Thursday, August 06, 2009
|
|
Despite Obama's Troubles, National Security Conservatives Remain Mostly Silent
|
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
11:10 AM
|
I've got a piece up on why national security conservatives have been largely sidelined by Obama.
Here's an excerpt of why they might want to be concerned:
Other worried national security conservatives note that while social spending is increasing at alarming rates, Obama is looking for savings in the area of national defense. For example, conservatives noted the administration's recent zeal in ending the F-22 Raptor program, effectively cutting production on the world's most advanced tactical fighter. And according to a recent op-ed by Adm. Paul Rohrer, "the Congressional Research Service (CRS) announced . . . a much greater shortfall in Navy and Marine Corps strike fighters than was previously estimated. Last year, CRS predicted a shortfall of 125 Navy fighter jets by 2017. They now predict that the shortfall will more be more than 300 jets."
But defense cutbacks -- no matter how egregious or dangerous -- are not likely to provoke much outrage from the general public.
A recent Quinnipiac University poll shows Obama's approval numbers slipping to just 50 percent. Social conservatives and economic conservatives have contributed to these numbers, but national security conservatives have thus far remained relatively quiet. One wonders what would happen if the Reagan Coalition were to unite in opposition to the president's agenda.
Read the whole thing here.
|
|
|
...until the next attack on the US, of course, that being something weak spine'd Presidents invite. Then the adults will have to go out and make it all better while the kids cry and scream "Big meanie!" |
|
As I have said already Obama effective beat back the conservative military voices(neocons? Are we rebranding again?) during the election-He came at these people with staright ahead anti-war message and basically challeneged them to show how their plans had worked and all they could offer was time will judge us because none of our goals will be met before Bush leaves office.
These same "security conservatives" spent much of their politcal capital right off the bat expressing as much outrage as they could about closing gitmo-even Cheney got into the act after basically being a mime to the general public for four years. While they struggle on gitmo Obama and Gates had already enacted their plans to change the way we fight in afganistan and set withdraw dates in Iraq. By changing the overall War strategy Obama also changed the military budget priorities.
Besides those shiny new planes were hadly going to catch OBL or even counter the recent Russian Sub patrol of the East coast. They won't deter NK from getting nukes so really the cuts make sense and even some Neocons know they can't fight a policy battle they have already lost.
Minds like Kristol, Krauthammer, Hayes, Goldfarb, etc. have turned their focus more towards social issues as a way to rehabilitate their credibility which is a sound plan and so far has been most effective. |
|
"...until the next attack on the US, of course, that being something weak spine'd Presidents invite."
9/11. |
|
|
Congress just passed a defense budget that was loaded with things the Pentagon DIDN'T WANT or NEED. Whatever our problems, insufficient defense spending isn't one of them. |
|
|
Can't stop the nukes in NK, the nukes in Iran, shoo away the Russian subs 'cause, well, that's all so like, you know, confrontational? And that's just not cool. We need to engage in dialogue, man, show 'em all how really, really harmless we are and we really, really don't mean to make them feel all scared and stuff like Bush did and all those war mongers 'cause, you know, we're not like that, we're just not, you know? Pass the bong. |
|
|
Think 9/11 got started oh, say, the previous November? |
|
"Can't stop the nukes in NK, the nukes in Iran, shoo away the Russian subs 'cause, well, that's all so like, you know, confrontational? And that's just not cool. We need to engage in dialogue, man, show 'em all how really, really harmless we are and we really, really don't mean to make them feel all scared and stuff like Bush did."
Well, the Korean and Iranian nuclear programs all got off a a great running start under the Bush policy of "no contact, no negotiation." Maybe it's time to try something else. ANYTHING else. |
|
|
...what the President BEFORE Bush did, you know, concessions, giving them things. That worked pretty good, too. |
|
And what did Reagan do? What did Bush 41 do?
Do you even know?
How far back are we going on this issue? |
|
"Yeah, let's try
...what the President BEFORE Bush did, you know, concessions, giving them things. That worked pretty good, too."
Well, North Korea stopped its nuclear development when Clinton was president. Wasn't a perfect deal, of course.
But whatever Bush was doing clearly DIDN'T WORK, so it would be rational to eliminate his policy from any futre efforts. |
|
Oh, yeah, right, they had to pause for a few months while they incorporated the technology that Clinton gave them. 'Cause, you know, those nuke tests? Only takes a couple of weeks to throw one of those together. Sort of like the 9/11 attack, all completed and done in about 26 days.
Idiocy. |
|
gives Obama a 50% approval rating? Wow, with a 50% rating, he might actually win election like Bush did in 2001 and 2004.
Obama is the tortoise, folks, not the hare. He isn't an instant gratification guy. He wasn't supposed to win the Dem nomination. Keep underestimating him...you can see how well that kind of strategy has worked out so far. |
|
|
Seeing as how the biggest threat to the U.S. is coming from inside our own borders, it is safe to say that everyone's attention is diverted from foreign affairs at the moment. |
|
|
|
|
Actually, the Rasmussen poll is interesting, because it is the first negative spread yet at minus 2% as of 8/5. |
|
|
"Obama is the tortoise" I'm going to turn you in for that comment, where is that damn web address? |
|
"Obama is the tortoise, folks, not the hare. He isn't an instant gratification guy."
Huh? He's the ultimate instant gratification guy. He's the guy who has to have all of this done immediately - govenment health care, cap & tax, takeover of auto industry, banking industry, insurance industry.
That's your idea of a tortoise? |
|
[I've got a piece up on why national security conservatives have been largely sidelined by Obama.]
Mostly because he hasn't changed a darned thing.
He hasn't closed Gitmo, and his administration has continued to state that they believe he has the power to infinitely detain people, even if acquitted in whatever trials the administration permits.
He has continued the two current wars. He has continued to assert state's secrecy privilege to dismiss lawsuits aimed at finding out what our government did to people in our custody. He has impeded trials and release of people we don't have enough evidence to detain.
He increased defense spending, despite the brouhaha over the F22.
And he has continued the previous administration's policies of alternately talking about talking to Iran and/or NK and imposing sanctions on them depending on what time it is.
Despite his talk about reset buttons, he continues to believe in expanding NATO to include the Ukraine and Georgia and (per Biden) thinks that Russia's weakness at the moment will force them to accept that and a missile defense system.
National security conservatives have absolutely nothing to complain about, unless they're of the John Bolton "Bomb everything now" school.
|
|
|
that, like this predecessor, no real efforts have been made to secure ports and/or the border. |
|
wanting to enact your legislation is not hare-like. It is what presidents are supposed to do, particularly when one has a mandate as he did, 54% of the vote, huge EV vote (meaning the big states voted for him), and Congress held by his own party. I'm sorry that the GOP can't read faster.
Hillary underestimated Obama. McCain underestimated Obama. Even Krauthammer has suggested that the GOP is underestimating Obama. Whether you like it or not, he and his administration are quite able to communicate directly to the American people, and will use all means to so do. Doesn't it embarrass even you, Maine, when people stand up at these meetings and rail against 'socialized' or 'government run' healthcare, when they themselves are on Medicare, that people are so clueless, and these are the ones you think are on your side? The GOP has for years now somehow gotten lower middle class people, people who work hard for their money, to think that the GOP and its funding base care about them, when in fact it is the GOP tax cuts and other laws that allow corporations to close viable US companies and put millions out of work. It is amazing how that white identification thing, the 'illegals are bad and taking my job', etc, can be successfully used to get people to vote against their own best interests. |
|
"Oh, yeah, right, they had to pause for a few months while they incorporated the technology that Clinton gave them. 'Cause, you know, those nuke tests? Only takes a couple of weeks to throw one of those together. Sort of like the 9/11 attack, all completed and done in about 26 days. Idiocy."
You think the 9/11 attack took a month to plan and execute? You should read a newspaper or something every now and then, not rely on the internet.
And did I say Clinton's policy was perfect? Nope. But a pause of a few months was a few months longer than anything Bush accomplished. Whatever Bush did is what we should NOT be doing.
Victor Davis Hanson's next column will be about why the latest baseball steroid story is the clinching proof that we should bomb Iran. |
|
I understand that Obama wants to get his agenda passed quickly, as all presidents do, but I believe he's using fear tactics to do it. If we don't pass this stimulus plan right now the entire economy will collapse. If we don't pass this health care reform prior to the August recess the entire health care system will collapse.
It's interesting, however, that as people get more familiar with his plan - and make no mistake about it, as he has said himself, his ultimate goal is a single payer plan - the country's support erodes. Does that not concern you? It certainly concerns Obama.
And, no, I am not embarrassed by the reaction of everyday, ordinary Americans for speaking their minds during these townhall meetings. It's what we should be doing. Why would you suggest it is wrong for Americans to let their elected representatives know how they feel?
You obviously just have distain for the American people and think they are all too dumb to understand what's good for them. That's the mantra of your leaders - we know what kind of cars you should drive, where you should keep your thermostat, what health procedures you need. All you people are too stupid to make those decisions for yourselves so we, who are so much smarter than you, and know so much more of what's good for you, will make those decisions for you.
I'm not buying it, and apparently, that sentiment is growing. |
|
I know it's hard for you to follow a thread, but the "26 days" crack was a crack at Bob's crack that 9/11 occured under Bush's presidency. Take your time. Think it over.
Gotta ask ya- is delaying a problem the same as solving it? |
|
"I'm not buying it, and apparently, that sentiment is growing."
Not really. You don't leave your echo chamber. Everything that Obama has passed so far was 'doa' according to the right.
"Fear tactics"? You mean like saying that a universal health directive is the equivalent of euthanasia? Come now, Maine, not even you can say that the right isn't the fearmongering party with a straight face. I mean, the Patriot Act, even now, suggesting that closing Gitmo or leaving Iraq, or even talking to Korea, will make Americans 'less safe'. Fearmongering is a GOP trick, not a Dem one.
The economy is improving significantly enough that right wing pundits are now trying to scare people about 'inflation'. Obama has never said his ultimate goal is single payor...to the contrary, he is advocating a blended system, just as Medicare is blended into the private insurance system we have now. Will some folks who now choose not to have health insurance be fined if they don't get insurance? Of course, but this happens in auto insurance all the time. For most who are uninsured, they use the ER as their primary physician, and often stick the hospital with the bill. We all end up paying for that. So, a fine would likely still be less than the cost of health insurance, and clearly less than the cost of the actual care received.
I don't have disdain for the American public. I do think that people who rant against 'socialized' or 'government run' healthcare while they themselves are on it are either stupid, ignorant or both. I am embarrassed that they don't know what they already have (and refuse to give up, i.e. their 'entitlement') is what the president plans for those who wish to join a public sector plan.
|
|
|
I suggest you go to the Kaiser Family foundation site and review the plans and the myths. I know that most of those at the townhall meetings who are shouting down any dialogue (you see, I think an exchange of ideas is great, and very american, but shouting down your opponents is not american) don't care about free speech, they only care about defeating Obama. They are the troop soldiers, much like Code Pink, and should be ignored, much as the last administration ignored Code Pink. |
|
"Come now, Maine, not even you can say that the right isn't the fearmongering party with a straight face. I mean, the Patriot Act, even now, suggesting that closing Gitmo or leaving Iraq, or even talking to Korea, will make Americans 'less safe'. Fearmongering is a GOP trick, not a Dem one."
First off you are confusing "the right" with a party. I was, and still am, as angry at the GOP as with the Dems. Bush inflamed the fearmongering I'm talking about with TARP, so don't paint me with that brush.
"Obama has never said his ultimate goal is single payor..."
Are you saying his words on this clip were "doctored"?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-bY92mcOdk |
|
Part 1
This is long, but it is very enlightening and most of all - so very true. We have to be worried friends, because the big bad wolf (Barack -the communist Hitler worshipper- Hussein Obama wants our heads!
I have just received the e-mail below and at this moment, its being broadcast on Fox News. This should “raise the awareness and ire” of all “freedom loving” Americans and send a “collective” chill up they’re spines! It is the greatest threat to our Republic and Constitution, since their founding!
What Mr. Obama and his Democrat supporters in our country intend doing is “demonizing” free speech and protest (against any of their policies or proposed legislation)…just so long as it’s not one of their groups (like the Communist inspired organization ACORN). The methods and tactics they propose to ”combat” anyone…and I mean anyone, who would oppose their policies, is to gather all of the personal information of the individuals or groups who oppose them. This is clearly an outgrowth of the protests in Pennsylvania this week, booing Sen. Arlan Specter and Health Sec. Sebelius at a townhall meeting. As of today, the Whitehouse has a new e-mail address so that “citizens” can report dissidents, for the purposes of identifying those who oppose his policies!
Remember: During his campaign, Mr. Obama stated that he needed a “special police force”, other than our military, to “maintain order” in the United States, that answered directly to him. Stalin had one too (NKVD)…So did Hitler (Gestapo)!
|
|
This “new policy” on the part of Democrats and the Obama Administration, is right out of the “Lenin Doctrine”! A large part of this is the “informing” on anyone, particularly a neighbor who speaks out against anything the Democrats intend on doing or any program they want to put into place (like the National Healthcare Program or Cap and Tax). This is exactly how it worked in the Soviet Union for 70 years and the people were firmly under the “complete control” of the government and anyone who opposed them, even by stating an opinion, was promptly arrested, tortured and most simply disappeared and were never seen again! In Argentina this “Soviet model” was used extensively 30 years ago and 100’s of thousands disappeared, never to be seen again! Do we want that here?
It’s coming unless the people put a stop to it now! I say deal with it now or live with it forever. Remember: Once established, government policy is almost impossible to reverse! My mother told me as a child: “An once of prevention, is worth a pound of cure”.
In the Soviet Union, as in China, those informing were recognized as “good Communists” and rewarded, while those they turned in, were branded as “anarchists and traitors” and taken away to “re-education” (that means indefinite imprisonment)!
My friends, this threat is now come to fruition in our country and it’s up to you and I to put a stop to it…the “hammer and sickle” have come to
Part 2
America, in the form of Comrade Barrack Hussein Obama and his Democrat (Communist) cronies in the Congress!
This isn’t “idle chatter” from some “disaffected” American citizen. It’s a warning from someone who has studied history all of my life and have now seen the exact same circumstances “surface” in our country. Socrates said it best: “He who ignores history, is doomed to repeat it”!
|
|
Part 3
Personally, I don’t need a repeat of 70 years of debilitating and destructive Communism, as occurred in the Soviet Union, in my country, to know it “isn’t for me and my family”!
Mr. Obama also stated numerous times, even as recently as this week, that he would not raise taxes on the middle class (those making under $250,000.) This has proven to be a lie with the publishing of the Cap and Tax Bill, which raises taxes by $4,600 annually on every taxpaying household in the USA! (You’ll notice I stated “every taxpaying household”, because those parasites who will benefit from this legislation, report too little income or none at all (as in illegal alien workers) pay no tax what-so-ever! Moreover, in Mr. Obama’s National Healthcare Program the taxes on the middle class are staggering! If you haven’t read it…you’d better. It’s the “worst nightmare” you could dream possible for taxpayers…and Obama and the Democrats lied about it! Why do you think they tried to “force” the Bill through the Congress so fast?
I’m not sure what else could be said to “raise the awareness” of my fellow citizens, to thus inform them that we are looking Communism in American, “right in the face” at this very moment. The signs are as clear as day and the “handwriting is on the wall”!
When Mr. Obama and his Democrat Party allies have made statements that only one political party is needed in this country and anyone who object to their policies and speaks out about it, must be “identified and dealt with” as potential terrorists and anarchists, you should be very afraid!
|
|
Part 4
I most certainly expect a denial from Mr. Obama and his Democrat cronies very soon, but remember: Mr. Obama has not kept a single campaign promise he has made and he has lied repeatedly! Having watched and monitored their rhetoric and political posturing for a long time, I can say with absolute certainty they intend to have their “all controlling policies” in place, before the elections of 2010. I am also quite certain that they know if they do not accomplish it by that time, that huge numbers of Democrats will be thrown out of offices in the elections of 2010 and they’re not about to stand still for that (one has to only listen to the rhetoric of House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi!
|
|
a 6 year old quote? That's what you base your pov on? What is in the plan he proposes? That is what is at issue. He's a pragmatist, and understands the American people quite well. You can hang on 6 year old quotes, or you can read what the proposed changes are.
Maine, you seem like a thoughtful person, and I understand that many did not support Bush even if he was nominally a 'conservative'. However, to claim that Obama is using fear to accomplish his agenda is silly in comparison to how Bush used fear. |
|
Part 5
Even if you’re not inclined to believe the warning signs, just bear in mind: The Jews of Europe weren’t either and Hitler put 6 million of them to death, while in the Soviet Union, Stalin murdered 100 million dissenters! Read on! LB
Liberals seek to silence and demonize those who oppose their socialism
New poll shows those opposing ObamaCare are in the majority
August 5, 2009
Gary Bauer sent out a special alert yesterday concerning how the liberal politicians and liberal media outlets are seeking to silence those who are “speaking out” against “out of control spending” and the take over of vital industries. The liberals are upset that common citizens like you are exercising their right to free speech, and are using it to let the liberals know they have had enough and are going to let their voice be heard.
I urge you to get involved, stand up and speak out. Make the phone calls, send the e-mails, make the phone calls. Don't let the liberal left silence you! The future of our country and our children and grandchildren is at stake. The ugly name calling shows that your voices are being heard. Please keep it up!
Here is what Gary had to say:
"All over the country, normal citizens are exercising their God-given rights of assembly, free speech and dissent. It is important for elected members of Congress to hear from their constituents, and it is a healthy exercise for our democratic republic.
|
|
Part 6
"But the reaction from some in the media and political establishment has been very disturbing. It appears as though there is a coordinated effort to delegitimize public dissent, which strikes at the heart of our constitutional guarantee of free speech. Here is a sample of statements we have collected in the past 24 hours:
• "One member of Congress from Texas referred to his own constituents as "a mob," saying, "This mob...did not come just to be heard, but to deny others the right to be heard."
• "From the Democratic National Committee: "Republicans and their allied groups -- desperate after losing two consecutive elections and every major policy fight on Capitol Hill -- are inciting angry mobs of a small number of rabid right wing extremists funded by K Street Lobbyists to disrupt thoughtful discussions about the future of health care in America taking place in Congressional Districts across the country."
• "From a Virginia congressman: "When you look at the fervor of some of these people who are all being whipped up by the right-wing talking heads on Fox, to me, you’re crossing a line."
• "White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs: "I hope people will take a jaundiced eye to what is clearly the Astroturf nature of grass-roots lobbying. This is manufactured anger."
|
|
Part 7
• "CNN commentator and political strategist Donna Brazile: "They're renting organizers. The left has done it. Now they're doing it. This little small band of protesters are trying to stop members [of Congress] from doing their jobs."
"The same leftists who for years applauded when demonstrators took over the streets to protest the Iraq war, amnesty for illegal aliens or who attacked churches that supported marriage remaining between a man and woman, suddenly see a few hundred retirees, small businessmen, homemakers, farmers, sales clerks and just plain folks as evidence of 'rightwing extremism.'
"My friends, the Left believes that name-calling can intimidate you into silence. Don't cave! As an American, you have a right to express your views to the politicians who WORK FOR YOU, even if they don't like it.
"The fact is, you are in the majority now – not the leftists trying to push European socialism on you. The American people do not want government-run healthcare, as a new poll out today from Quinnipiac University shows. The poll found that '52 percent of American voters disapprove of the way [the president] is handling the health-care issue and 39 percent approve.' Here's more from the poll: By a whopping 72%-to-21% margin, voters don't believe healthcare reform will be paid for or be 'deficit neutral.' And by a 20-point margin, 57%-to-37%, voters say healthcare reform should be abandoned if it adds to the deficit.
|
|
....if Fox News is covering this.....
(Sorry Ronna....I can't help myself sometimes....) |
|
Finale
"By the way, the Washington, D.C., newspaper The Hill reported this weekend that labor unions and leftwing organizations "will spend between $10 million and $20 million this month to twist lawmakers' arms over the stalled healthcare reform effort in Congress" and the Employee Free Choice Act. So, ACORN, Big Labor and other groups can organize and protest in support of the liberal agenda, but how dare anyone speak up against it!
"My fear, given the stakes and emotions on both sides, is that union thugs, ACORN activists and leftwing anarchists (who ransacked the streets of Minneapolis and St. Paul during last year's Republican National Convention) will turn violent and innocent people will get hurt. If that happens, the radical Left will bear the responsibility for demonizing free speech."
Sincerely,
Donald E. Wildmon,
Founder and Chairman
American Family Association
|
|
***First off you are confusing "the right" with a party. I was, and still am, as angry at the GOP as with the Dems. Bush inflamed the fearmongering I'm talking about with TARP, so don't paint me with that brush.***
puh-leeze. step one in Camp Grown-up is taking moral ownership. I have no doubt that you do not agree with the Reeps down the line, but "I was, and still am, as angry at the GOP as with the Dems"? Get over yourself.. |
|
"a 6 year old quote? That's what you base your pov on? What is in the plan he proposes? That is what is at issue. He's a pragmatist, and understands the American people quite well. You can hang on 6 year old quotes, or you can read what the proposed changes are."
No, no. It's not the fact that the quote is from a few years ago, it's that he admits that a single payor system won't get done in one fell swoop. He invisions it may take a decade to run the insuance companies out of business. You are exactly right that he's a pragmatist. He's taking it one step at a time. He's ultimate goal, however, is to do away with health insurance companies.
And...you claimed he had never advoacated for it. I believe your exact quote was "Obama has never said his ultimate goal is single payor..." In my book, 6 years is not "never".
|
|
I'm relieved to see you're okay.
After you left our last discussion in mid-sentence, I thought you had either expired or gotten lost in your circular thoughts and wandered off into oblivion somewhere.
Welcome back. |
|
|
I noticed that typo too. it was actually a sentence that i had started to construct previously and which i had forgotten was there. i knew i did not have to make big deal about it, since it was inconsequential, and making a big deal about inconsequential things is more your speed. |
|
Pasting page after page of opinion up, with no attribution other than "Fox news is covering this" is an utter waste of everybody's time.
Here's a couple of clues:
Nobody is trying to stifle anybody's free speech. If you don't like something, you are totally free to say so.
Nobody is encouraging people to turn other people in.
Every organization larger than Sal's Pizza spends money on political positions they support. That's true of the unions and it's true of corporations. It's true of NOW and it's true of Operation Rescue.
Most importantly, you will get more people to pay attention to you if every day doesn't bring some new issue that you claim is destroying the republic. Lighten up. |
|
fight the Obama plan. If you lose, you lose. If you win, you win. I hope that if the Obama plan fails, the next step will be to undo Medicare and VA care immediately, and dump all the seniors and vets into the private system. Good luck with those pre-existing conditions.
That's only fair, right? |
|
Medicare, Medicaid and VA care all could use some changes.
I'm not saying that our health care system isn't in need of improvement. What I'm saying is that every time government comes in and tries to run an industry, it's a dismal failure - as we see with Medicare, Social Security, Postal Service, Amtrak........
My belief is those things would, and could, be better managed by the private sector.
I don't want government running every part of my life. |
|
"making a big deal about inconsequential things is more your speed."
Hey, that's MY turf! |
|
"Hey, that's MY turf!"
Have to admit. I liked that. |
|
yeah? well your belief is wrong. we know that government is inefficient and nasty, but after 30 years of free-market theology, we also know that it is stupid to turn the country over to the animal appetites of men.
so you are going to have to do better than say "government bad and private sector good." we need better definitions, because that piece of rhetoric has grown stale and stupid. |
|
"every time government comes in and tries to run an industry, it's a dismal failure - as we see with Medicare, Social Security, Postal Service, Amtrak........"
'dismal failure'. No, Maine, not even close. Some glitches, but private industry has failures all the time, and the way private industry has outsourced american jobs is sickening. USPS has lots of private competition. So you don't need to privatize it. Just like schools educate most students pretty well.
Do you get Medicare or social security? If you don't want government running your life, tell the govt. you want to opt out. Do you not get your mail? What other parts of 'your life' does the government 'run'? I mean, govt paves the streets, cleans the water, picks up the trash, polices the streets, puts out fires, runs the libraries, etc, etc, etc. And all done pretty well. |
|
defense and protection pretty well too.
|
|
"Have to admit. I liked that."
The period after "admit" should have been a comma. |
|
The first parts are personal opinions, then ther's an email I recieved from a friend with his input on the subject. Last but not least, at the bottom of the article is the name and address of this man, to the original article to whom the emailer was referring
Sincerely,
Donald E. Wildmon,
Founder and Chairman
American Family Association
_________________________________
So you see, Vladimir, this was not just something that I said FOX aired. It might behoove you to read something in it's entirety before you slam it for being something it isn't. |
|
"Do you get Medicare or social security? If you don't want government running your life, tell the govt. you want to opt out."
I do not, yet, and the way those are run they'll probably both be bankrupt before I do. Tell the government I want to opt out? I can do that? Do you realize how many of us would gladly do exactly that if allowed?
"Do you not get your mail?"
I do, but how many billions of dollars does the postal service lose a year? You call that successful?
"What other parts of 'your life' does the government 'run'? I mean, govt paves the streets, cleans the water, picks up the trash, polices the streets, puts out fires, runs the libraries, etc, etc, etc. And all done pretty well."
I haven't said there is no role for government. They should police our streets and keep us safe. They should maintain interstate highways. The govt picks up your trash?
I don't want government owning and running car companies, banks, insurance companies, telling me what car I should drive, what light bulb I can use in my home, how high I can adjust my thermostat, what doctor I can see and what medical procedure I need. The list can go on and on.
You can always find private companies you can point to which have not done the best of jobs as well, but the more you allow private industry and competition to prevail, with limiting government intervention, the better our country will be. |
|
***I don't want government owning and running car companies, banks, insurance companies, telling me what car I should drive, what light bulb I can use in my home, how high I can adjust my thermostat, what doctor I can see and what medical procedure I need. The list can go on and on.***
no one wants the government doing these things. that is not the point.
when companies fail--much less engage in fraud or flimflam--there are costs absorbed by the broader community. who is going to make good? shareholders?! hell no. these "heroic risk-takers" are liable only to the extent of what they have ponied up, regardless of the liabilities incurred by the company they own. When companies fail, creditors, employees, suppliers, customers, and taxpayers are left holding the bag. So basically, under free-market theology (and theology is exactly what it is--cause it sure ain't sensible economics), the upside is privatized and the downside is socialized. that is a raw frigging deal. It makes sense that the public, acting through their duly elected representatives, would balance the scales some, even if it adds a stratum or two of inefficiency.
again, this is democratic capitalism. no one wants the government with its paws in everything. but some of us are not simply willing to turn over vast arenas of human activity to the tender mercies and providential kindness of the invisible hand. the theology of markets is simple. it is clear. but it does not work. Life is a little more complex than what we learned in the microeconomics class. there are distortions and frictions and extraeconomic realities that nullify the pleasant little market-clearing symmetries of Adam Smith (with all due respect to that genuine giant). There is sin and nastiness and larceny in the heart. Was a time when conservatives knew this. Now we are saddled with "free-market" utopians calling themselves "conservatives." We tried it. It failed. |
|
Sorry I couldn't engage you last night in this discussion. I was busy with the Sox-Yankees - and after enduring the beating wasn't in a frame of mind to follow your mumbo jumbo.
"when companies fail--much less engage in fraud or flimflam--there are costs absorbed by the broader community. who is going to make good?"
That's what the free market is all about. Yes, companies, and individuals fail- sometimes multiple times. I have failed myself, been downsized 3 times. Failure only opens up an opportunity for the next success. It's a very important element to growth and learning.
Too many, however, rely on the safety net of government to assure there is no failure. That impedes the learning and growth that breeds success. Failure doesn't mean the end. We can recover from failure and try again - not resort to that victimhood embraced by the left that says you can't do it, that the deck is stacked against you.
"no one wants the government with its paws in everything."
You would do well to educate yourself a bit on what your dear leader and his minions want. Such statements really make your ignorance apparent. |
|
sorry about your sox. The senior circuit's finest team won with a walk-off HR last night. as for the Yankees, my mystic sentiments tell me there is a new Babe Ruth curse in effect--for abandoning the House that Ruth Built. We'll see. Maybe they'll be the next AL team with a 90 year drought. Them and Cleveland, of course. Don't know what can be done with that sorryass franchise.
I always thought the suffering of Boston baseball fans was overrated. Chicago had it worse, in both leagues. Whatever.
with ref. to your post, my mother always taught me that complex truth--or mumbo jumbo, as you call it--is preferable to false clarity. your mom didn't do the same? I am sorry about that. it is all about striking the proper balance with moral hazard, no doubt.
my post, to break it down, had to do with entrepreneurial activity. The theology of you market utopians is that the entrepreneur is some kind of risk-taking hero who creates jobs and wealth as he goes. so you protect him, by limiting his downside risk and passing those losses on to his employees, creditors, suppliers, customers, and to taxpayers. that's fine. I agree that the entrepreneur is the organic engine of growth--the spearhead of economic evolution, as Schumpeter put it. My point is that the entreprenuer is not the only valuable economic agent, and that policy must also be built around protecting the working stiff--the employee, the regular citizen. While the entrepreneur is working 24/7, the working guy is taking care of his family, coaching at little league, teaching bible study on Weds. night, serving on the PTA board. That guy needs a net too, and no less than the entrepreneurial hustler.
In the end, your principles are platitudinal. I'd like to see more rubber hitting the road. I don't see any thought behind the innocuous truisms. moral hazard? sure. Victimized mindsights. absolutely. That's not the point, tho. |
|
This phony writes at 8:56 AM over on the "Fishy Videos" thread,
"paranoia and ridiculousness...
...okay. its time for this grownup to get to work. the flimflam and moral laziness in these parts is pretty contemptible, i must say."
However, she proves that she either has NO job, nor is a "grownup" in posting more and more ever since the 8:56 AM finger waggin' at all you OTHER lazy people.
Laziness to her is a very subjective concept---one which never includes her nonsense.
|
|
You sell the "working stiff" short. I worked most of my life as a "working stiff". I was layed off in 1985 - went back to school and got a degree. Downsized in 1996 - went out, beat the brush and found a better job. Downsized again in 2004. Started my own small business and now employee about 30 "working stiffs".
I know you think I am something great but I'm really not anything special. If I can do it with no governmnet assistance nearly anyone can.
It's like learning how to ride a bike. A child can ride it well as long as his dad is running alongside holding it up, but thinks if dad let's go there's no way he can ride. Once dad let's go, unbeknownst to the child, the child rides off on his own. See, a real dad let's go, our government "daddy" just can't seem to.
The "working stiff" can, and will take care of himself if we can get that gov't "dad" to let go and allow it to happen. Will he tip over occasionally and skin his knee? Sure, but he'll get back on and away he'll go. Just get the government the hell out of the way. It'll make us all more responsible and stronger in the long run. |
|
|
|