tax the citizens. Police and fire fighters are being furloughed while the spending continues - something is wrong with the basic concept of what the City should be doing.
Of course, as with all things, this is just one persons opinion.
By Headslap Spit Take
January 21, 2009 9:10 AM | Link to this
Shorter Ragnut:
All of our problems are because of the Democrats, including GW Bush, who was secretly a Democrat. And the first day of Obama’s presidency proves he will be a failure.
By Copyleft
January 21, 2009 9:27 AM | Link to this
And I’ll enjoy repeating the fascists’ own foolish arguments back to them in these coming years, including
“How dare you criticize our President in a time of war!”
“Why do you hate America?”
“Criticizing our war policy? You don’t support our troops, you terrorist-loving scum!”
“So you want America to fail? You’re wishing for a bad economy/terrorist attack/failed legislation just to make the administration look bad? How sadly, pathetically partisan of you! A REAL patriot would want America do prosper and succeed!”
etc., etc.
Gonna be FUN!
By Peter
January 21, 2009 9:31 AM | Link to this
Jim I am looking forward to your retirement………you write such hooey.
I voted for Obama, and I own a business……. I get up each day, and I look in the mirror for my own success.
I am NOT Like your REPUBLICAN Friends who have run a business into bankruptcy, and then ask for a handout, as in all the Corporation’s that Bush helped out……..and to top all off….. they got large Bonus’s for doing very badly…..Thank you King George !
Bush created the largest deficit known to man, as well as two WAR’S…..He ran the country into the GROUND ….so stop with all the crap about Liberals wanting a free lunch…….people want equality, hope and decent pay Jim……..something Republican’s can’t self actualize.
Write something about Economic Accountability for a change, or the lack of it…….. which is truly the real story.
Write about how we CURRENTLY have the largest Government EVER…… because of George Bush and his policy’s……not the liberals.
Conservatism is a lie with the Republican Party Jim, put some lipstick on the Pig !
Also Republican’s cut education spending, cut the funding to America’s Boys and Girl’s Club, and lied about scientific data.
Speaking of over Reaching JIM…….what is the current deficit that Obama inherits ?
Typical spinning Jim …….. mostly Lies…….mostly “faulty Intelligence” !
By Davo
January 21, 2009 9:31 AM | Link to this
Good luck out there in the ‘wilderness’ JW. While your out there blaming everyone but yourselves, maybe take some time out from re-creating the Donner party to contemplate what a real conservative is and that leadership matters.
By findog
January 21, 2009 9:41 AM | Link to this
Jim,
Your black and white view of American’s contains the insanity of the two parties. True there are ideologues of both hues that fall clearly into your silos. But then around election time every two years the parties fight for the middle. It is this middle of: self sufficient, hard working, tax paying, law abiding citizens who want government at every level to work and quit playing these power trip games with our money, environment, and future. The Gingrich revolution lost its bearings when they took over the federal government in 2001; soon losing the senate before the year would end. I doubt American’s will give the GOP another shot at governance if they return to their message that government should be reduced in power to where it can be drowned in the tub.
Innovation will be the key. Bill Gates and Microsoft never, ever, invented anything. They bought or stole great ideas and then combined them into a package they called innovation. Governing here is like their operating system. There are many parts I myself find ridiculous but if I want a platform that can integrate the many applications I use everyday I have to accept the whole package. If I want a strong national defense, integrated interstate commerce, application and enforcement of laws to protect my property and ideas, and freedom from a police state then I have to accept some environmental regulation and oversight of the financial markets. There will always be some element of the nanny state but will it be a moderate Hazel to help and guide or an Aunt Bea demanding three vegetables with dinner: two green and one yellow…
By CommunistAJC
January 21, 2009 9:43 AM | Link to this
What goes around comes around. Dems are in complete control so the country will be watching them carefully. And remember dems, pride comes before the fall.
By Road Scholar
January 21, 2009 9:58 AM | Link to this
Why do Conservatives even get out of bed each day? Whoa be me! Instead of defining what you are (don’t you know by now?) why don’t you join forces with the Liberals (oh my God, there’s a thought) and get to work on participating in solving our problems? You spend so much time trying to define yourself, and then redefine yourself, so that you can feel “good” about yourself. I use the word “good” since obviously you despise anyone who disagrees and who want change to move forward.
Bring your ideas to the table. If you had listened to Obama in the campaign and the inaugural address, you would be able to see that he has openned his arms to government by inclusion. Look at his cabinent picks; middle of the road. Get out of denial and listen. bring forward constructive thoughts and solutions.
This is not a win at all costs, like your conservative mantras state. It is a time to move forward, solve problems, and move to solve other problems. All items are on the table, to paraphrase our President. “It’s not whether government is too large or small, it’s whether government works!”
By Churchill's MOM
January 21, 2009 10:11 AM | Link to this
Jim no one has anything about our girl Sara so here is something useful a cake recipe. Our maid makes it & it’s great. How about a little something about how that great “CONSERVATIVE” Saxby is working to cut waste on the F22 & Farm Department?
BLACK FOREST CAKE
1 dark chocolate cake, baked in 2 round layers
3 tablespoons cherry liqueur or brandy (optional)
2 cups pitted fresh red cherries, 2 drained (16-ounce) cans dark cherries or 2 drained (10-ounce) jars maraschino cherries
Topping and filling
1 (1/4-ounce) envelope unflavored gelatin
2 tablespoons cherry liqueur or brandy (optional)
3 cups (1 1/2 pints) heavy cream
3/4 cup unsweetened cocoa powder (or, for white topping, 1 teaspoon vanilla)
1/2 cup sifted confectioners’ sugar
Prepare cake: Split each cooled cake layer in half horizontally to make 4 layers. Sprinkle brandy over each. If using fresh cherries, poach for 4 minutes in water to cover; drain. (With canned cherries, the drained liquid can be used in place of cherry brandy.)
Make filling: In small saucepan, combine gelatin and cherry brandy; allow to soften for 5 minutes. Place over low heat and cook, stirring, until liquid is clear. Remove from heat and set aside. Whip cream till it holds soft peaks, then sift in the cocoa powder and confectioners” sugar and continue beating until stiff. Add gelatin mixture in a steady stream while continuing to beat until cream holds stiff peaks.
Assemble the cake: Spread a 1/2-inch layer of filling on bottom layer. Add a third of the cherries. Repeat with 2 of the remaining layers, then place fourth layer on top. Spread top and sides of cake with remaining filling mixture. If desired, garnish with additional cherries and/or chocolate curls. Chill thoroughly before serving. Makes 12 servings.
By Maniac is accurate
January 21, 2009 10:13 AM | Link to this
Republicans need to be cooperative now with the Democrats in the process of governing, accepting of the fact that they are on the outside, put there by voters.
Simultaneously, they need to shed — or at the very least push way down the agenda — the Big Father parts of their platform. They need to focus on the virtues of smaller government, less taxes, more freedom, fair trade and non-militaristic international leadership. They need to separate themselves from themselves.
By deegee
January 21, 2009 10:23 AM | Link to this
What wilderness? How long ago was it that republicans rallied around Sarah Palin? I thought she was leading the party in the direction they want to go.
By Maniac is accurate
January 21, 2009 10:25 AM | Link to this
ron is absolutely right about the Hillary Clinton move by the Republicans. Not a smart fight. Confirm her and let her trip over her own foreskin, if that’s what you think is going to happen.
By getalife
January 21, 2009 10:31 AM | Link to this
President Obama said to grow up and get to work. MTV has taken this call and the O generation is volunteering to help others.
Funny what real leadership can accomplish. The President started getting down to business in his speech yesterday.
Color me impressed.
By Redneck Convert
January 21, 2009 10:35 AM | Link to this
Well, Wooten is right as rain. All the librul Democrats want to do is get in our pocket and spend. We need to keep the guvmint out of our life. Except when it comes to abortion and You Know What. A taxpayer got a right to know what’s going on in peoples bedrooms and make sure women have all their babys. And guvmint should enforce the law and make sure the Death Penalty is carryed out. Other than that we got no need for guvmint. I can’t hardly wait for the next election so us rednecks can vote this Obama out of office and put God back in the White House. Have a good day everybody.
By Peter
January 21, 2009 10:38 AM | Link to this
Gosh what TRUE words !
By CommunistAJC
January 21, 2009 9:43 AM | Link to this
What goes around comes around. Dems are in complete control so the country will be watching them carefully. And remember dems, pride comes before the fall.
And the Republican’s have FALLEN !
By Ga Values
January 21, 2009 10:44 AM | Link to this
Looks like the AJC’s IT department think Jim is already retired. They have pretty much hid your work from everyone. I did not vote for OBAMA but hope his plan works, for the next 6 months I willNOT say anything bad about him.
I do agree with Churchill’s Mom that it would be good to know what our 2 Socialist Senators are up to. My wife has cooked the prior cake several times and it is really good but this one is probably past her cooking skills.
All our childeren and grandchilderen spent Christmas with us and we acted like tourist in Atlanta. We loaded our Daughter & her boyfriend on the plane to Zurich Saturday so things are quite and dull around here.I gained 5-10 pounds from eating 3 real meals a day. Our lake is about 2/3 covered with ice and I had to break the Ice off the horses water this morning.
By Get Real
January 21, 2009 10:47 AM | Link to this
Leave it to Wooten to still harp on the partisan divide. He’s either too old, or too out of touch to see Obama is trying to bring forth a new form of government, where Republicans and Democrats alike can come to some consensus. Would Bush go to opposing journalist’s homes to meet with them, and see what their ideas are; like Obama did with George Will and others?
Wooten has yet to realize that the policies of the last administration have so screwed up this country, that government has to step in to keep us from collapsing. Look what less government did to the Wall Street! Bush turned a surplus into the largest deficit ever, how have you solve this problem without government Wooten? I’m sure your retirement account isn’t worth the paper its written on, so what will you do when the AJC throws your old arse out the door? We have two wars going on, the economy is in the crapper, and the rest of the world thinks we’re hypocrites. Who should step in to correct the huge mistakes of the administration you blushed over for 8 years? The only President in history to cut taxes during a time of war! Took the most vacation days than any President in history! Either giver the man a chance to correct these problems, implement sound policy, or get out of the way Wooten. You’re still talking about small government, while everyone else is asking can government work at all. You’re completely out of touch!
The AJC needs a younger, more well-informed Conservative writer as Wooten is completely out of touch. Still living in Reagan’s City on the Hill days!
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
January 21, 2009 10:57 AM | Link to this
Dear copyleft @ 8:57, curious minds want to know, “How long will a nation prosper when it disfavors the prosperous?” Suggest you reconsider the New Deal – after eight years of the New Deal, the unemployment rate was “only” 14.6% (1940 average). We would agree that the New Deal, like Obama’s program, did little to encourage employers to hire, or to use your language, “don’t favor capital enough.” I will be curious to see how many jobs are created by increased welfare spending and taxing the productive more. The similarity between Obama’s plan and the Bush tax “rebate” last year is striking - sounds like we hired Bush III to me.
By Dutchman
January 21, 2009 11:10 AM | Link to this
CommunistAJC,
A little clarification -
The conservative parts of the Democratic and Republican party are still here. We have not given up. Working with the Democrats in Congress is what got the middle in this mess.
The more the government meddles in business, the worse it will be. If the Democrats are really wanting to stimulate the economy let them cut the Corporate and capital gains taxes in half. It would cost the government nothing, it would not increase the tax burden of the average worker. That is if Congress would cut spending also.
The sad truth is that Government produces no product that generates funds. All they can do is take money from the working man(only one that pays taxes) to spend on the necessary and the inane.
By findog
January 21, 2009 11:22 AM | Link to this
Ragnar @8:52
This is not England where the election turns the government on a dime. To say that the drop in 400-points was based on W not being there to control spending is ridiculous on many levels. How did we get that it was not Clinton that got the stock market to soar in the 90’s; it was not Bush that caused the collapse in recent years, but before he has finished the last toast at the last ball he is responsible for several percentage points of market capital? Did the Wall Street types think that somehow Obama would not be sworn in? Was there some last give away from W that required them to keep their capitol in the market until yesterday? I think not, I think you are too sensitive to your lack of control at the reins of power in America and cannot bring yourself to hope things get better less the next Newt not have a platform for change in 96 weeks…
By Dutchman
January 21, 2009 12:18 PM | Link to this
Get Real,
Smaller government is what was envisioned by the founders of this country. Try reading what the Constitution really says. It is a document that puts extreme limits on what the federal Government can do. Nevertheless, the Congress has decided to act outside the Constitution on many occasions and considers it a resume enhancer to side step these limitation.
Look at the excessive use of the interstate commerce clause - to include almost anything in our daily lives. Look how they threw out a perfectly good taxation scheme in favor of creating the IRS. Admittedly, that was by constitutional amendment. Actually, I feel the 16th and 17th amendments should be repealed. Repealing the 17th might make the Senators less partisan and more productive.
By williebkind
January 21, 2009 12:30 PM | Link to this
Remember conservatives! Compromise to liberals is giving up your beliefs and acceting theirs. They will enforce this expotientally now! It is time to read a good book for the next four years. By then the tide will be a sunami.
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
January 21, 2009 12:32 PM | Link to this
Dear findog @ 11:22, fair question, and most of your analysis is valid. Indeed, virtually all of the market drop since October 1 has been in response to an anticipated Obama government. But yesterday there was only one meaningful item in the news: Obama made a speech, and he offered a blue print that was less conservative than some signals of previous days. The little steam, that the market had tried to muster in recent days, deflated suddenly. Call it a market sigh, an expression of “depression.”
Ok, I lied, there were two items: the government strong-arming Bank of America also depressed the market, the actuality of government bureaucrat/activists setting banking direction. But I think that reinforced the Obama-effect, rather than undercutting it.
By williebkind
January 21, 2009 12:34 PM | Link to this
Remember conservatives! Compromise to liberals is giving up your beliefs and accepting theirs. They will enforce this expotientally now! It is time to read a good book for the next four years. By then the tide will be a sunami.
By williebkind
January 21, 2009 12:34 PM | Link to this
Remember conservatives! Compromise to liberals is giving up your beliefs and accepting theirs. They will enforce this expotientally now! It is time to read a good book for the next four years. By then the tide will be a sunami.
By CommunistAJC
January 21, 2009 12:47 PM | Link to this
Eight years ago the democrat party asked itself the same questions. With an enormous beat down by the GOP the democrats went whimpering back to their holes. What will it take to get the GOP back to power? Lets see, get back to TRUE CONSERVATISM AND REJECT THE NEOCONS! Get rid of the RINOS like John Mccain, and start supporting people like Bobby Jindal and Sarah Palin. Let the dems and the media make fun of Sarah Palin. Doesn’t matter because going to the center got John Mccain NOWHERE! Remember, it was Sarah Palin who energized the the party and not John Mccain.
Dutchman, This mess was caused by overspending by the GOP and in 06 they in turn got a beat down. George Bush did NOTHING to curb spending. Forget Iraq. Iraq is not why the GOP lost. It was lack of vetoing spending bills, not sealing up the border and terrible PR that led to this. W let the media call the shots instead of him coming out and hitting on all cylinders. Reagan NEVER let the media get to him. He came out swinging and called out any democrat that got in his way.
By Jason
January 21, 2009 12:48 PM | Link to this
“It will not escape President Obama’s notice that the stock market dropped 400 points after inauguration yesterday, an unprecedented inauguration day collapse.”
You say this as if Obama’s becoming president took the Market by surprise. Fate was sealed back in November, so any reaction by investors—postive or negative—to the prospect of an Obama Administration was built into the DJIA well before yesterday. You really must be blinded by your ideology to make such an outlandish statement.
By Dutchman
January 21, 2009 12:48 PM | Link to this
For all you lefties out there. To make you day complete, I am going to change the current lefties mantra from “Bush stoled the election of 2000” to a mantra that the righties can use - “Obama, Our Immigrant President”.
Both are just as lame and ignorant, but then again the lefties don’t care about the truth or facts.
By GayGrayGeek
January 21, 2009 12:56 PM | Link to this
Jason @ 12:48 - Don’t bother The Esquire with things like demonstrable facts and verifiable truths. Like all good Republican’t’s - and Scarlett O’Hara’s - he ignores that he doesn’t want to deal with and “Fiddle-Dee-Dee”s while Rome (aka the U.S.A.) burns.
By Shawny
January 21, 2009 12:57 PM | Link to this
1 - Had Gore been president, there still would have been a 9/11. It had been planned for quite some time.There still very well may have been an Iraq invasion, based on the intel of the day. GWB didn’t make all that crap up. There was an overwhelming majority vote in the senate to afford the president the authority to proceed. You can not convince me that with the info at the time and the feeling of the country at the time that Gore wouldn’t have done the same.
2 - Had Gore been president, there would still have been Katrina. The mayor still would not have followed the evacuation plan. The govenor still would have declined assistance early on. Federal response, no matter to what degree, would have been too late and inadequate. 3 - Had Gore been president, there would still have been a financial collapse. The seeds to the current debacle were planted during the Clinton years when risky sub-prime loans to get lower income people into home ownership was a big initiative.Point is, even with poor decisions, bad judgement calls, straying from the mantra that got them to power in 1994, Republicans were in the cross hairs for being the party in power when major catastrophes occurred.
Power ebbs and flows from one group to the next, depending on a lot of factors. Carter led to Reagan/Bush I, then to Clinton, then to Bush, then to Obama. Change is good, sometimes. Too much of any one thing or one direction is bad. We need the checks and balances. I wish there were no parties, so that leaders could be more free to do what is right without the constraints of losing their job (like Lieberman almost did).
Republicans will be back. They just need to quit worrying about looking good and get back to being good. If the country sees too much govt creeping into their lives, with high costs and inefficiencies, they we may get another 1994 election cycle. Lets see.
Hopefully, the Obama administration will temper some of the desperation of injecting govt into everything. It leads to high inflation and deficit spending far beyond the deficit we have already dug.
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
January 21, 2009 1:00 PM | Link to this
Dear Jason @ 12:48, you err. While it would be fair to accuse Obama of hiding his agenda during the campaign, and there are the inevitable mixed voices in high places proffering conflicting policy directions, yesterday Obama spoke for himself reasonably clearly, and significant portions of the speech sounded anathema to business growth. Rather I am envisioned by my ideology, a filter that eliminates white noise, and you are whelmed by your cult-worship. Alternatively, please advise of the Obama policy that would make an employer wish to expand.
By SaveOurRepublic
January 21, 2009 1:01 PM | Link to this
As an Independent Constitutionalist, my advise to the GOP would be return to real (paleo)conservative ideals & abandon the phoney (neo)conservative platform. The Republicruds have sunk themselves by allowing a mass infestation of Neocon RINOs & their quasi-socialist, Machiavellian, Trotskyite ideals. The GOP’s embrace of corporate welfare, empire building/foreign entanglements, failure to protect the middle class (via support of NAFTA, etc.), compromising US sovereignty (via SPP/NAU) & submission to the Zionist/AIPAC agenda have directly led to their downfall. Unless the GOP embraces the Constitutionally adherent platform of patriots like Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan, Samuel Francis & Joe Sobran, they’re doomed to continued demise & failure!
By Shorter Ragnar
January 21, 2009 1:03 PM | Link to this
It’s all Obama’s fault.
Whatever’s not Obama’s fault must be Bill Clinton’s fault.
Whatever’s not Clinton’s fault must be Jimmy Carter’s fault.
Because, children, remember - Republicans, the “Party of Personal Responsibility”, are, IN NO WAY “Responsible” for any of the mess in which the U.S. finds itself. It’s all the fault of Democratic officeholders. All of it. ALL of it.
By Really Get Real
January 21, 2009 1:05 PM | Link to this
By Get Real January 21, 2009 10:47 AM | Link to this Leave it to Wooten to still harp on the partisan divide
Yeah, and chants at Bush & Cheney “na na na, na na na na, hey hey hey, ho ho”, Rahm’s gesture finger & tongue gesture, and immediate calls for a Bush arrest and other hate shenanigans from you libs should just be ignored and forgotten, right? This nation is now magically unified for the first time in its history, right? What about the nearly half of this nation that didn’t vote for president Obama? What about their voices like you libs wailed about in 2000 and definitely 2004 when your boys lost? Are you going to be so concerned about them now? Like hell.
Do you have any other fairy tells of liberalism you want to wave your magic pink(o) wand over?
I’ll bet that there were no missing items from the White House when Bush & Laura left either, not the least of which would be “O”s on White House keyboards, unlike, say “W”s which had mysteriously vanished when Bush & Laura moved in:
Wednesday, 24 January, 2001, 06:39 GMT news.bbc.co.uk Mystery of the disappearing dubyas
The White House is turning into the hite House. Washington is reduced to ashington.
George W Bush is in danger of becoming indistinguishable from his father, plain George Bush.
Some of the Ws were simply blacked out or missing. Others were taped to the ceilings and walls.
Some members of the new administration face the ignominy of hunting down their Ws under desks and filing cabinets.
Staff in the West Wing - or “est ing”, as it’s now being referred to - have yet to determine how many machines have been affected.
A White House spokesman whose keyboard was discovered fully intact, said his first reaction was “wow”.
From the colleagues with the vandalised machines, the response, he said, was simply “o”.
By Really Get Real
January 21, 2009 1:11 PM | Link to this
By findog January 21, 2009 11:22 AM Ragnar @8:52— This is not England where the election turns the government on a dime.
That’s interesting because the way you libs preached to the ignorant masses who voted for president Obama one was SURE that that was the way our government works.
And yes, the backpedaling and toning down of your Pelosicrats’ and Obama’s administration on promises has been duly noted as well - just like the trump card you people are preparing if all the hype and promises of the O-Team and P-Team aren’t fulfilled: “Bush dug too deep of a hole to get us out of.” (As if Bush ran the government without a congress or something).
By deegee
January 21, 2009 1:13 PM | Link to this
It’s just stunning that people bemoan the democrat administration on the grounds of big government intrusion. What part of the $750 billion TARP don’t you understand? You think that we are going to elect republicans so that we can have another experience like that?
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
January 21, 2009 1:16 PM | Link to this
Dear Shawny @ 12:57, “They just need to quit worrying about looking good and get back to being good.” Great observation. The brainless alternative view, offered by John Feehery (former aide to Dennish Hastert) was, “What the Republicans have to understand is this is not about getting more conservative, it is about getting more seats.” Feerhery’s perspective is that Republicans are me-too-ish enough in pandering votes. You would think the failure of the McCain campaign, the only real “moderate” among the front runners, would have been sufficiently instructive to guys like Feerhery.
Dear deegee @ 1:13, thanks for the clarification, I thought the democrats controlled both houses of Congress after 2006, and that the house republicans were the only significant opposition to TARP. Don’t you ever feel silly making some of your baseless charges?
By Jason
January 21, 2009 1:18 PM | Link to this
“But yesterday there was only one meaningful item in the news: Obama made a speech, and he offered a blue print that was less conservative than some signals of previous days.”
Actually, Bank of New York Mellon announced a 95% drop in profit; Regions Financial reported a $6.2 billion loss; and the U.K. warned it would need to expand its bailout plan.
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
January 21, 2009 1:18 PM | Link to this
Dear Shawny @ 12:57, I had a typo, should have written, “Feerhery’s perspective is that Republicans are NOT me-too-ish enough in pandering votes.”
By Cornbread Fred
January 21, 2009 1:22 PM | Link to this
Hello, tiresome lefties and righties! Hey righties: condolences! Hey lefties: don’t get too smug! Hey Jim: let’s go get drunk! Hey everyone: America forever!
By nicholas
January 21, 2009 1:23 PM | Link to this
“The GOP’s embrace of corporate welfare”— SaveOurRepublic
Do any of you leftists who always wet your beds over that phrase actually understand that it is essentially government incentive to invest in their employees like retirement plans, pensions, health care, and continuing education programs?
What, did you emotion-driven lefties think those companies just sucked up those expenses? You liberals & dumocrats with your feel good policies couldn’t run a corner lemonade stand.
By Billy
January 21, 2009 1:24 PM | Link to this
willieb, that’s a load if I ever heard one. For the past 8 years “bipartisan” meant “my way or the highway”, and if you didn’t acquiesce you were branded as hating America. Bush wins the 2000 election by a 5-4 vote then governs as if he has a mandate from the American people, and it’s all fine and dandy. Obama wins handily then takes enough of a centrist course in his appointments and declared policies that he upsets a substantial portion of the left, and it’s as if he’s mandating the purchase of a little red book.
As to Obama being responsible for a drop in the stock market — If the market is so volatile than a single speech can have such a dramatic effect, then maybe we should consider a drastic restructuring of our economy. Even in elementary school, not understanding anything about anything, I really didn’t understand the newscasts about the stock market. Why is it that it would fall if Alan Greenspan farted?
Is it not possible that the stock market was inflated due to the housing bubble? Housing bubble breaks, banks start failing, stock market crashes? Yet it’s Obama’s fault? BULL.
By steve-o
January 21, 2009 1:25 PM | Link to this
Bush squandered the budget surplus achieved by Clinton by giving everyone tax refunds. If he had put that money to work for the country he could have balanced the budget and paid off our national debt. Instead he chose to blow it all and mortgage the future of our country. Stop lecturing me about how fiscally careful conservatives are. You bunch just spent 8 years proving otherwise. We got into this mess under your party’s leadership and you don’t want to accept any responsibility for that. That’s why you are in the wilderness and that’s why you will probably stay there for at least a generation. The so-called conservative revolution was a total flop. Come to grips with it. You won power and FAILED!!!
By deegee
January 21, 2009 1:29 PM | Link to this
No, Ragnar, I don’t feel silly considering that W’s boy, Hank Paulson, the former CEO of Goldman Sachs, led the charge. Hank instilled the fear of God into the American people and congress when he insisted that the walls of the global financial system would come crumbling down on September 22, 2008 if the government didn’t step in. The republican minority’s opposition was pre-election ceremony as there was no question that the TARP deal would be done. The only question was the manner in which it was done.
By nicholas
January 21, 2009 1:32 PM | Link to this
RGR @ 1:11 —-
Don’t forget that if there are any failures, you sure won’t see them reported in the Obama loving DNC media!
One has to wonder where the line of censorship under the guise of “fairness” according to leftists will be drawn. I for one don’t see it ever being drawn. It will be inch by inch. First, talk radio. Next up, blogs with no liberal input? Only God knows what’s in their minds. Make no mistake about it though, we are going to find out.
By Get Real
January 21, 2009 1:33 PM | Link to this
Really Get Real @ 1:05pm, that was the people who were chanting goodbye to Bush; Democrats AND Republicans. And if you recall, 2000 was decided by the courts, 2004 was decided by great voters like you. I was upset in 2000, but 2004 I knew Bush was going to win so I said not a peep. As far as liberalism, I believe the practice is extreme.
You or Wooten hear Obama’s Executive Orders about dealing with lobbyists and the revolving door just now? Is that liberalism? The man is trying to institute a new way of politics, and folks like you and Wooten should give him a chance. If guys like you that want him to fall get your wish, then where will we be as a country?? Your guy Bush has brought us so far!
By JLK
January 21, 2009 1:33 PM | Link to this
Hey nicholas, I called an American company’s tech support the other day and got a woman in India I couldn’t understand. Will SHE be getting the retirement plan, health care, and continuing education that the American who used to have her job won’t be getting from that company? Maybe if health care costs weren’t so disproportionately RIDICULOUS here, our companies could be competitive… here. But I’m sure YOU have a better solution, and your memo just didn’t make it through to McCain in time for the final debate, right?
By nicholas
January 21, 2009 1:36 PM | Link to this
By steve-o January 21, 2009 1:25 PM | Link to this Bush squandered the budget surplus achieved by Clinton by giving everyone tax refunds.
Wrong, steve. That would be the NEWT REPUBLICAN CONGRESS that dragged a kicking and screaming Clinton to sign off on those.
You leftocrats love revisionist history, dontcha?
By findog
January 21, 2009 1:39 PM | Link to this
RGR @1:05
As Dick Cheney would say of his command of the government that W hoax from eight years ago is a urban legend that never happened…
By nicholas
January 21, 2009 1:41 PM | Link to this
Maybe if health care costs weren’t so disproportionately RIDICULOUS here, our companies could be competitive
Hey JLK: maybe if government meddling and regulations and lawsuits [by tort lawyers like JOHN EDWARDS] in private health care weren’t so RIDICULOUS, we’d have more affordable health care. Ever thought about that?
By findog
January 21, 2009 1:46 PM | Link to this
RGR @1:11
I believe my comment was in response to the stock market. As far as me being a lib, as long as you are not a lib I’ll accept the label. As far as wholes I believe that three-fourths of the congress helping W through his two terms were supposedly Republicans. I personally believe there is no hole any one administration can dig that we as the United States cannot fill slowly enough to where we eventually can climb out. See the story of the mule in the well for further understanding; but please remember the first rule of holes – quit digging.
By steve-o
January 21, 2009 1:48 PM | Link to this
What I love is the absolute refusal to accept any responsibility for anything that goes wrong and ALWAYS taking the credit when things go right. Example: Reagan had a Dem controlled House & Senate but everything good that happened in the 80’s was Reagan’s doings not the congress’. And during Clinton’s terms everything good that happened was because of the Republican congress, not Clinton. Don’t you see how those two arguments disagree? Bush was President the last 8 years and I blame the failings mostly on him. For most of the time he was in office he had a Republican controlled House & Senate. The mess we are in is the fault of the Republicans. That’s why you have lost bigtime. You just cannot face that. Also, if Republicans are so into not taking government handouts then why has Saxby Chambliss never met a farm subsidy he didn’t like? Those are just welfare for farmers, but because his constituents are farmers he is all for them. You hate handouts until they are for you and then you line up and grab ‘em. We are all keen to your hypocricy.
By Jason
January 21, 2009 1:51 PM | Link to this
“Alternatively, please advise of the Obama policy that would make an employer wish to expand.”
Reducing taxes on the lower and middle classes will leave them with some/more discretionary income. They’ll spend that money on goods and services. An increase in demand will require an increase in production. Greater production will necessitate the hiring of more people.
By @@
January 21, 2009 1:55 PM | Link to this
Well, Jim! Today is the first day of what’s left of OUR lives.
J/K
When politicians use the “collective” WE, it always sends cold chills up my spine. Make no mistake about, the WE means that THEY will be collecting from US to do as THEY please — wasting what is OURS in the political process.
A person would almost think that President Obama believed that he was addressing a bunch of Kuntsler types yesterday, but in reality, a slight change in the Cpelling of the name would better define what the dems have cultivated with their agrarian plows.
Walter E. Williams wrote a great piece regarding Obama’s admiration for “Honest” Abe. He ended it with this:
((“President Obama can be forgiven for celebrating the hypocrisy of Abraham Lincoln because the victors of wars write their history and glorify the winners. The recognition that slavery is a despicable institution does not require hero worship of a president who made the largest contribution to the unraveling of our Constitution. After all when it is settled by brute force that states cannot secede, as they thought they had the right to in 1787, then the federal government can ride roughshod over states and their people’s right — in a word make meaningless the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.”))
and the crowds attending the inauguration bellowed a collective “Yeeeehawww!”
Anyhoo! I’m watching Bobby Jindal closely. He has lotsa things going for him in my opinion. He refused McCain’s invitation to be the V.P. candidate. In his first year as governor he implemented a hiring freeze within government as well as vetoed a pay raise for legislators. Now, as with all, his fair state of Louisiana, will suffer under a loss of funding. How will he handle it? Will he be able to stand up to the attack by the legislators from whose pockets he took that to which they felt entitled?
Many residents of Louisiana have proven that they can weather the storm. All politics may be local, but the economic suffering is not. It’s national now.
Dare to compare.
By Shorter Ragnar
January 21, 2009 1:59 PM | Link to this
George Bush, Ben Bernanke and Hank Paulson are all Democrats, beholden to Nancy Pelosi.
By Russ
January 21, 2009 2:06 PM | Link to this
@@- keep talking. I am an independant and it’s folks like you who make me certain that my vote for Obama was a correct one. If your party is pinning its hopes on Bobby Jindal and Sarah Palin then Obama can be assured of a second term in office. Your party is now where close to learning the lessons of the last two crushing defeats. You are still blaming the Dems for everything. People like me hear you and will not vote for you again until we see and hear some contrition. Bush standing up and calling all his failures “disappointments” made me and the other 73% of Americans who hate him want to vomit. We, as a country, took your party to the woodshed twice (06-08) and you are still defending yourselves and blaming the other side. I will keep voting for the opposite of you until you learn.
By Lauren
January 21, 2009 2:17 PM | Link to this
It doesn’t take long reading this blog to realize that the south is very much out of step with the rest of the country. The GOP is becoming a party of the south and a few crazy square states. Enjoy! I know I will.
By Copyleft
January 21, 2009 2:19 PM | Link to this
The cry of the weak-minded fascist after every Republican loss is “They weren’t conservative enough!” It’s comforting to them, because it explains every electoral failure without confronting the reality that America simply REJECTS far-right positions on pretty much every issue.
The truth is that McCain won the nomination because, as a sane moderate, he was the only one who stood even a snowball’s chance after the far-right havoc that was wrought upon this country. America knew that neoconservatism was a failure as foreign policy, and that supply-side was a proven failure domestically. Only a moderate had even a prayer of coming close to the next Democratic nominee.
That McCain did as well as he did is to his credit, and reflects the appeal of his policies and positions. Further shifts to the right—if such a thing were even possible—only guarantee more Republican defeats in future elections. And as such, I encourage the GOP to run rightward as fast and hard as they can.
America will be much better off with such morons staying irrelevant and powerless.
By JLK
January 21, 2009 2:21 PM | Link to this
Nicholas, are you saying if we completely remove [what’s left of] the rights of American citizens to sue for damages when maimed or murdered by the negligence (or greed) of others, our ridiculously high health care costs will magically float down to a level where the 40 million uninsured Americans could afford basic care without going bankrupt? Hmmm… the numbers don’t back that up, but please feel free to connect those dots for the good readers here. (Just curious, will you willingly surrender all YOUR rights to save someone else a few dollars?)
By JM
January 21, 2009 2:30 PM | Link to this
What’s next for conservatives?…perhaps pulling their heads out of the sand.
By steve-o
January 21, 2009 2:33 PM | Link to this
Bravo, Copyleft! Bravo!
By Billy
January 21, 2009 2:39 PM | Link to this
JLK — …the numbers don’t back that up…
I mean, let’s look here in GA, where we enacted tort reform a few years ago…My wife’s OB/GYN, who quit practicing Obstetrics because of her insurance rates, hasn’t started back. She’s still only practicing gynecology. My uncles, both of whom are doctors, aren’t seeing lower interest rates to speak of. Maybe the high insurance rates are not due to frivolous lawsuits but to the insurance companies’ desire to make money.
By @@
January 21, 2009 2:50 PM | Link to this
Well s-cuuuuuuse me Russ! Was there any mention of Governor Palin in my post? NO!
While I admire Sarah Palin as a woman, a mother, and an administrator, the fact that she signed on to be McCain’s running mate should have given me pause. A person could say, that she lacked political savvy (personally, not a bad thing) in having done so. McCain was destined to lose in moderation.
Nope! Governor Palin needs to hone her skills, of which she has many, before stepping into the lion’s den.
(((People like me hear you and will not vote for you again until we see and hear some contrition.)))
Funny! When I entered these sites, I was somewhat up for grabs, but after witnessing the venomous and selfish left, I said the same as you……
I will not vote democrat again until they euthanize the rabid dogs. Obama may have taken ‘em for a walk, but he has yet to prove whether he will take ‘em to the vet for disposal. I look forward to seeing the fiscally conservative Blue Dogs’ bite being bigger than their bark.
Still, since the democrats appear to be more into “leashing”, I’ll more than likely to remain a stray mutt while you opt to be a chihuahua.
Yip!
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
January 21, 2009 2:59 PM | Link to this
Dear Jason @ 1:51, Keynsianism has always failed. Not that failure would ever keep leftists from raising the bet. No rational employer will add inventory or employees based on a tax cut to the lowest earners - the potential for sales growth is too low.
However, if you apply those same tax cuts to the employers themselves, you give them an incentive to make something happen. Thus the difference between leftism and conservatism. The former holds no real incentive, and the latter is pure incentive.
Dear @@ @ 1:55, did Williams article shock you as much as it shocked me? I never knew that Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation specifically did not free the slaves in Tennessee or New Orleans or Norfolk, VA.
Dear Lauren @ 2:17, if you are saying that you vote leftist because that is the trendy thing to do, I do not doubt your sincerity. Some of us have principles, and others do what everyone else is doing.
Dear JLK @ 2:21, perhaps if we tried a real market reform - where real people had to pay medical bills instead of payment via an employment benefit - medical bills would become reasonable (or otherwise would never be collected at all.) The problem with high medical bills is the same as with high tuition bills - somebody else is paying the bill from a big pile of money.
By DAB
January 21, 2009 3:05 PM | Link to this
I am so sick of this bull**!!!!! Every liberal and every conservative needs to just deal with the fact that being miserable will happen every 4 to 8 years. It is like playing tag!!!!! Bush just said okay Obama “you are it” and Obama will do the same!!!!! THEY ARE ALLL STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GET OVER IT PEOPLE!!!! Every Repub has to know that deep down inside BUSH did and awful job and every liberal is hoping that Obama’s inexperience does not show through! WELCOME TO POLITICS!
By Hillbilly Deluxe
January 21, 2009 3:09 PM | Link to this
To Ragnar @ 2:59
The Emancipation Proclamation applied only to slaves in the parts of the Confederate states that were under Confederate control. It didn’t apply to Union states or Union controlled areas. In effect it freed no one. A lot of slaves actually freed themselves by moving to safe areas when they could.
Mr. Wooten: You want less government involvement but you have argued in the past for TAD’s. Isn’t that how we got in this mess? Money for one person’s good investment but not another.
By Dusty
January 21, 2009 3:16 PM | Link to this
Oh for goodness sakes, RELAX, folks. I bet most of you did your same routine this morning just like I did. i got out of bed, got dressed, ate breakfast and left to tend to my affairs. THE WORLD HAS NOT TURNED FOR BETTER OR FOR WORSE.
The crowd at Washington was impressive and energetic. I enjoyed seeing Americans arise from lethargy. I hope they keep the spirit.
Obama and all the officials covered the formalities and that was done. Obama got up this morning and went to work. He froze some government salaries and cut back on lobbyists. Talked to foreign leaders. Sounds pretty good! Now for a good tomorrow and the next day.
I did not vote for Obama. His experience was too short. But the man has displayed no anger, no vindictiveness and seems most sensible and reasonable(and gracious). Now, if only his followers can catch up with him.
No, I will not agree with everything he does. Also, I will disagree with his followers when they act like the rear end of the Democratic donkey. I find some Democrats in Congress are the most objectionable people ever to be there. They will be Obama’s iron anchor dragging him down into the mud.
Jim Wooten is clearly thinking about the future. He is around more politicians than I am. He wants Republicans to THINK.(He probably doesn’t expect such an effort from liberal Democrats.) He is definitely concerned about what is next.
I am too but decided to be OPTIMISTIC until that is impossible. As we have heard numerous times: TRY IT. YOU’LL LIKE IT.
By Jason
January 21, 2009 3:24 PM | Link to this
“No rational employer will add inventory or employees based on a tax cut to the lowest earners -the potential for sales growth is too low.”
The “lowest earners” make up over 90 percent of the population. (Collectively, that’s a lot of buying power.) Employers won’t have to elect to expand based on a potentional for sales growth, as actual sales growth will force them to.
By Dusty
January 21, 2009 3:26 PM | Link to this
@@ 2:50
Dear friend, I am sure you have the finest of pedigrees. Doesn’t matter as you will never be a mutt. We bark for the beauty of it and to scare away loony libs. We are the Finest!! We are REPUBLICANS!
(If it doesn’t get warmer soon I shall turn into an Eskimo guide dog or something.) Cheeers!!
By GayGrayGeek
January 21, 2009 3:28 PM | Link to this
Jason - Please, stop trying to point out the factual fallacies of The Esquire. As with most paleocons in these environs, “Providing facts” is to “Ragnar/jbmlaw/NomDuJour” as “Teaching to sing” is to “Pig”.
By Billy
January 21, 2009 3:33 PM | Link to this
Yes, yes, Lincoln didn’t free ALL the slaves. Frederick Douglass called him “a reluctant friend”. The Emancipation Proclamation wasn’t really about freeing slaves, though. It was about preserving the Union. By freeing slaves, he made the Civil War about slavery. (You supporters of this previous administration should know all about revising the reasons for war.) By making the war explicitly about slavery, Lincoln ensured that the British, who had long since banned the practice, would not support the Confederacy. And, yes, it’s a nice idea to think that he should’ve freed all slaves. Had he done so, however, all those places still loyal to the Union would likely have turned as well.
The Emancipation Proclamation may indeed be an example of hypocrisy, but it is also an example of a shrewd political maneuver. Had it been done any differently, the North likely would have lost the war. Besides, don’t we always overlook things when it suits our interests? How many ruthless dictators have we supported over the years because it benefits us where oil or military bases are concerned? No slaves would have been freed had the North lost, and it was inevitable that they’d all be freed eventually if the North won.
By @@
January 21, 2009 3:43 PM | Link to this
Ragnar:
(((did Williams article shock you as much as it shocked me?)))
Not after having been directed to the read…… “The Real Lincoln” by Loyola College of Maryland’s economics Professor Thomas DiLorenzo by various conservatives over the last few weeks. Ever since Obama’s pride in being sworn in on Lincoln’s “Bible”, it’s all the rage.
Like I’ve said before, The Civil War didn’t take priority in my home state of California. It was the Mexican American war that we were instructed in. I’m not much of a history buff. Alls I know is that “To the victor go the spoils”, a quote that can be attributed to a “Learned” Democrat of the Jacksonian type, I believe.
In truth, if anyone’s lookin’ for it these days, Lincoln was a lot like today’s dems when it comes to exploiting the slave issue for personal advantage. That’s something that I knew even before being turned in the direction of “The Real Lincoln”.
Now we’ll have to see who is the real Lincoln……Abe or the learned Obama?
By JLK
January 21, 2009 3:44 PM | Link to this
”..perhaps if we tried a real market reform - where real people had to pay medical bills instead of payment via an employment benefit..”
Sounds like a practical way to thin the herd of its physically weaker members — survival of the fittest, if you will. The disease or infection prone will die much sooner, thus enabling the disease-resistant to reproduce at a higher rate. Natural selection, strengthening the strong. Let the rest suffer from maladies that are entirely curable, right? (Wish the neighbor kid would stop screaming from that burst eardrum, though. Tough to sleep through that.) Well, you are entitled to your own teeninesy little set of values. Church of Darwinism? I’ll bet your Wednesday night prayer suppers are a hoot!
By DB, Gwinnettian
January 21, 2009 3:50 PM | Link to this
While you’re all urinating on Lincoln’s grave and insinuating that he didn’t give a good crap about black folks, might I ask just why the guy wound up getting shot by the redneck?
What was it that Abe had said, again, that got Booth all PO’d?
By EdwardRMorrow
January 21, 2009 3:53 PM | Link to this
I hope Obama fails to get Geithner, Clinton, and Holder approved by the Senate. IMHO, all three are crooks, at least one is a multiple tax cheat, at least one sold pardons, and all three are LIARS, imho. If any of these three are approved by the Senate, I urge all my fellow Rush listeners to remove every red cent, in cash, from any and all american bank, and put the cash in a personal safe or a safe deposit box at the very bank you withdrew it from. They pay us nothing in interest, yet we have to allow them the free use of our money, with the risk we will lose it all. I say just withdraw the cash, and put it in a safe deposit box or your own safe. Deny the crooks the use of YOUR money.
By Marie
January 21, 2009 3:56 PM | Link to this
Thank you Hillbilly Deluxe for educating the masses on the No-mancipation Proclamation. The time for exposure of the lie is far overdue. As for what the Republicans need to do, stop supporting corporate greed. Why are we in an economic mess? Greed. Greedy bankers, and mortgage brokers who sold greedy people loans that they knew those people could not afford. Then re-sold those loans at inflated dollars to more greedy bankers. Why do I put this at the feet of the republicans? How many bankers and mortgage brokers do you know who are anything other than republican? Even now, with 1/2 of the bailout money in hand, are they doing what they should and loaning it to responsible people so that the markets open again? No. They are holding it, giving themselves bonuses and not giving any accountability for it. De-regulation of the greedy by the greedy got us here. Republicans need to be the party of accountability, fiscal responsibility, smart fiscal conservatism (spend money on head start/child enrichment and you won’t have to spend mega bucks on jails later). Right now they just seem to be the party of vitriol and moaning rather than real work and real (good) ideas. They don’t really want to listen to any ideas that anyone else has, even good ones. Come to think of it, so do the democrats. Throw them both out.
By @@
January 21, 2009 3:56 PM | Link to this
Dusty:
Why, thank you.
Rest assured, I am not a hypoallergenic mutt, but a mutt just the same.
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
January 21, 2009 4:11 PM | Link to this
Dear Jason @ 3:24, a tax break to potential buyers is not the same as allowing the seller to keep his profits; “hope” is not the same as “incentive.” That is why Keynesianism has always failed. Just read a funny line about Keynesianism, “Wile E Coyote is the triumph of hope over experience.”
By @@
January 21, 2009 4:16 PM | Link to this
DB:
He suggested conferring voting rights “on the very intelligent, and on those who serve our cause as soldiers.”
Like I said in my post from yesterday, while dem politicians claim they’re out to support the cause of African Americans, they will not risk their power by going too far.
Always leave ‘em wanting so they’ll come back for more. It’s the ol’ plastic carrot scam. Tell them that they are vitamin deficient so they’ll bite.
By Dusty
January 21, 2009 4:32 PM | Link to this
Well, I have heard of the many ideas concerning Lincoln. Whether or not he outlawed slavery in the USA as a political move or a compassionate effort, HE STOPPED LEGAL SLAVERY IN THIS COUNTRY.
From some of his lesser known writings he did not seem to promote racial diversity in society. Slavery has permeated society since Biblical times and still exists today (see Mali & other nations). It has not continued in this country since the time of Lincoln.
Lincoln was a compassionate man who was not totally well himself and had the agony of watching his son die. I have read letters he wrote to the families of soldiers killed in the war. He felt personal grief.. Also, I believe he had plans to draw the war wracked South back into the mainstream, a plan totally forfeited at his assassination.
I see only the greatness of Lincoln. I read his Gettysberg Address every time I visit the National Cemetery in Beaufort where it is posted at the gate. You can’t miss the greatness of the man. Too much of it is still evident.
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
January 21, 2009 4:34 PM | Link to this
I think we all agree that the original TARP - massively supported by democrats and RINOs - was an incredibly stupid idea. The Obama plan is twice as big as TARP. Can anyone here multiply: what is 2 x stupid?
By Break Like the Wind
January 21, 2009 4:44 PM | Link to this
Instead of trying to re-invent yourselves, why don’t you lay low and work together with Obama to get this country back on track?
Though you vehemently deny it, Obama’s ascendency to the presidency was due in large part to the failure of the Republican Party…and especially of the commander in chief…to govern and lead our nation over the past 8 years.
To fight Obama tooth and nail over ideological differences for political expediency will only blow up in your collective faces.
Show a level of bipartisanship for a period of time, choose your battles carefully, and keep your noses clean. The Republican Party will revive itself, but first, America has to get that God-awful bad taste out of its mouth.
By Jason
January 21, 2009 4:47 PM | Link to this
“Dear Jason @ 3:24, a tax break to potential buyers is not the same as allowing the seller to keep his profits; ‘hope’ is not the same as ‘incentive.’”
I’d rather keep 65 percent of something than 100 percent of nothing. If no one can buy a company’s products, it doesn’t matter what its tax rate is.
On a different note, the DJIA gained 280 points today. I guess investors got over their fear of an Obama Administration pretty quickly.
By @@
January 21, 2009 4:48 PM | Link to this
Stooooooooooopid?
By CommunistAJC
January 21, 2009 4:49 PM | Link to this
@@, I believe Russ has mistaken you for me with his comments on Palin. He’s gone so who really cares what that guy thinks? I don’t, and I’m glad he’s in the other party because I’m sick of RINOs anyway.
By Lauren
January 21, 2009 4:57 PM | Link to this
Ragnar, I never ever said I am liberal because it is trendy. Learn to read! That is what you inferred but it is not what I implied. I have been a liberal for 35 years and I am proud of it. I am just pointing out that most of the country does not approve of your most recent president or your party. That’s a fact. Deal.
By CommunistAJC
January 21, 2009 5:02 PM | Link to this
Lauren, Pride before the fall, Lauren. Pride before the fall. Deal.
By Fred Morrow
January 21, 2009 5:06 PM | Link to this
Wooten said nothing, not a mouthful. His conservative talking points and republican agenda are gone. Everything he once stood for in words and deed were nothing more than biting partisanship. He actually thought he could win and grin with it. But now, Wooten has extracted out the very teeth of his arguments, cleansing his palette of the very molars of moral decay gripping his creed. We’ll never again have to read about corporate tax breaks trickling down from some elite class to the indentured rabble. His constant grinding about the caste system’s natural order serve as unretouched photo-ops professing to show that the presumed stereotypes, epitomies, and emblematic single parent posterchildren are black, have been black, and will continue to be black, but OMG he’d rather bite his thumb than supply them prophylaxis or prophylactics.
The vestiges of red state wisdom want Wooten to keep writing the same words and let the country come back full circle, and embrace him again. That would work only if the country were willing to stay on the same merry-go-round.
But there’s a black president, and that does not compute. Wooten dare not understate the joy the country feels about Obama, nor does he dare underestimate what a big deal a black prez is. How big a deal? There will never be a German Chancellor of Turkish descent; or a Sri Lankan President of Kurdish descent, or a Botswainian Chief of Lower Mongolian descent…..(i know. u get the bit)
But in American all things are possible. So we must form the language anew and build a new platform that says, “We are conservative” that respects the individuals that actually inhabit these united states.
Spit.
By deegee
January 21, 2009 5:15 PM | Link to this
What was stupid about the TARP program is that Paulson sold the plan as a troubled asset buyout and then changed course before the program even got started. Is it possible that he didn’t know that the banks had no way of pricing their troubled assets? I doubt it. It’s more likely that he was more interested in simply giving them cash outright all along. That way they could do what they wanted with it, as they did. Obama’s team is now trying to address the fundamental problem of foreclosures while creating as much transparency in the solution as possible.
By C. Bush (no relation)
January 21, 2009 5:26 PM | Link to this
If the GOP would move to the center and leave religion out of politics. I would vote GOP again. If they’d not pick someone like Sarah Palin, I’d vote GOP again. If they’d get government out of our bedrooms, I’d vote GOP again. If they’d recognize that all Americans love this country, not just the “traditional family”, I’d vote GOP again. If they’d recognize that America isn’t the America of 50 years ago, I’d vote GOP again.
By The Conservative
January 21, 2009 5:30 PM | Link to this
Obama’s stimulus plan is inflationary because it will inject a trill into the money supply. Even though it’s debt, the total outstanding debt is so large now that a trill hardly matters, yet a trill into the M1 money supply will have the same effect that printing a trill outright, and 9 to 13 percent inflation could be the result as early as fall, 09.
That’s why the market has been tanking. SHorts covered today on IBM. That and investors are realizing that the bank bailouts are simply perpetuating the same failed business plans. Dow could see 5000. Ibm had a good report today so a sustained rally isn’t impossible, especially if there’s tech follow up, but I wouldn’t bet a nickel at this point in the cycle. (the more reason TO invest?)
maybe.
By Hillbilly Deluxe
January 21, 2009 5:30 PM | Link to this
Slavery was ended by the 13th Amendment. It passed the Senate in April 1864 but not the House. Lincoln was active in seeing that it passed the Congress, which it did Jan. 31, 1865. It was ratified Dec. 6, 1865.
There is no doubt he was anti-slavery all along but his primary goal was saving the Union. He had said that if he could save the Union by freeing none of the slaves he would do that, or by freeing all of them he would do that, or if by freeing some and not others he would do that. No one can doubt he was a shrewd man and when he saw his opportunity to get the public behind ending slavery he took it.
It’s also interesting to note that if you read the letters home of common soldiers on both sides they often referred to “a rich man’s war but a poor man’s fight”.
By The Conservative
January 21, 2009 5:37 PM | Link to this
Newt Ginrich has impressed me with his deft pouncing on the Treasury nomination. He’s running, folks, and this is him throwing his hat in the ring. It’s at least a very competent rear-guard action for the ebbing red tide.
By @@
January 21, 2009 5:39 PM | Link to this
NORMAN THOMAS, For many years the U.S. Socialist Presidential candidate proclaimed:
“The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of “liberalism” they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.”
By golly, I knew it when I saw it and unlike those weak-kneed reps, chose not to be drug behind the ol’ clunker. I’ve never been one to hitchhike.
Thing is, the dems could have passed the TARP without rep support. The fact that they wouldn’t go it alone indicates to me that they knew full well what they were doing but didn’t want the American people to know, supporting the “urgency” of the situation in words that would appeal to the liberal mind.
It been mostly moderates and conservatives that saw the writing on the wall, opposing it from the get-go.
By The Conservative
January 21, 2009 5:45 PM | Link to this
Take heart, Fellow Conservatives! The best thing we got going for us now, as we regroup, is Jay Bookman and his reasoned, seasoned take on the markets, the middle east, and George W. Bush.
Let them run with this. The country will soon gag itself with a spoon, for sure, 4 sho!
Patience, Republicans. Focus. Get serious. Get involved. It’s never too late, it’s never too early.
But dont waste any ammo on the left, they’ll implode soon enough.
By Nina
January 21, 2009 7:14 PM | Link to this
I think the Republican party needs to define itself for it spent much of this past election redefining itself over and over again. The Sarah Palin pick suddenly thrust the campaign of John McCain’s into a very divisive and negative tone. What they, the GOP, need to figure out is what they truly stand for, and how it can appeal to the ever-growing demographics that just aren’t voting for them. They need to be more inclusive. Fostering the kind of hate displayed at many of the rallies this summer is a sure fire way to lose ANY minority vote, most of the youth vote (I think it’s clear that today’s youth is not only more tolerant, but tired of the usual politics), and many independents turns off by their extreme right positions.
By mister.earl
January 22, 2009 8:28 AM | Link to this
The so-called “Magic Negro” has walked calmly into The Oval Office and the Republican Party wonders why it is irrelevant?
That is too funny.
Good Morning America.
Somewhere, the media w******* Rush Limbaugh spits louder into microphone so he can be heard, totally missing the meaning of progress:
It is good to be smart.
By ginger
January 22, 2009 8:59 AM | Link to this
“Those who carry its financial burden want less, as do those who accept the responsibility to provide for themselves and their families.”
That is not an accurate statement. I am a well-paid professional who works in an office with other well-paid professionals and we are all Democrats. Perhaps your columns would be more powerful if you dealt in facts as opposed to myths.
By Liberal Advice
January 22, 2009 8:59 AM | Link to this
Defining the GOP is more of a task of changing its inherent profile of being “Exclusionary.” I would venture to say that the majority of the populous see the party as a Good Ole Boy Country Club and its “elite” status excludes the common man. It is the pandering of that ideology through such media pundits (Rush, Hannity, Cunningham) that forwards this thinking and creates further the divide and out of touch messaging on behalf of the party. You are deaf to the concerns of the citizenry, and hellbent on promoting the desires of the few. Nothing against those that have worked their way to their successes, however, the consistent drumming of hate and divisiveness by the GOP apparatus has lessened its value 100 fold in the eyes of the public. Their is no cross section of Americans in the party. The ideas are Reganesque, however, Regan era is long gone. To continue to hold that banner reaffirms to the public that the party is old and feeble with no new set of ideas or forward thinking.
My suggestion is evolve or face certain demise.
By mister.earl
January 22, 2009 9:12 AM | Link to this
Want Ads
LiberalAdvice - excellent point
Is it a coincidence that Cox Enterprises, the single print and radio media machine that dishes out large servings Hannity, Limbaugh and Cunnningham - is also struggling for relevancy?
The notion of advertising for the next conservative columnist in a public cattle-call is curious. What are the qualifications?
Just one question: Is being conservative is a qualification any more than being a Green Party Member or Muslim or Jewish a qualification?
Enjoy your vacation Mr Wooten
By mister.earl
January 22, 2009 9:33 AM | Link to this
Want Ads
LiberalAdvice - excellent point
Is it a coincidence that Cox Enterprises, the single print and radio media machine that dishes out large servings Hannity, Limbaugh and Cunnningham - is also struggling for relevancy?
The notion of advertising for the next conservative columnist in a public cattle-call is curious. What are the qualifications?
Just one question: Is being conservative is a qualification any more than being a Green Party Member or Muslim or Jewish a qualification?
Enjoy your vacation Mr Wooten
By D
January 22, 2009 9:41 AM | Link to this
ya hear all these stats like, worse economy in 26 years, lowest value of the dollar in 26 years, worse unemployment rate in 26 years. you know what was going on 26 years ago? that’s right, 92-93, it was the last time Republicans held the White House and the Congress for a long period of time and ran the country into the ground for the sole reasons of greed and exclusion. the Republicans are not who they say they are, smaller government, nope. what entitlement programs have they eliminated? none. they haven’t even begun to fix the immigration problem. and instead of doing things to help this country they just help big business and when that hurts America then they just blame someone else that darn mythical beast that lurks in the night, you know, the Liberal. it’s getting old. they say they are patriots but they put our military personnel in a craphole like Iraq for all the wrong reasons. the contractors get rich, America gets poor and working class people that fill the ranks of the military do the dying. doesn’t sound patriotic to me. then the greed of CEO’s, by the way, most, if not all of them are Republicans. there’s not a liberal among any of the CEO’s of the companies receiving bailouts. and I can tell you that Jesus was against greed, against profit to the point that it hurts others. so they’re not Christian. and when hurt America, you hurt Americans and their children. so they’re not for our children either. how easily led I see the people around me. and even they know that the Republican way is BS, I know because try to talk to them about anything that isn’t part of the party propagand and they become physically threatening to you. people get really angry and physically threatening in a debate when they don’t have a leg to stand on, when they can’t build themselves up based on merit. then it’s not about looking good, but just about making the other preson look worse. that’s not America! smaller government? please! would smaller government be worried about marijuana or euthanasia or same sex marriage? no. would smaller government want the church to have more of a say in how we live our lives? no. and the next time you want to put down someone as a liberal(you know, witch, heretic, Jew, ni**er), take the time to look up the root word for liberal in Latin and you’ll find the definition is the foundation of America.
By alohagator
January 22, 2009 10:01 AM | Link to this
I’d like a table dance from Sarah Palin.
By zeke
January 22, 2009 10:29 AM | Link to this
YES GOVERNMENT SPENDING IS INHERENTLY BAD BECAUSE IT MEANS THAT TAXES MUST BE RAISED FROM THOSE WHO ACTUALLY CONTRIBUTE TO REDISTRIBUTE THROUGH GOVERNMENT SPENDING TO THOSE DREGS OF OUR SOVIETY WHO ONLY WANT WHAT THEY CAN GET FOR DOING NOTHING! Admittedly there are some, few who actually need help and those should get it, but, not through the government dole! If the government would get off the taxpayers and businesses backs and allow us to do what we do, these other few would be taken care of adequately. The others would in turn be forced to change to productive members of our society or wither away! Republicans, no consevatives, need to get back to our roots of less government, low taxes, personal responsibility and faith in the Constitution as the law of our land! If we had run on these things instead of trying to emulate the demagogs, the election would have been far different! Obama may have still been elected, but, with far fewer votes and the Congress would not be rampant socialist as it is now! They also need to reach out and inform blacks as to which party has helped them the most. Which party freed slaves? Which party passed all the civi rights acts? NOT DEMOCRATS! And after 50 years of welfare, adc and all the other socialist programs, are blacks better off??NO! THEY ARE MORE DEPENDENT, THE FAMILIES ARE DESTROYED AND YOUNG BLACK MALES ARE ALMOST NON EXISTANT EXCEPT IN THUG GROUPS AND SOCIETIES! VOTE CONSERVATIVE ONLY AND RID THE US AND IT’S CITZENS OF THESE SOCIALIST MORONS!
By HaHaHa
January 22, 2009 10:37 AM | Link to this
Apparently, as evidenced by Obama’s win, the past many YEARS of GOP control, both of Congress and the President, who had a rubber-stamp congress for 6 long years, has demonstrated to the American people that the GOP concepts are NOT wanted in this country.
Why is that so difficult to accept?
if they were wanted, we would have a GOP President and a GOP Congress.
major DUH!
By Mac
January 22, 2009 10:45 AM | Link to this
Make mine a lap dance. She’s smokin’ hot.
By Hasell Brown
January 22, 2009 11:23 AM | Link to this
Now that a new era in American has begun, let’s review what conservative policies have wrought:
1) From a $300B surplus in 2000 to a $1.2T DEFICIT in 2008
2) From almost full employment in 2000 to 7.2%(and climbing) unemployment rate in 2008
3) From fully functioning financial markets to depression-like, failing financial markets
4) From ready credit availability to tightening of credit
5) From increased housing construction and occupancy to housing foreclosures
6) From increased personal responsibility to increased dependency
AS ONE WHO WANTS TO WORK, SUPPORT HIS FAMILY, AND BELIEVE IN THE AMERICAN DREAM, it should be evident that conservatism only wants to maintain the status quo for those who ALREADY have…..not geberate a path for those who desire!!
Since 1860…EVERY time Republicans get into the White House, the economy shrinks, the nation goes to war, the wealthy gain…the poor lose…and the middle class gets SQUEEZED!! This is NOT revisionism….it’s the facts!!
I don’t believe in socialism….but the government DOES have a societal role: to protect the nation, to be a safety net for those who need, to set the tone for the nation to grow. Under Bush..the nation became fractured….almost BALKANIZED; under Obama, I envision an era of growth, cooperation, and unification!!
ANYTHING IS BETTER THAN WHAT THE NATION HAS BEEN THROUGH FOR THE PAST 8 YEARS!!!