The Ever-Bolder GOP
It seems that Republicans are feeling pretty good about themselves these days:
By citing reservations about the economic recovery package, Gregg reinforced widespread GOP criticism about wasteful spending that has less to do with reviving the economy than rewarding Democratic constituencies. And by noting his differing view on the census, Gregg breathed life into Republican charges of a White House power grab over a critical Commerce Department function.
Both issues are part of an emerging GOP case against Obama and the ruling Democratic Party: Strip away the new face, the lofty rhetoric and the promises of post-partisanship and you’ll find the same big-spending party of old, bent on politicizing government to consolidate its hold on power.
Even with the stimulus package on the verge of passing later this week, the unanimous GOP vote against the bill in the House and the near-unanimous opposition in the Senate revealed a Republican Party surprisingly united in direction and in message for perhaps the first time since losing its congressional majority in 2006.
This reminds me of what Eve Fairbanks wrote back on February 9 when she observed that they are “completely obsessed with winning the media “cycle” and getting the sexiest, most provocative quotes on TV, an attitude that yields the kind of overblown dreck RNC chair Michael Steele is now spouting.” She traces the origins of this mentality back to the summer’s “drill baby drill” outbursts “which Republicans cite constantly as the moment that will someday be recognized as the beginning of their rebirth, their A.D. 0: They mounted a lot of antics, their brazenly hyperbolic rhetoric ended up all over the news, and a frightened Pelosi backed down.”
At the time, what Republican optimism about the drilling issue reminded me of was Republican optimism about the immigration issue. At one point, conventional wisdom held that taking a moderately pro-immigrant, pro-immigration line was necessary for a political party hoping to appeal to Hispanic voters. But the conservative base didn’t like that idea and scuttled it. These things happen. But then as more and more congressfolks got swept-up in the far-right maw, they became convinced that this bit of base pandering was going to deliver them to electoral nirvana. Then in November 2006, they took it on the chin.
Then you flash forward to 2008. At one point, conventional wisdom held that offshore drilling was a bad issue for its proponents—the only people who really cared about it were the people whose livelihoods and lifestyles would be imperiled by it—which is why even friend of the oilman George W. Bush never previously campaigned on offshore drilling. But the base wanted to drill offshore. So “drill, baby, drill” it was. And this, too, was supposed to be not just base pandering but brilliant politics. Then in November 2008, they took it on the chin.
Now they’ve convinced themselves that lockstep opposition to economic stimulus is the way to go. And the press, which mostly keeps believing that the right is politically brilliant despite two blown elections in a row, is inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. But it seems hard to figure. Here’s some Gallup numbers:
And more:
I’ll be the first to tell you that none of this will matter very much if the economy is in the toilet in 2012. But the fact remains that what conservatives are doing is moving in lockstep opposition to a popular initiative backed by a popular congress and a Democratic congressional leadership that, while not particular popular, is still more popular than they are. And if you think back to what serious people thought Republicans’ electoral problems were two months ago, it’s very hard to see how complaining that the stimulus bill was insufficiently weighted to corporate and capital gains tax cuts is expanding the party’s appeal to non-whites or to the younger cohort of voters or demonstrating that it’s an effective custodian of the economic interests of lower middle class traditionalists.
67 Responses to “The Ever-Bolder GOP”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
February 13th, 2009 at 10:03 am
Attacking the stimulus on fiscal grounds is just a preemptive strike against any further non-stimulus spending. They are embellishing the costs of current spending so that when Obama tries to pass something truly liberal (like energy or health reform) they’ll be able to make a stronger case (i.e “we have no money”).
February 13th, 2009 at 10:11 am
One theme of early-millenial Republicanism is its arationalism: politics designed to solve an emotional problem (”unease” about immigrants, or Democratic spending, Iran) rather than an empirical one (informal economies, economic decline, nuclear proliferation).
The most interesting case today is David Brooks, who is violently treading ideological waters trying to appear cosmopolitan and sophisticated amidst this political devolution. He writes a foreboding column based on the assumption that American psychology is a more fundamental source of contemporary econonomic crisis than more quantitative , objective realities.
It’s interesting that Brook’s own column could be offered as Exhibit A of the disease he attempts to discover.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:12 am
Initial reaction to TARP was mixed, then moved sharply negative. Even liberals on this blog repeatedly mistakenly blame Republicans even thought it was largely Democrats that voted for it. I don’t think Americans will forget this amount of wealth transfer too quickly. 2010 will be an interesting election cycle, with the economy still in the toilet and an extra trillion in deficit on the books, Democrats will have to explain to their constituents what exactly they have accomplished besides taxing their children.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:12 am
2012? Hah!
What about 2010 when the economy is still in the dumps and the Dems have spent another trillion or so “that could have gone in YOUR pocket!”.
Will it give the Repubs control of Congress? Hell no but they are going for triage.
And believe it or not announcing the plan to extend WH oversite to the Census sounds like the US Attorney scandal: the politicization of what is perceived to be, even if it is not, an apolitical arm of government.
We can thank the Black caucus and Loud Mouth Rahm for that little PR disaster in the making.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:13 am
The republicans are simply doing whatever they are paid to do by the crooks who own them.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/2/13/32013/1373/707/696949
February 13th, 2009 at 10:15 am
This is excellent news! For John McCain!!!!
February 13th, 2009 at 10:16 am
I’m not usually a conspiracy theorist, but this whole thing seems like a setup to me. Why would you apply for a job you don’t want if you already have a pretty good job?
At this point, at least Obama can legitimately claim that he tried the bipartisan thing, and Republicans wanted to have nothing to do with it, and in fact went out of their way to thwart it. If I were running against Gregg next cycle, I might point that out to the electorate.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:16 am
after 44 years of emphasizing cliche over thought, these are the kinds of people the republican party now features.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:23 am
And one more thing:
We lived through 8 years during which all opposition to Bushit Policy was painted as unAmerican when not downright traitorous.
And now we get too many progressives using the same rhetoric.
We are a two party system. One party is always of necessity in opposition.
THE STIMULUS IS OBAMA’S BILL!
The Republicans are supposed to oppose it.
They are doing their duties in attempting to shape it to their “philosophy” of government. Call them ignorant, call them stupid, but to suggest they should not oppose Obama for the sake of some idiot idea of bipartisanship is crack talk.
As Kos wrote recently:
Obama made the error and now he should do something really radical
LIKE APPOINTING A DEMOCRAT WHEN AN OPENING APPEARS!
I mean really, how’s that Greg thing working out?
February 13th, 2009 at 10:24 am
I too well remember John McCain opposing TARP I.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:25 am
One word why the GOP lost all credibility in the minds of Americans and lost seats in 2006 & 2008: IRAQ
February 13th, 2009 at 10:28 am
It doesn’t matter what the Republicans think. Period. Democrats are the party in power and they have to govern based on their principles. That they do it in the face of overwhelming Republican opposition is awesome. That way if the policies succeed, then the Republicans in their current avatar will be discredited for good. If the policies fail, then maybe we Democrats need to examine whether said policies were the right ones in the first place. In any case, adversity sometimes can be a good thing. If the Republicans were politically smart, they might try to hedge their bets and at least appear to work with a President who seems to be making significant overtures to them. But they won’t. For those guys is all or nothing. They have spurned the outstretched hand of Obama and having done that are feeling mighty happy for behaving like dicks. The effete MSM thinks acting like dicks is being confident. But who cares … our country is in a shithole. We need bold policies and honest leadership. I hope Mr. Nice has learned his lesson that there is no compromising with the current GOP. At best he might be able to manipulate some of it more vulnerable members in the Senate. But that is about as good as it is gonna get. I personally think that is a better thing.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:28 am
Even liberals on this blog repeatedly mistakenly blame Republicans even thought it was largely Democrats that voted for it.
Of course, the initial TARP plan was proposed by a Republican president, maladministered by Republican appointees, and supported by the Republican nominee for the presidency.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:28 am
Well, conservatives, and an overwhelming number of people working for our major media outlets, are morons.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:33 am
One of the political weaknesses the Democrats have faced over the past four decades is that they tend to get their growth early in a Presidential cycle, whereas Republicans take advantage of victory to get stuff that is bad for the economy early, and ease up late when looking to the next election, and get a lower average growth rate but higher average growth rates in the fourth year of an administration.
But this economy is so very bad, that there’s no danger of that at all. If the economy starts to recover, it will be the right political time. So the Republicans have got to hope for economic catastrophe.
But being seen hoping for economic catastrophe is also politically risky, so the only recourse is to lie like a truckload of Persian Carpets about what they are trying to do in scuttling effective economic policy.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:35 am
I figure they’ve decided the only way to win in 2010 and 2012 is to bankrupt the American people so that the can’t donate to opposition candidates in $10 increments.
Sounds like a bunch of losers with an even more losing game plan.
I’m starting today — socking away $10/week in a fund to donate to the opposition. I’ll give up Starbucks and Ben and Jerry’s if I have to.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:36 am
And this is where Obama’s attempts at trying to get Republicans on board help. He can say “I tried, and we even made some concessions”, and he’ll get credit for the stimulus and being bipartisan. Not only do the Republicans look out of touch on stimulus, they look out of touch on bipartisanship, too.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:38 am
Folks, the Republicans are not coming back. Period. Don’t believe it. They own what is happening to this country. Sure the lunatic 30% will blame everyone under the sun but themselves, but who cares? No one is listening anymore and it’s insanity like saying “work is not a job”. WTF is that?!? That’s not remotely convincing to anyone who isn’t the one spouting it.
The Republicans own this disaster. The youngest generation of voters are moderate to liberal. The GOP has demonized latinos, the fastest growing demographic which also happens to make up 40% of that generation as well.
If we were really talking about the pre-W Republican Party I would agree that they could take advantage of economic conditions in 2010 or 2012 but these are not your father’s Republicans, these people are freaks.
Simply put they continue to tell voters “who are you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes” and people have had enough. The scars of Republican governance are not going to be erased by the economic runaway train continuing on it’s unstoppable trajectory off the bridge into the ravine.
They had complete control of a nation at it’s economic and military peak and dismantled it. They own it.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:42 am
“THE STIMULUS IS OBAMA’S BILL!
The Republicans are supposed to oppose it.”
The Republicans are supposed to oppose the stimulus if they actually think it’s a bad idea for the country, not just because they’re the opposition party or they think it’s better for them politically. They’re also supposed to offer up intelligent and substantive criticisms of the stimulus, not BS aesthetic arguments about spending a milion dollars a day since Jesus was born. That’s the standard that’s supposed to apply to every issue and it’s the same for the Democrats when they are in the minority.
Mike
February 13th, 2009 at 11:00 am
tehstupid Says:
Folks, the Republicans are not coming back. Period. Don’t believe it. They own what is happening to this country.
Well yes but then again 80% of the American people (not to mention Mr. Yglesias) supported the war and Rove grew rich predicting the permanent Republican majority.
And nobody ever went broke misunderestimating the ignorance of their fellow citizens.
If the economy is in the tank November 2010 you will see Repub gains in both houses.
Then you get a weakened president overseeing a fucked economy.
And like it or not Obama now owns the overall economy and the banking crisis and yes two wars and it doesn’t look like he’s handling them well (I know, only 3 weeks but in American politics that’s a couple of lifetimes, just ask Daschle) and that is the basis of ObaCriticism fired from the left.
It’s Krugman’s “No we can’t”.
February 13th, 2009 at 11:04 am
Yep, the Republicans are doing great, as long as their goals don’t include winning elections.
Are you kidding? Republicans, bar Reagan’s resurrection from the grave, couldn’t have won the last two elections. Period.
What you are seeing right now is a perfect set-up for 2010 and 2012 (given their obvious constraints). They criticize the stimulus as much as possible. Make it sound wasteful and irresponsible. All while refraining from actually blocking anything substantive. Then in 2010 or 2012 as the country is in fiscal crisis they throw in a Bloomberg type and win just like they have so many times in the past.
Of course if Obama saves the economy there is nothing they can do except stop a new New Deal from passing. But if this happens there is nothing the republicans could do anyway, so why change?
February 13th, 2009 at 11:08 am
DTM, this generation of republicans needs to pass from the scene before they begin thinking differently: it could easily take 20 years before we can think of the gop as a group of sane people again.
on the other hand, gordon gekko, i agree with you: the gop realizes that an improving economy croaks them in 2010; in this sense, they are completely sane.
February 13th, 2009 at 11:12 am
MBunge Says:
The Republicans are supposed to oppose the stimulus if they actually think it’s a bad idea for the country, not just because they’re the opposition party or they think it’s better for them politically.
You presume that they don’t really believe that much of the stimulus spending is a bad idea.
On what basis that presumption??
One reason some politicians are Republicans is because they truly think it bad public policy to spend tax dollars buying condoms fo hos, as but one example.
They’re also supposed to offer up intelligent and substantive criticisms of the stimulus, not BS aesthetic arguments about spending a milion dollars a day since Jesus was born.
Here you are making a funny yes?
Surely arguing against gouging our children to the tune of 10 trillion more dollars is a tad more than an aesthetic argument.
It was Republicans not Democrats who opposed the now much hated TARP.
That’s the standard that’s supposed to apply to every issue and it’s the same for the Democrats when they are in the minority.
Well now I know that you moonlight doing standup.
February 13th, 2009 at 11:17 am
DTM Says:
And as long as the Dem base doesn’t understand that these people are just feeding the Dem base’s self-delusions for their own personal gain, the Dem base will be doomed to repeat their political mistakes.
Silly isn’t it?
Ad hominem attacks are rarely effective as argument, especially when they lack self irony, don’t you think?
February 13th, 2009 at 11:17 am
The Republicans are in a place where their base (and their politicians) simply don’t have their fingers on the pulse of the greater electorate, and I don’t see that happening any time soon. The problem is pretty basic: Republicans are saying stuff in public that doesn’t make any sense to voters. It’s like Democrats opposing welfare reform: even if you think they’re right, the arguments to the rest of the public don’t make any sense.
What are they going to run on in 2010 and 2012, even if the economy is still sluggish? “Vote for us and we’ll give you tax cuts!” ? They have no message, and they can’t beat the Democrats by offering solutions to problems of the past. it’s going to take a while for them to retool, but there’s just no way they’re going to win elections by recycling 80s-era rhetoric.
February 13th, 2009 at 11:23 am
Of course, the initial TARP plan was proposed by a Republican president, maladministered by Republican appointees, and supported by the Republican nominee for the presidency.
Which begs even more question as to why Democrats voted for it.
February 13th, 2009 at 11:23 am
Why is it that Republicans can vote in lockstep to spend 400 billion on helping the Iraqi people yet consider it government waste to spend 800 billion on the American people.
February 13th, 2009 at 11:30 am
JT, it is impossible to take anyone seriously who offers the “condoms for hos” line – indeed, it is impossible not to assume that you are an asshole altogether (and yes, it’s ad hominem, and yet, it’s perfectly effective) – but still, let us attempt to make some sense of your comments.
the republican party was completely and totally comfortable with the fiscal irresponsibility of the bush administration, agreeing to enormous deficits during a period of growth. in particular, i don’t believe there was a single republican who demonstrated at any time from spring 2003 to january 2009 that they had any interest in funding the war in iraq, which has already drained more money than the stimulus.
so it is impossible – and i mean that literally – to take seriously any republican claim about concern for “gouging our children.”
nor has the republican party demonstrated any interest in not expanding the deficit: surely even an ass like you has noticed that the demint plan – the one the gop loves – expands the deficit far more dramatically (and with far less payoff) than the stimulus plan.
as for policies themselves: people like bruce bartlett and martin feldstein – honest conservative economists – have levelled legitimate, substantive criticisms (bartlett that the stimulus is too small and feldstein that the composition should be improved). these are not the criticisms we hear from the moron caucus, who instead spend their time inventing stupid remarks (like your witless one about condoms), stamping their feet that this is a spending bill and not a stimulus bill (well, duh), and, of course, spouting silliness about government never creating jobs.
in aggregate, intelligent adults call these “BS aesthetic arguments.” you seem to be enamored of them….
PS. given that the financial system was on the verge of freezing up when TARP was passed, any republican who is proud of opposing it – as differentiated from railing at the bush administration for maladministering it – fits the argument we’re already having, namely that the gop is a fundamentally unserious group at this stage, dedicated to cliche over thought and governed by the whims of rush.
February 13th, 2009 at 11:36 am
While I welcome JT, our new hysterical troll, JT needs to keep in mind that eventually he will tire out and get bored while the rest of us will remain. Only the most indefatiguable of trolls like Al have managed to hang in there.
February 13th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
I encourage the Republican party to follow the lead of enlightened folks like JT and to use precisely their language and logic. There are still far too many Republicans in Congress, and this tactic will help to solve that problem.
February 13th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
DTM Says:
JT,
Where is the ad hominem?
To ascribe base motivations and only base motivations, this without evidence, to your opponent is an adhominem attack.
February 13th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
“You presume that they don’t really believe that much of the stimulus spending is a bad idea.
On what basis that presumption??”
I’m not presuming anything. What I’m talking about is this attitude that the GOP should oppose the stimulus simply because they Dems are for it. I’ve heard more than one person on cable TV say that the purpose of an opposition party in Congress is to “blow things up”. But just because you’re in the minority, that doesn’t free you from any and all responsiblity.
Of course, one could point out the irresponsible way all these “fiscal conservatives” happily voted for every Bush budget and smiled as America’s deficit and debt soared into the sky when they were the majority, so what can you expect.
Mike
February 13th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
“To ascribe base motivations and only base motivations, this without evidence, to your opponent is an adhominem attack.”
He’s simply describing the dynamic as it exists. It doesn’t benefit Rush or Rove to tell Republicans things that are good for Republicans or good for the country. It benefits them to say things that ultimately put more money in Rush’s and Rove’s pockets. That’s a fundamental bias that cripples a great deal of conservative discourse.
Mike
February 13th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
The problem with the modern GOP is that they believe their own propaganda. They come up with a line to use that isn’t supposed to accurately depict the world as it actually exists – liberals want to surrender to terrorists, we’re the Real Americans, opposed by only a small fringe – but rather, to influence public discussion in a manner that advances their political interests. It’s that whole “reality-based vs. reality-creating” thing again.
But instead of leaving it at that, they round on themselves, and believe the line they just made up!
They’ve spent years now making the “Real Americans” argument, and to very useful effect vs. Al Gore and John Kerry and the Democrats in the 2002 elections, but they’ve come to believe it themselves. So, rather than making any effort to conform their positions to those of the public, or even bother finding out what the public thinks, they merely assume that the Real Americans are with them – and hey, they can go to all kinds of places and find crowds of Real Americans who are with them – and conclude that they have strong public support.
Republicans are a lot like Iraqi Sunnis in this way. There are millions of people in Iraq who know – just know that Sunnis make up a majority of the Iraqi population, and define themselves as the Real Iraqis.
The difference being, the Iraqi Sunnis seem to have woken up to reality after a couple of elections proved them wrong.
February 13th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
howard Says:
February 13th, 2009 at 11:30 am
BLAH BLAH BLAH
Your ObaMessiah voted for every Iraq funding bill during his time in the Senate. I don’t think that makes him appreciably better than the Repubs and Dems who, being in the Senate longer, had the chance to vote even more often for that deficit spending.
So what’s your point?
I agree completely that all those who voted, repeatedly, for ever greater deficit spending have little basis for complaint now. Little, not none.
Because the fact is that all things considered we are talking a 10 trillion dollar commitment (Treasury, Fed, interest) over the next ten years.
And nobody has suggested by whom or when that deficit will be paid.
And none is providing any metrics by which to judge success.
I’ll only note here Obama’s “jobs SAVED…” dodge.
Are you so brain dead that you consider that rational argument?
Further, you seem to suggest that if I got drunk yesterday well then the thing to do is get blind drunk today and dead drunk tomorrow.
The assholes were the ones who thought it a good idea to put money for condom distribution in an emergency stimulus bill.
Why?
For two reasons:
First of course it demonstrates that much of the stimulus bill is little more than social engineering spending which would not survive the regular budget process these days.
And then of course is the fact that non-critical spending is best and most democratically handled through the regular appropriations process.
What is difficult to understand about that?
And again, as typical of your rhetorical skills, you simply choose to dismiss all initial Republican criticism of the TARP as empty posturing. You do this to somehow make the ObaGeniuse’s uncritical, indeed essential, support seem less than the massive dry fuck it has turned out to be.
February 13th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
I don’t agree with the new conventional wisdom that if the economy is still in the toilet in 2010, the GOP will be back in the saddle.
I fully expect the economy to be bad in 2010. But I also expect that the only republican policy will be DeMint’s. This has proven to be popular in South Carolina. Otherwise, not. Why, after all, did Bush win, say, Florida in 2004? Oh, ye of little memory – remember that pill bill? If you don’t, the over sixty set sure did. Just as that same set, watching their retirement end up in ashes, provided Obama’s margin in 2008. To a population suffering from health care bills they can’t pay and ravaged retirement, the GOP is going to offer what, exactly?
Bush is blamed by the GOPers who praised him to the skies in 2005. In fact, he did come up with the only positive reason to vote republican. The contract on America was a long time ago. The GOP is playing with 3s, 4s, and 6s, thinking that they have a full house.
February 13th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
And as long as the Dem base doesn’t understand that these people are just feeding the Dem base’s self-delusions for their own personal gain, the Dem base will be doomed to repeat their political mistakes.
Anyone who’s spent even a little time reading this blog and its comments will realize that there’s no shortage of Democrats suspicious of what Dem politicians are feeding them. Hell Paul Krugman would probably kick Obama in the nuts if he thought he could get away with it.
February 13th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Mike says:
That’s a fundamental bias that cripples a great deal of conservative discourse.
There we go Mike and who could disagree with you? And of course the same is true of much progressive/Dem rhetoric.
My criticism is aimed at the blanket dismissal of almost all opposition criticism to the stimulus as base, craven, and ignorant.
February 13th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
“My criticism is aimed at the blanket dismissal of almost all opposition criticism to the stimulus as base, craven, and ignorant.”
Maybe we wouldn’t dismiss almost all opposition criticism as base, craven, and ignorant if it were not in fact base, craven, and ignorant. Are you watching the House debate right now? Or any of the Congressional debate over the past two weeks? 90% of the Republicans just go up there and talk about $200 mil programs (that do create jobs) as wasteful spending. As though they’d vote for it if the 2% of the bill they’re calling out were removed. Right.
The key point is this, JT. Republicans have decided to be the party that opposes whatever Obama and Democrats do, whether it’s good or bad. My Senator, Saxby, explicitly ran on this. That is the hallmark of an unserious party: when you don’t care whether an idea is good or bad, you just oppose it because the “other team” came up with it. And they’ll forever be an unserious, minority party until they stop doing that.
February 13th, 2009 at 1:38 pm
“There we go Mike and who could disagree with you? And of course the same is true of much progressive/Dem rhetoric.”
Actually, it isn’t. That’s one of the major advantages for the Dems and disadvantages for the GOP. There is NO ONE one the Left that has the equivalent influence and divergent agenda of Rush Limbaugh. What liberal commentator can get politicians to come crawling to their show in apology the way Limbaugh can any conservative says something about him that isn’t entirely complimentary? Who on the Left with that level of influence doesn’t need to, have to or want to give a damn what happens to the Democratic Party or the country as a whole?
Obviously, there’s criticism to be made of liberal political discourse…but it doesn’t suffer from the distorting effect of Limbaugh/Rove/Hannity/Beck punditry.
Mike
February 13th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
Whatever happend to mixner?
February 13th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
FYI, the regular appropriations process is rarely used for anything these days. Most major items are funded through cobbled together omnibus bills and emergency supplemental appropriations. So regardless of your thoughts on what is “best handled” through that process, it is unlikely anything of import will be.
February 13th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
JT, i can see that you’re one of those right-wingers who fancies himself a cut above the everyday johnnies, but really, it’s still the same old babble.
for example: $10T: whatever in the world are you talking about?
for example: if you can’t understand that you can very seriously oppose deficits in a time of economic growth and at the same time very seriously support deficits in a time of weak economic growth, then you don’t belong in the conversation at all.
for example: that obama voted for iraq spending is neither here nor there – he’s not the one hypocritically fetishizing balanced budgets.
for example: condom distribution is an effective public health measure that promises to reduce future spending by reducing unwanted pregnancies and HIV transmission. calling it “social engineering” is of a piece with your “condoms to hos” idiocy.
February 13th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
My criticism is aimed at the blanket dismissal of almost all opposition criticism to the stimulus as base, craven, and ignorant.
He’s got a point. There is also the type of criticism one sees coming from, say, Reason Magazine, which, while insane and delusional, is neither base, nor craven, nor ignorant.
February 13th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
“And like it or not Obama now owns the overall economy and the banking crisis and yes two wars”
I don’t think that’s true. Bush’s taint (heh) may not last until 2010 (then again, it may) but it’s certainly still looming over the political scene right now. Nobody’s unclear as to where these problems started.
“and it doesn’t look like he’s handling them well”
If this is honestly you’re opinion, I’m afraid you’d find yourself in the minority on it.
February 13th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
They have no message, and they can’t beat the Democrats by offering solutions to problems of the past.
I think that should be: They have no message, and they can’t beat the Democrats by offering solutions, like tax cuts, that the Democrats have already given to people.
February 13th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
I fully expect the economy to be bad in 2010. But I also expect that the only republican policy will be DeMint’s. This has proven to be popular in South Carolina. Otherwise, not. Why, after all, did Bush win, say, Florida in 2004? Oh, ye of little memory – remember that pill bill? If you don’t, the over sixty set sure did. Just as that same set, watching their retirement end up in ashes, provided Obama’s margin in 2008. To a population suffering from health care bills they can’t pay and ravaged retirement, the GOP is going to offer what, exactly?
I agree.. If the economy is still bad, which it will be, I’m sure that a clever opposition party could use the opportunity to win some seats. But not these guys! They have no ideas other than tax cuts, terrorism, and gay marriage. If the economy is bad, unemployment is high, people are going to want solutions, and the GOP doesn’t have them. In fact they’ll be obstructing Obama’s efforts on the stimulus and probably health care coming up. Voters are not going to care about how much the stimulus cost.
February 13th, 2009 at 11:53 pm
I understand the urgency people feel with addressing the economic troubles; however, was there a broken promise of transparency to post the bill for public access for 48 hours before a vote?
Is it wrong to vote against something you haven’t had a chance to review?
February 14th, 2009 at 12:56 am
“We lived through 8 years during which all opposition to Bushit Policy was painted as unAmerican when not downright traitorous.”
Please. Lefties whining about stuff that never happened are like that black woman Columbia professor who staged her own bias incident (because everyone knows that the halls of Columbia are crawling with racists). The only people who challenged lefties’ patriotism over the last eight years were the lefties themselves. Quit your bitching, and be glad that President Obama doesn’t have the uncivil, childish opposition Bush did.
February 14th, 2009 at 10:01 am
I love the Republican belief that what we really need to get out of the problems we’re in is MORE of the policies which got us into the problems we’re in. There’s something so corrupt, so stupid, so blind, so bereft, so human about a willingness to destroy the world for vanity and self-interest.
February 14th, 2009 at 10:34 am
fred, i really thought this thread was over and was just looking back at a couple of comments and discovered your 12:56 a.m. posting. you do realize that that’s complete crap, right? you do understand that? or are you so deluded that you honestly believe that dick cheney and karl rove and rush limbaugh and sean hannity and any number of other thugs and authoritarians in and around the republican party didn’t challenge the patriotism of those of us who opposed the war in iraq, who opposed torture, who opposed illegal wiretapping? you can’t possibly be that delusional, can you?
February 14th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Matt, there is a point I think you are missing about drill baby drill.
Getting a MILF governess on stage and having the sexually repressed, abstinence educated masses chant drill baby drill has nothing at all to do with oil and everything to do with the mass unconscious psychology of sexual repression and fascism. Consciously, they may be thinking oil, but what’s really going on in their head when they chant drill baby drill to Palin isn’t about oil. Your analysis of drill baby drill is superficial because it’s not what’s really going on.
March 1st, 2009 at 5:14 am
viagra
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
March 1st, 2009 at 5:57 pm
cialis
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:00 am
tramadol
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
March 22nd, 2009 at 10:22 am
buy viagra online
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:03 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 9th, 2009 at 5:07 am
It is the coolest site,keep so! viagra