The danger for the administration is that, historically, the American electorate has moved away from one-party control of government to two-party splits. This happened to the Bushies, eventually it will happen to Obama.
The Republicans either are really angry, or they are playing a destructive political game. They may be hoping the recession/depression worsens and continues, and then planning to blame it all on the democrats, and boast they could have done a better job. It's non-participatory and irresponsible.
January 30, 2009 11:23 AM
Anonymous said...
Actually, the Republicans aren't trying to undermine the stimulus, they'd like more of it.
They're opposed to the enormous cost of the non-stimulus parts of the program. Those costs are not insignificant and not temporary. They will be the baseline for spending for years to come.
If the Democrats want to be bi-partisan, they don't have to change a thing. They just need to split the bill between things with a stimulative purpose and things that don't have that purpose and allow seperate votes.
What's the big gripe about Republicans anyway? The bills passed. The Democrats also apparently think there should be no dissent.
Even the Washington Post, who would generally be expected to agree with most of the non-stimulus parts of the bill, agrees that the non-stimulus portions of the bill should be seperated and debated in Congress seperately and not rushed through.
Backfire? Short-term, it looks like Sen. Kerry is the Democrats' own worst enemy. He's talking about eliminating the AMT patch that has already been brokered?
Go ahead, make our day. When tens of millions of middle income Americans start getting hit with AMT, we'll see who is subject to a backfire.
Hoover made two mistakes in a bad recession. Raising taxes and protectionism. The result was the Great Depression. AMT creep amounts to a tax increase that will dampen any recovery. Foreign governments are already threatening a trade war over the the America-only purchasing policy of the enormous stimulus package.
How ironic that as soon as the Democrats get control of Washington, they do the same thing Hoover did to cause the Depression.
January 30, 2009 11:38 AM
Anonymous said...
I'm a Republican, and, like you said, we're irrelevant now. Republicans are thrilled that their Congressmen didn't vote for the stimulus package, the Democrats are happy that their members voted for it. Everyone's happy.
It's a win-win situation! Everyone got the Congressional votes that they wanted! HOORAY!!
I defended Obama's choice of Rick Warren to give the prayer at the inauguration, I do believe it is wise to include all segments of society in the new administration, but that doesn't mean the Democrats need to compromise their principles.
Nor should they...on this you and I are in complete agreement. And when Republicans are back in power I hope you will recall your own words.
It's not like the Republicans can recover from the failure of two terms of George W. Bush by being even more pig-headed than they were. If they want to be part of America's future they're going to have to participate in the process. They've been invited but if they don't want to take part in governing the country, well, nobody will miss them.
Wow Jim, I sure hope the Democrats do not express these sentiments too openly as this would likely be too good an opening for conservative Republicans.
I did not vote for McCain for one very important reason - by putting his name on the single greatest violation of the right of free speech, that being the infamous McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act, he presented himself as someone not serious enough to defend any principle, much less the Bill of Rights. As for Bush, Jr., the legacy he may very well be remembered for is that aside from a bungled military operation in Iraq, he ran up the public debt to a degree that would make LBJ blush.
When the Republican Party again establishes themselves as a political party based on the principle of limited government then they have a chance of making a come-back. Otherwise, many conservatives will simply sit on the sidelines and watch the Democrats promise every sort of variation of political salvation.
You certainly don't need to make promises to these guys if they're only going to undermine you no matter what. You give them a chance and if they don't want to play you go ahead without them.
Now that's the spirit...lol.
A lot of people are feeling that the Republicans have become irrelevant, and this vote on the economy does make you see that.
That is ok though since what has transpired with Geithner and Daschle will likely happen again, I think Democrats ought to be careful not to over-extend themselves. But hey, what do I know?
This is a time for strong leadership, a strong government to get the country back on its feet, and if they're only going to undermine our leadership and weaken our government, then why would anybody care what they want?
While that question is rigged in favor of a particular political ideology, I think it is revealing and exposes a certain weakness, not to mention hubris.
When enough voters understand that a strong leader and government can come at the price of freedom and ordered liberty then perhaps they will take notice. What might help this along? Oh, a disenchantment with the results of a messianic vision of politics, as just enough voters come to the realization that if they are seeking genuine salvation they are more likely to find it by going to church, as opposed to placing all of their hopes in the arm of flesh.
I'm no political expert, but it looks to me like the best the new President can do is to unite the American people, and let the Republican politicians implode into their own private pity-party, disconnected from the real world. Maybe a new political group will emerge to represent the wishes and opinions of conservative Americans in an effective way.
If Republicans marginalize us social conservatives then you can bet they will implode. On the other hand, if they smarten up and present issues, such as limited government that once again takes seriously the idea of personal responsibility then they have a fighting chance. If not, then they deserve to disappear.
January 31, 2009 1:25 AM
Anonymous said...
Orin,
EXCELLENT post! Republicans in the House stood up for conservatives when they said "no" to this ludicrous "stimulus" package. You are correct that if the Republicans don't stand up for conservative principles, then the party will fail -- and deservedly so.
January 31, 2009 10:56 PM
It looks to me like the Republicans might have shot themselves through the heart this time. President Obama did everything to negotiate with them and compromise on a stimulus package to save the economy, and after the Democrats had watered it down to win their approval the House Republicans banded together, as they have done for years, and voted against the bill. Every single Republican Congressman voted against it. Rather than thinking for themselves, rather than promoting something that would be good for the economy, rather than negotiating something they liked, they did what they could to ensure that this administration fails. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said she didn’t come to Washington to be “bipartisan”, one day after shuttling through an $819 economic stimulus bill without a single Republican vote.
“I didn’t come here to be partisan, I didn’t come here to be bipartisan,” Pelosi told reporters at her weekly press conference. “I came here, as did my colleagues, to be nonpartisan, to work for the American people, to do what is in their interest.”
Pelosi expressed no regrets over passing the stimulus measure without any GOP support. Republicans followed their leaders in objecting to the bill on the grounds that it was put together without GOP input, and that it would not do enough to stimulate the economy.
Repeating the term “nonpartisan” on more than one occasion in describing the bill, the Speaker said her goal was to put President Obama’s vision on paper for the good of the country regardless of the type of support it garnered.
“The president’s agenda is reflected in this legislation,” the Speaker said. “People vote for what they believe in. Clearly, Republicans did not believe in [that] agenda … I think they probably voted their conscience.” Pelosi dismisses need for bipartisanship Obama is trying to be nice to the Republicans, I hear he invited them to the White House for drinks, but if they choose not to play ball, the Democrats have the Presidency and majorities in both houses of Congress, they can go ahead without them. There's really nothing to be gained by being nice.
I defended Obama's choice of Rick Warren to give the prayer at the inauguration, I do believe it is wise to include all segments of society in the new administration, but that doesn't mean the Democrats need to compromise their principles. You certainly don't need to make promises to these guys if they're only going to undermine you no matter what. You give them a chance and if they don't want to play you go ahead without them.
It's not like the Republicans can recover from the failure of two terms of George W. Bush by being even more pig-headed than they were. If they want to be part of America's future they're going to have to participate in the process. They've been invited but if they don't want to take part in governing the country, well, nobody will miss them.
Here's John Kerry, speaking my mind: Sen. John Kerry says Democrats should ignore Republicans’ demands about the stimulus plan if they’re going to vote against it anyway.
Reacting to Wednesday night’s vote in the House — where not a single GOP member supported the stimulus package — Kerry told Politico that “if Republicans aren’t prepared to vote for it, I don’t think we should be giving up things, where I think the money can be spent more effectively.”
“If they’re not going to vote for it, let’s go with a plan that we think is going to work.”
The Massachusetts Democrat and 2004 presidential candidate suggested tossing some of the tax provisions in the stimulus that the GOP requested. “Those aren’t job creators immediately, and even in the longer term they’re not necessarily. We’ve seen that policy for the last eight years,” he said. A lot of people are feeling that the Republicans have become irrelevant, and this vote on the economy does make you see that. This is a time for strong leadership, a strong government to get the country back on its feet, and if they're only going to undermine our leadership and weaken our government, then why would anybody care what they want?
I'm no political expert, but it looks to me like the best the new President can do is to unite the American people, and let the Republican politicians implode into their own private pity-party, disconnected from the real world. Maybe a new political group will emerge to represent the wishes and opinions of conservative Americans in an effective way.
"Republican Attempt to Undermine Stimulus Is Backfiring"
5 Comments -
The danger for the administration is that, historically, the American electorate has moved away from one-party control of government to two-party splits. This happened to the Bushies, eventually it will happen to Obama.
The Republicans either are really angry, or they are playing a destructive political game. They may be hoping the recession/depression worsens and continues, and then planning to blame it all on the democrats, and boast they could have done a better job. It's non-participatory and irresponsible.
January 30, 2009 11:23 AM
Actually, the Republicans aren't trying to undermine the stimulus, they'd like more of it.
They're opposed to the enormous cost of the non-stimulus parts of the program. Those costs are not insignificant and not temporary. They will be the baseline for spending for years to come.
If the Democrats want to be bi-partisan, they don't have to change a thing. They just need to split the bill between things with a stimulative purpose and things that don't have that purpose and allow seperate votes.
What's the big gripe about Republicans anyway? The bills passed. The Democrats also apparently think there should be no dissent.
Even the Washington Post, who would generally be expected to agree with most of the non-stimulus parts of the bill, agrees that the non-stimulus portions of the bill should be seperated and debated in Congress seperately and not rushed through.
Backfire? Short-term, it looks like Sen. Kerry is the Democrats' own worst enemy. He's talking about eliminating the AMT patch that has already been brokered?
Go ahead, make our day. When tens of millions of middle income Americans start getting hit with AMT, we'll see who is subject to a backfire.
Hoover made two mistakes in a bad recession. Raising taxes and protectionism. The result was the Great Depression. AMT creep amounts to a tax increase that will dampen any recovery. Foreign governments are already threatening a trade war over the the America-only purchasing policy of the enormous stimulus package.
How ironic that as soon as the Democrats get control of Washington, they do the same thing Hoover did to cause the Depression.
January 30, 2009 11:38 AM
I'm a Republican, and, like you said, we're irrelevant now. Republicans are thrilled that their Congressmen didn't vote for the stimulus package, the Democrats are happy that their members voted for it. Everyone's happy.
It's a win-win situation! Everyone got the Congressional votes that they wanted! HOORAY!!
Why complain, Jim?
January 30, 2009 12:00 PM
Jim writes,
I defended Obama's choice of Rick Warren to give the prayer at the inauguration, I do believe it is wise to include all segments of society in the new administration, but that doesn't mean the Democrats need to compromise their principles.
Nor should they...on this you and I are in complete agreement. And when Republicans are back in power I hope you will recall your own words.
It's not like the Republicans can recover from the failure of two terms of George W. Bush by being even more pig-headed than they were. If they want to be part of America's future they're going to have to participate in the process. They've been invited but if they don't want to take part in governing the country, well, nobody will miss them.
Wow Jim, I sure hope the Democrats do not express these sentiments too openly as this would likely be too good an opening for conservative Republicans.
I did not vote for McCain for one very important reason - by putting his name on the single greatest violation of the right of free speech, that being the infamous McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act, he presented himself as someone not serious enough to defend any principle, much less the Bill of Rights. As for Bush, Jr., the legacy he may very well be remembered for is that aside from a bungled military operation in Iraq, he ran up the public debt to a degree that would make LBJ blush.
When the Republican Party again establishes themselves as a political party based on the principle of limited government then they have a chance of making a come-back. Otherwise, many conservatives will simply sit on the sidelines and watch the Democrats promise every sort of variation of political salvation.
You certainly don't need to make promises to these guys if they're only going to undermine you no matter what. You give them a chance and if they don't want to play you go ahead without them.
Now that's the spirit...lol.
A lot of people are feeling that the Republicans have become irrelevant, and this vote on the economy does make you see that.
That is ok though since what has transpired with Geithner and Daschle will likely happen again, I think Democrats ought to be careful not to over-extend themselves. But hey, what do I know?
This is a time for strong leadership, a strong government to get the country back on its feet, and if they're only going to undermine our leadership and weaken our government, then why would anybody care what they want?
While that question is rigged in favor of a particular political ideology, I think it is revealing and exposes a certain weakness, not to mention hubris.
When enough voters understand that a strong leader and government can come at the price of freedom and ordered liberty then perhaps they will take notice. What might help this along? Oh, a disenchantment with the results of a messianic vision of politics, as just enough voters come to the realization that if they are seeking genuine salvation they are more likely to find it by going to church, as opposed to placing all of their hopes in the arm of flesh.
I'm no political expert, but it looks to me like the best the new President can do is to unite the American people, and let the Republican politicians implode into their own private pity-party, disconnected from the real world. Maybe a new political group will emerge to represent the wishes and opinions of conservative Americans in an effective way.
If Republicans marginalize us social conservatives then you can bet they will implode. On the other hand, if they smarten up and present issues, such as limited government that once again takes seriously the idea of personal responsibility then they have a fighting chance. If not, then they deserve to disappear.
January 31, 2009 1:25 AM
Orin,
EXCELLENT post! Republicans in the House stood up for conservatives when they said "no" to this ludicrous "stimulus" package. You are correct that if the Republicans don't stand up for conservative principles, then the party will fail -- and deservedly so.
January 31, 2009 10:56 PM