Random comments:
1) What's a proper 13th anniversary present? Tradition dictates that a present for a 13th anniversary is lace. Is the present for a 14th anniversary Leather? Who wrote these rules, Don Henley and Steve Nicks?
I have a better idea....
MONDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL!
Now, how do I convince Janice of this idea - our 13th anniversary night (November 16) should be spent freezing in Cleveland watching MNF against the Ravens?
2) So, after all the whining last year about West Coast teams coming to the East and playing a 1:00 game....and their record being 1-15 or something......
San Diego comes to Cleveland on December 6.
And the game is schedule for a 4:05 start. Why? Give us the win, for God's sake, and start the game at 1:00. There's no reason for a 4:05 start. It's not a doubleheader week for CBS (else it would have been a 4:15 start).
3) The Jackets drew the Red Wings for the first round. Ugh. Would have preferred San Jose to Detroit. I originally wanted the #6 seed, but Vancouver (#3) is red hot and Detroi has not been stellar down the stretch. Columbus is +500 to win the series -wager $10 to win $50 if the Jackets prevail! You can still get the wager in!
4) Tea parties: Love the idea. I think the grass-rooted-ness of this movement is healthy. (These are the tea parties that occurred today across the nation - and for any of you that want to argue that Fox/Rush/Glenn Beck set these up, well, you haven't been paying attention the past few months. There have been similar rallies all over the place since the 2nd bailout; they just haven't occurred all on the same day).
I think the lack of fiscal discipline that we have seen in Washington over the past couple of years - both parties - have struck a chord. Just look at the bailout debate we had on this blog last fall. It seems wrong. Why are we rewarding that behavior? And the continued bailout and spending that we have seen this year is an extension of the entitlement attitude.
I think this will manifest itself in the 2010 elections. The Republicans better capitalize on this by finally turing their party over to the less-government, libertarian wing....and this means less government on the social side, too. The only way the Republicans can shape this movement into a tidal wave is to talk the talk of lower government, but also walk the walk by extending that limited government philosophy into all areas on policy - especially on social issues. That will truly send a message to independents that the party is changing.
9 comments:
I'm trying to wrap my head around these tea parties. On the one hand, I get the anger about government spending and the money going towards bailouts of failing companies. (Although, where was this public display of furiousness during the last 8 years? It was overspending and lax policies during the Bush administration that got us here, but the hatred is clearly directed at Obama's attempts to fix things.)
Anyway...there is a valid argument to be had about whether the administration and treasury are taking the right course of action, and if the protests were focused here I would take them more seriously
But, the demonstrations were riddled with cuckoos. Watching coverage last night, I saw:
- signs comparing Obama to Hitler (ironically, with neo-Nazis and white supremacists holding racist signs just a few feet away)
- calls for armed uprisings (!) against the government (which of course is promoted as a viable option by Fox News correspondents)
- accusations that Obama is a "fascist", "socialist", and "communist" (can you be a fascist and a communist at the same time?)
-Joe the Plumber suggesting that saying "In God We Trust” will get you shot at in some parts of the country. Um, really? Where, exactly?
Needless to say, the message is a little muddled.
So, the question is, how does the Republican party make sure that the "fringe" doesn't become the face of the party? How do you hold a serious discussion about government priorities without it becoming a side show for every racist and religious extremist in town? If you make a move towards libertarianism you will lose the religious right. How can you win without their vote? And are the Republicans now in the position of hoping the economy tanks in order to have a chance at any future election?
Go Red Wings!
Interesting points. My thoughts...
It is impossible to have public rallies such as this without your extremist wackos showing up. It happens at liberal & conservative gatherings. I can't defend either.
The Bush administration spending was bad, although not as bad as the Obama plans. It's hard to hold a revolt in your party against a sitting President. I think you're seeing the Republican party trying to refocus themselves. They got away from their core ideals and they have paid the price in recent elections.
I, for one, don't really give a damn about most of the social aspects of the Republican party. I'm definitely more Libertarian when it comes to social issues. Rush would probably call me "Country Club Conservative." Which I'm fine with. I'm not sure how much the party stands to lose by moving away from the religious right. What is their voting alternative? The atheist left?
What bugs me the most about the spending of the Obama administration is what a thinly veiled attempt it is to cram a liberal agenda down our throats by using the economy as an excuse. Health care, alternative energy, and education have very little to do with the current problems. They certainly are not creating jobs, and the Pelosi penned "Stimulus Bill" did even less. That is where a lot of people's outrage is coming from.
I'm not hoping the economy tanks because of the liberal policies. In the long run, I know they will hurt this economy & country. What I do fear, is that in the short terms things get better just because they can't get much worse & the Democrats use that as an opportunity to implement more of their terrible agenda, and by the time it all starts to fail, it is too late to reverse.
4micah-Why do you think that health care and energy policy aren't part of the economic problem? The amount that a middle-class family spends on healthcare has risen over the last 20 years to 7% of total income. Mine went up 12% last year! When people have to spend more on healthcare, they have less to spend on the non-essentials that fuel the economy. What do you think happens to businesses and the people they employ when people cut back spending on clothes, homegoods, electronics, etc.? Same thing goes with the increasing price of gas and electric utilities-those cut into family budgets as well. These expenses are all connected and sticking with the status quo is not a viable solution. Once again, what is the Republican PLAN?? Doing nothing and obstructing in the face of a huge mess is not a plan-that's sticking one's head in the sand.
I don't think Obama is attempting to veil his plans at all. He campaigned on them and got elected by a majority of the country-why wouldn't he pursue them openly?
And if I had seen ONE sign with Bush's picture on it in the sea of anti-Obama signs I may have be persuaded to think it was something other than sour grapes.
He campaigned on them yes, but he now portrays them as the answer to our economic woes, which any economist will tell you, is not the case. They are long term projects that he's trying to use the current environment to get implemented immediately. As Rahm Emmaunuel said, you can't let a good crisis like this go to waste.
As far as healthcare is concerned, I agree that it is a problem, what I don't agree with is that the government is the answer. Outsourcing the free market to the government NEVER works. It will only make it less efficient, and lower quality. If I want & can afford quality health care, I should be able to pay for & get it. If your poor & can't afford health care, get a better job or work more hours. That's the American way. Giving things to people only incentivizes them to do less.
As far as my Republican answer to the the health care issue, we must find a way to control the ridiculous litigation in this country. That is what is driving up health care costs. Doctors can't even practice certain specialties because the mal practice insurance is so high. Limit the ridiculous law suits, and you'll bring down health care costs substantially.
A little late to the game here, but a couple of comments.
We had a "Tax Revolt Party" here in Orange County about one month ago due to California State Senate and Congress passing the budget that would put in place temparary tax increases. The only reason why this passed was because the republican governor and the republican congressman rolled over. There was such outrage from the people in OC that they were having a protest to show their disproval of Republicans that were supposed to protect us against such tax increases.
So about 15,000 people showed up to this rally, that was put on by the conservative talk show KFI and it was not even covered by any of the news stations or the LA Times. Why? Because it was a bunch of people who were protesting against both sides and it wasn't very interesting.
Now the Dems want to make the temp tax increase perminate, which is sending this anger in OC into a full blown rage, but that is another story for another time.
So now we get this national tea party, which doesn't really make sense since our Federal Taxes haven't even increased yet and for most of us they won't. Yes any idiot can see that they probably will, but we knew that well before the bailout even started so why now?
So the networks spin this in such a manner to get some legs out of it and call it racial and such, and this in turns infuriates the republicans even more and it turns into this terrible cycle and everyone losses the true intent of the protests and it goes back to how bias the media has become.
I'm starting to think that all the networks want to do is divide the country even more so they have something to report on. Its becoming extremely disgusting.
You know I was just reading an article about how a small bank was repaying back their TARP money today because they said it wasn't fair on how the government changed the rules on them after they received the money. They didn't like how they were being vilified by congress. So they repayed the loan. Is this a bad thing? Thank you for returning the money that you probably should not of received in the first place!! Would this happen under Bush?
I'm too tired to respond to all the points, but I can't let this comment from Laura pass:
And if I had seen ONE sign with Bush's picture on it in the sea of anti-Obama signs I may have be persuaded to think it was something other than sour grapes.
Um, I don't have a picutre, but three eyewitenss stories:
http://www.bobkrumm.com/blog/?p=2247 - where the quote in here is: A sign near the center of the crowd summed up the sentiment succinctly: Above side-by-side pictures of President Bush and President Obama were the words “Dumb & Dumber”.
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-tea-party-republicans-should-not-be-rejoicing-quite-yet/2/
" Many protesters went out of their way to say they are upset with both parties and hold George W. Bush equally responsible for launching the now never-ending stream of bailouts. "
and
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/04/15/california-tea-party-to-california-gop-smackdown/
"Massive boos from the crowd of thousands here against the Calif. GOP establishment."
Why didn't these get play? Because it doesn't fit the narrative. These are supposendly angry, white, racist conservatives mad at Obama - and should be portrayed as such. See CNN and MSNBC's coverage, where teabagging jokes were made all day. They really miss the fact that this was a bi-partisan (or, maybe correctly, non-partisan) rally agaisnt taxes and spending.
Litigation reform will help, but that won't eliminate the burden that the uninsured place on the rest of us. We pay for their care, they increase wait times in emergency rooms, and keep specialists from participating in emergency care (which means you won't see a neurologist when you come in with a massive headache or a gastroenterologist when you are crippled over with stomach pain-aka you will likely get incorrect diagnosis and treatment). Of course, this is also an immigration issue. How many of the uninsured don't even belong here in the first place? This is especially a problem here in Maryland where we so considerately give illegal immigrants drivers licenses and refuse to check the immigration status of criminals upon their arrest. Maybe this is the place to start for comprehensive health insurance reform...
Back to Obama, his health plan is highly misunderstood because most Republicans equate universal healthcare to socialized medicine. This is not what he proposes, as far as I understand. If you have health insurance you can keep it. If you don't have it you get options that are negotiated by the government. It's just like Medicare-you can always add extra coverage if you're rich. The gov't does not become a health insurance provider-it's simply the negotiator of rates with existing companies. I have no problem with this since it's exactly what the government already does for its employees (me). It's not free -I still pay a percentage - and I would love my rates to drop the projected $2500/year. I doubt I'll be paying that much extra in taxes annually to cover this program...
Anyway, I can always tell when I've got something right because Eric becomes "too tired" to respond. ;)
Laura, a few comments:
1) I understand your first point - the "tea parties" last week really isn't about taxes, per se...it's about out of control spending - and ignorant spending. By ignorant, I mean Congress are spedning $780 Billion without even reading what is in the bill. That is sickening.
So the tea parties could have done better in focusing on the "spending" issues, rather than the "tax" "increases" - which has not happened yet.
2) Laua, you need to get over the "cuckoos" present at every protest. I mean, really...do you see who shows up at some liberal/anti-War protests? Do you think NAMBLA is a good representative for the anti-War-in-Iraq movement?
3) You ask: "Where was this public display of furiousness during the last 8 years?"
It was obvious, Laura - it manifested itself at the ballot box in November 2006 and 2008. These people made their anger "public" by refusing to support Republican candidates those years - either by staying home or voting D (or Green).
Losing this block was a death blow to the Republican party.
4) Just a quick point of order:
"Doing nothing and obstructing in the face of a mess is not a plan"
Um, yes it is. The status quo is ALWAYS an option. If the status quo - however bad it really is - is preferable than any proposed changes, then people should support the status quo.
This is why we got into this bailout mess in the first place. In September last year, when the market was tanking - the leaders panicked and said "we have to do SOMETHING! ANYTHING!!!"
Really? Did we?
People like us - on this blog! - stopped and thought about this. What are benefits? What are consequences?
But no one in leadership - Bush, Pelosi, McCain, Obama - did that. The default choice for all of them was "Action! Action Now!" People fell for the falsehood that action is preferable to nothing.
And now, look where we are. We now are telling GM who to hire as a CEO. Is this truly what we want?
Don't take this as a personal endorsement of the R's straetegy on health care - but doing nothing, if well articulated, is certainly a viable plan.
(and the current plan (if any) as put forth by the R's is not well articulated...)
Post a Comment