I sincerely apologize for taking up two whole slots on the Recent Blog Posts list, but this whole stimulus fiasco has me livid. Well, it's not so much the stimulus bill itself, but rather the politics behind it. Heck, just politics in general.
If I remember correctly, and if this isn't just some wacky dream world I've found myself in, not only did the Democratic candidate win the presidential election way back in November, a considerable number of Democratic congressional candidates won their elections as well. In fact, the mandate (or, if you prefer, landslide) was enough to get the media talking of a 60-seat, filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, albeit the number just barely failed to materialize.
Fast forward two months and three days-along with one historical inauguration, two confirmed cabinet appointees, two other cabinet appointees that dropped out due to tax problems, and half a stim bill journey-later, and one would think that the overwhelming victory of November never happened.
Not only are the Republicans still pushing the ideas of fiscal conservatism when anyone who really paid attention would know that they failed miserably, their side of the argument seems to be winning. Yes, even after a resounding metaphorical cry from the American people to the Republicans of, "Quit running our government," they're still pretty much running our government.
Am I the only one who sees something wrong here?
As much as I love the idea of people being able to disagree with the government and be taken seriously when they do so, it isn't as great when the ideas they propose have known to fail yet are still being accepted as good ideas. With all the numbers in my other blog on the RBP to back me up, I can say that this is one of those times.
All the Republicans in Congress right now may just be representative of the base, but these congresspeople will not budge from their ideology that says in black-and-white text, "Spending is bad and tax cuts are good as long as the other party is in power." They will not unclench their fists, no matter what the stakes. They cannot see the abysmal results of their policies beyond their personal gain. They will not stray from their ideals, regardless of where it has led the country and what impact it will have on getting it out.
And I have had enough.
Memo to the Democrats: Their ideas have failed. By and large, they are out of power. These guys should have very little influence outside of their own fiercely loyal base provided you guys don't screw things up royally. However, you are giving them more influence than their track record and their current numbers suggests they deserve. Stop it, or nothing will get done at this most crucial of times.
Memo to the Republicans (CL is intentional): YOUR IDEAS HAVE FAILED! By and large, you are out of power. Quit acting like you run the country, because you do not! Your ideology has placed this great nation in the darkest of times since the Hoover and FDR administrations. We are now in a useless and counterintuitive war that increases our deficit by $1 trillion (not million, not billion, but trillion) annually. We are now in the worst recession since the Great Depression. Our global image has been tarnished by your party's embrace of torture under the paper plate mask of 'enhanced interrogation'.
Your bravery is to be admired on some level; if I were a political party that placed the nation in a state of affairs half as bad as this one, I would leave the political stage and live out my days in exile. Yet there is a thin line between bravery and shamelessness, and you guys passed it over four years ago.
You actually have the nerve to come out and accuse the other party of wasteful spending while you put us in a war that wastes $1 trillion that could've been used to fix the abysmal infrastructure left by Ronald Reagan and prevent New Orleans from drowning, among countless other things? I can only imagine the unmitigated gall it would take to say, with a straight face no less, that you kept us safe for eight years while knowing the fact that your party's last president ignored the memo warning of an attack that would happen on his watch.
For the good of this country and all that she stands for. Shut! Up!
I guess I got a little carried away there...
"...Seek any job; ask anyone out; pursue any goal. Don't take it personally when they say 'no' — they may not be smart enough to say 'yes.'"
-Keith Olbermann
You can't just tell the Republicans to all-out shut up. Just because the Democrats won this time doesn't mean the Republicans are just, for lack of a better term, shit out of luck. We do have a majority rule, but also minority rights. And the minority was a good 45% of the country who voted McCain. You can't just say that the philosophy which represents a good half of the country has no say whatsoever. Conservatism and liberalism both have their place. The thing is, the Republicans nowadays want programs so big that you can't tell them apart from the Democrats. I think ideal Republicanism is good, just for limited government. But if I had to choose between Democrats and Republicans, I'd go with the Dems because at least when they do big government programs, it's for a good social cause. The Constitution is in shambles because of both parties, really.
You can't just say, however, that Republicanism is a failure. The way it currently is, I can understand. But conservatism has its place: after periods of extended liberalism, you need some conservatism to slow things down (IE, French Revolution), and vice versa (The old USSR, for example.) And Obama's not even that liberal. Sure, he's more liberal than the Republicans, but you can see here that most of the candidates, left or right, are still in the right-authoritarian quarter. You want a real liberal? How about Kucinich? Or McKinney? Or even Nader?
With Obama, I'm happy that he's trying to remove all earmarks for fiscal acts. But the fact is, these stimulus packages AREN'T WORKING in the first place. Obama plans to pass bigger ones, despite the fact that most Americans don't want it anymore. However, if that stimulus package was to be spread across to the taxpayers, the economy would shoot up. Everyone would have a good $15k to spend!
Try Toilet! Hah, I love this.
I'm Libertarian.
However, I will defend what I said.
Like I said before, I'm a pretty big fan of dissent with government. It was fun during the last eight years and I hope to have it around for what may come. However, when little Steve carries out a stupid idea that creates a giant mess, he is told to be quiet, to go stand in a corner, to think about what he's done. He does not get to lead the discussion on how to clean up his giant mess, and understandably so. After all, it was his idea that led to the giant mess. Most importantly, he does not get to undermine the efforts of those trying to clean up his giant mess. I'm not saying shut them up forever and ever; I'm saying that they need to come back once they get some good ideas.
Yes, 45% of the country voted for McCain. However, Obama's approval rating as of the 5th of this month tells a slightly different tale: 62% approve, with 15% disapproving and 23% unsure. (+/- 3 perentage points).
Yes, support for the stimulus bill has dropped, but to say that most Americans don't want it anymore is a bit of an overstatement. Besides, the bailout isn't working because of a lack of oversight combined with CEOs too concerned with their bonuses, Super Bowl parties, and retreats to really care about getting their banks back in shape.
Yes, conservatism has its place. That place is when the economy isn't about to completely dissolve (in a metaphorical sense) along with our infrastructure (in a much more literal sense). In other words, this is not that place. Unfortunately, people are still trying to force the square peg of conservatism into the round hole of our current situation, undaunted by the fact that it won't fit despite their insistent hammering.
As for whether or not I want a liberal, a liberal would be nice right now; preferably one in the same ballpark as Rachel Maddow. Ultimately, though, I won't be the inverse of Rush Limbaugh and say that I hope that conservatism fails for the sake of liberalism's appeal (or, if you want, me being right). If it turns out that more of what got us into this mess gets us out in the end, I will not only hang my head in shame and shut up for a long time, but also be one of the first to give a standing ovation for that kind of economical hat trick. Until then, well, you get the idea.
"...Seek any job; ask anyone out; pursue any goal. Don't take it personally when they say 'no' — they may not be smart enough to say 'yes.'"
-Keith Olbermann
Let me redirect your attention to a known fact. In the late 1970's a Democrat leader our president Jimmy Carter Said "America's best days are behind us". Then came along Reagan and with his conservative ideas pulled us out of a recession that was far worse then what we are going though now. It was conservative ideas that pulled us out of that recession that saw unemployment in double digits not liberal spending. Reagan also untied both parties in an effort to save this great country. Obama has only made the divisions between the parties more pronounced.
I am not a Republican I am a Conservative and if the Republican losing so much in this election brings them back to their conservative roots then I will be happy. Do not dismiss conservatism as something that is good for the good time it has proven itself to work better then liberals in the hard times and the really ruff times. Also for your information the Democrats put us in this recession in the first place by the support of the sub prime mess. That was not the Republicans. In my opinion the fight to remove the sub prime loans by the republicans was the only good thing that they have done during the Bush administration it was to bad that the democrats fought it and allowed the mess to stay on the books that pulled us down into this deep recession. I find it interesting that you are so willing to give more power to a party that has shown over and over again that they do not know how to fix an economy. Carter, Clinton (doubling down on the sub prime mess that carter started) and the congress democrats that fought to keep the sub prime and not care about the evidence that was shown to them about what will happen. The doom of the sub prime is the democrats fault and now it is their task to fix it, but I will not stand ideally by and let the democrats put of further in the hole.
"Something given has no value"~Robert Heinlein
"Having been poor is no shame, but being ashamed of it, is." Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richards Almanack, 1749
It was conservative ideas that brought us Recession: Back With a Vengeance, not liberal spending. Also, it was conservative ideas that crumbled a major bridge in Minnesota and helped bring a major American city to its knees, definitely not liberal spending.
I, along with 62% of the country, beg to differ.
Yeah, 'cause massive deregulation of the banks that allowed them to give loans to people who they knew wouldn't pay them back wasn't part of the problem...
I find it interesting that you are so willing to dismiss a party that pulled us out of the worst economic times in recorded history.
"...Seek any job; ask anyone out; pursue any goal. Don't take it personally when they say 'no' — they may not be smart enough to say 'yes.'"
-Keith Olbermann
Yeah, 'cause massive deregulation of the banks that allowed them to give loans to people who they knew wouldn't pay them back wasn't part of the problem...
The banks gave loans out to people they know could not pay them back because of the Democrats that passed the sup prime mess you seem to be showing that the republicans forced and strong arm banks into making these loans when it was the Democrats.
I, along with 62% of the country, beg to differ.
His approval rating is still high but it is falling fast he has been in office for less then a month and it is down to 62%. If you look at the stimulus bill in the house not one republican voted yes for it but 11 Democrats voted "no" I see that as a division.
I find it interesting that you are so willing to dismiss a party that pulled us out of the worst economic times in recorded history.
I hope that you are not talking about the great depression because if you do any real research into you will find that we did not emerge from the great depression until the world war 2 that means that all those massive spending FDR used to try to get us out of the great depression failed.
It was conservative ideas that brought us Recession: Back With a Vengeance, not liberal spending. Also, it was conservative ideas that crumbled a major bridge in Minnesota and helped bring a major American city to its knees, definitely not liberal spending.
Wow that is reaching you are blaming a design error on the conservative politics did the governor tell the bridge designer to use 1/2 inch steel plates that would not support the weight you better have proof on that. This Recession is not anywhere near what is was like in the late 70's you are making a mountain out of a mole hill. Do not get me wrong any recession is bad but this is not near "Back with a Vengeance".
"Something given has no value"~Robert Heinlein
"Having been poor is no shame, but being ashamed of it, is." Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richards Almanack, 1749
When you say 62% of the country, were you refering to the 62% that want the stimulus plan to have more tax cuts and less spending?
... Obama hasn't been president for five months. He was inaugurated on January 20th, and Bush was President until noon that day. It says right there that the poll was taken two weeks into his Presidency. The rating is quite impressive, but he hasn't done anything yet. He's announced plans, but he's only been in a few weeks. Nothing's gotten passed yet, so I'm pretty apathetic about his job performance as of yet.
I am so against the stimulus bill that I can hardly put it into words. It won't help because the government is just giving it to corporations when most of them aren't showing any plans for the money, and a lot of it is wasted on things we don't need! I don't get a lot of these, because many of them don't seem to have anything to do with the economy:
You get the picture. The stimulus packages are quixotic at best. I think that instead, just distribute that money to the taxpayers! Then the people would spend their money more, which would shoot up the economy exponentially. Think about it: 800 billion dollars plus 750 billion from the last one, spread to about 250 thousand taxpayers amounts to about $6000-7000 per taxpayer. Most of them are bound to spend at least some of it. It's spending and selling that keeps our economy going. It keeps getting worse, in part, because people are afraid to buy too much.
I do agree wholeheartedly that Bush screwed up big time. But at this point, I hardly consider him a real conservative. Social issues are the least of my concern when compared to government size and foreign policy. With regards to those, he's made the government so big that many conservatives hate him, too. I really don't get it. So many republicans are just abandoning actual republican ideals: the most important of which is limited government.
Try Toilet! Hah, I love this.
I'm Libertarian.
You can't just tell the Republicans to all-out shut up. Just because the Democrats won this time doesn't mean the Republicans are just, for lack of a better term, shit out of luck. We do have a majority rule, but also minority rights. And the minority was a good 45% of the country who voted McCain. You can't just say that the philosophy which represents a good half of the country has no say whatsoever.
I think the republicans are lying in a bed of their own making. I know I heard MANY republicans crow about their "mandate from the people" after the narrow victories that put Bush in the White House. It hurts when the shoe is on the other foot, doesn't it?
I think ideal Republicanism is good, just for limited government. But if I had to choose between Democrats and Republicans, I'd go with the Dems because at least when they do big government programs, it's for a good social cause. The Constitution is in shambles because of both parties, really.
Two words...Libertarian Party.
TTFN,
Blackout
---
A question of love.
---
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
Fiscal conservatism was doing great from the moment Newt Gingrich seized the Congress with his Contract for America up until 2000 when Bush took office. The Republican Congress finally imposed the spending discipline to balance the budget.
Republicans lost their way and behaved just about like Democrats during the Bush years with a massive spending spree. It is totally disingenuous to say that fiscal conservatism failed because we have not had any fiscal conservatism for almost a decade. Fiscal conservatives were furious about unfunded Medicare Prescription Drugs, massive new Federal spending on No Child Left Behind, massive Agricultural Subsidies, massive Energy subsidies, massive biofuel subsidies, massive Highway bills, etc. Big spending Republicans spent this money and deserved what the public did to them but as I recall the Democrats greatest objection to each of these bills was that they wanted to spend even more. Fiscal conservatives wanted the structural deficits caused by Social Security and Medicare fixed and while Bush half-heartedly attempted these things he was blocked by Democrats.
I remember Democrats howling about the Bush deficits during his first six years. The Republicans were thrown out not for fiscal conservatism but precisely because they were not fiscally conservative. They deserved what they got.
Then Democrats took control of the Congress (Congress and not the President controls the purse strings) two years ago and the deficits have gone from bad to worse. This year, after two years of Democrats in control of the purse we were looking at a trillion dollar deficit and now Congress is on the verge of spending yet another $800 billion. And we still have another $500 billion of Tarp2 sitting in the wings and who knows how much the Democrats are going to spend bailing out the UAW Union and the auto industry but I doubt it will be less than another $100 billion.
Democrats may manage to increase our total national debt from about $10 trillion to 13 trillion. A 30% increase in one year with no end to the spending hemorrhaging in sight.
Fiscal conservatism is not something we have seen for a long time. I welcome the Republican Party's newly re-discovered adherence to this long abandoned principle and you should recall that 47% of Americans voted against Obama. That very significant minority deserves representation so if you think our Republican Senators should roll over you are just nuts. I don't recall Democrats rolling over for Bush. It looks like the honeymoon is just about over for big spending Democrats with only about 35% of the population approving of the PORKULOUS spending bill. Look for a backlash in 2010 because Democrats have over-reached.
...at the expense of our roads, bridges, dams, levees, and a major American city.
When did complaining about the level of hypocrisy in our officials become a bad thing?
Oh, trust me. We passed a trillion dollar deficit a long time ago. Thanks for that, Iraq War!
$780 billion. I'll let this slide; you probably just rounded up.
$350 billion, and it's still the same TARP money. The first part of this comment was credible, but now it's just getting ridiculous.
You mean the Big Three for making cars that no one wants to buy. Also, this leads me to assume that you accepted that $70/hr figure that auto workers supposedly earn. What auto workers actually make isn't even half of that. The correct answer? $29.
As for this paragraph, I can only headdesk and point you upthread to my reply to another comment that argued the same points without the tone that would've branded that poster a troll on another site. I know you weren't around for that wall of text, but it is a giant wall of text, and I'm not in a mood to repeat myself.
"...Seek any job; ask anyone out; pursue any goal. Don't take it personally when they say 'no' — they may not be smart enough to say 'yes.'"
-Keith Olbermann
As for this paragraph, I can only headdesk and point you upthread to my reply to another comment that argued the same points without the tone that would've branded that poster a troll on another site. I know you weren't around for that wall of text, but it is a giant wall of text, and I'm not in a mood to repeat myself.
I can only assume you're referring to the comment by Scraps of Former Sanity. What, exactly, was troll-like in her comment to you?
I also wanted to point out that this comment sort of implies that jackbenimble's response to you wasn't worth replying to, or that your own response to him didn't matter enough to take the time to write. Simply linking to your previous, similar response in the future helps you let people let you know your views without having to repeat yourself, and it doesn't give the impression that you're brushing them off.
"What a crazy random happenstance!"
Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog
Read my Blog!
...at the expense of our roads, bridges, dams, levees, and a major American city.
The Democrats had control of Congress for a very long time before that 6 year period. If the infrastructure fell apart that quick then the Democrats must have left it in pretty bad shape. There have been at least two massive highway spending bills since the mid-1990s. As for New Orleans, massive amounts of money were spent there before Katrina and much of it went into the pockets of the corrupt Louisiana and New Orleans political machine which was controlled by Democrats. And beyond that it is stupid to build a city in a hole below sea level and all the money we have spent since then has been a waste too because the disaster is inevitably going to happen again.
$780 billion.
There are two bills so far, one in the House and one in the Senate. It looks like you chose to pick the cheaper one. Maybe you have not hear the Senators talking about putting back the spending in Conference that they stripped out to achieve cloiture. Take a civics class and learn how our government works.
$350 billion, and it's still the same TARP money. The first part of this comment was credible, but now it's just getting ridiculous.
Since you decided to get insulting I will return the favor. You should pull your head out and start paying attention:
Our favorite tax evader and our new Secretary of Treasury has plans to spend vastly more money then just the remaining $350 million installment of Tarp 1. In the next go around he may be looking for another TRILLION to recapitalize the banks.
Stimulus Battle May Signal Tough Sell for Bank Rescue
You mean the Big Three for making cars that no one wants to buy. Also, this leads me to assume that you accepted that $70/hr figure that auto workers supposedly earn.
Yes those are exactly the ones that I mean. The Democrats are beholden to the UAW and regardless of whether or not anybody wants those cars, the Democrats will spend a huge amount of money to make the Unions happy. It may come in pieces but it will be close to a hundred billion before they are done.
And yes, I understand where the $70 hour comes from. Unlike you, I have a degree in economics and I have passed the CPA exam and worked as an accountant. When you add up all the costs of complying with union contracts including pensions, job banks, active workers, and gold plated health insurance and divide it by the number of hours worked it comes to a little over $70 per hour. When you do the same thing with the non-union Japanese plants in America it works out to well under $50 per hour.
comment that argued the same points without the tone that would've branded that poster a troll on another site.
I did see anything trollish about the other poster's comments but your tone throughout this thread was the kind of screed I would expect to find from the extreme far left haters over at Democratic Underground.
You know, even though the Democrats are the majority party right now, the Republicans still represent Americans who have the right to have their concerns voiced. Democracy is a beautiful thing about our country, and regardless of whether or not you agree with what they have to say, never ever tell them they should shut up. Explain to them why their wrong, but opposing voices should always have the right to speak in America.
RESPECT LIFE
SMILE EVERY DAY
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
We are now in a useless and counterintuitive war that increases our deficit by $1 trillion (not million, not billion, but trillion) annually.
You probably would not be quite so angry if you were working with actual facts.
I agree wih you that the war has been horribly expensive. And I agree that the Bush Administration badly "misunderestimated" the cost or flat-out deceived us. And I agree that the cost of the War is part of what is screwing up the economy now. It adds to the excessive deficit spending and borrowing that are at the root of the economic problem and which won't be fixed by even more deficit spending.
But most sources put the TOTAL (not annual) cost of the war to-date in the $600+ billion range. Here are a couple of examples and I think you will agree that these are not even close to being right-wing sources.
The War in Iraq Costs
The War in Iraq Costs
Some say that the eventual total cost may be as high as $1 to 3 trillion and I think these numbers are in the ballpark. That is the Total and not Annual Cost. Here is an examples from a credible source that is at the outside extreme of estimates.
The Iraq War Will Cost Us $3 Trillion
If you have a credible link which suggests the Iraq War is costing a trillion per year then please post it. I certainly don't remember Congress authorizing these kinds of expenditures. Otherwise you might want to correct your blog so you dont a) mis-inform peope and b) look like an uninformed idiot.