Posts
There are increasing signals that the Washington Democratic establishment is over it's honeymoon with President Obama. Even some in the admittedly left wing media are starting to question his general handling of things. His staff is getting slightly defensive. All of this is despite the fact the he remains popular with the public. However, that public opinion moves slowly is a double edged sword. While they may be slow to turn on the new President, they will also be slow to embrace him again if his luster fades.
Indeed, one of the criticisms of President Obama during the campaign was that once he was forced to make the difficult decisions, and put his rhetoric into practice, his supporting coalition would crumble. This seems to be happening. It is starting with the political class, and his largest challenge will be keeping it from spreading to the public. The spread is not a foregone conclusion. The public content will have more to do with the shape of the economy that policy squabbles.
The most dangerous part for the President is dealing with the "Blue-Dog" Democrats. Not only will they eventually reach the limit of their part loyalty, the voters they represent are easy pickings for the Republican insurgency. Navigating this constituency is key for the President's future success.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Monday, March 9, 2009
Warnings
Yet another leader who has experience with socialism warned President Obama against infringing on free markets today.
Those who have dealt with the state running the economy are far more protective of the free market than those of us who take it for granted. The have suffered first hand the chilling effect of such systems. Hopefully we will not be forced to learn this the hard way.
For a particularly harsh look at the Obama administration's plan, read this article by Kevin Hasset.
Those who have dealt with the state running the economy are far more protective of the free market than those of us who take it for granted. The have suffered first hand the chilling effect of such systems. Hopefully we will not be forced to learn this the hard way.
For a particularly harsh look at the Obama administration's plan, read this article by Kevin Hasset.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Conservatives vs. Republicans
David Frum has a very good article on why Rush Limbaugh is bad for the Republican party. He illustrates why if the Republican party continues to revere Limbaugh, they are doomed in the polls. It's a pretty decent article for MSM.
However, it misses the larger point. The Republican's problems go much deeper than Limbaugh. At the heart of them are a lack of firm ideological foundation and worse, a tendency towards hypocrisy when they do gain power. Both of these are rooted in the modern Republicans near constant opposition status. Since the end of the second World War, for only a few years did Republicans hold both Houses of Congress and the White House. When they did, they abandoned the principles they claimed.
Because they were in opposition for so long, to a large degree the Republicans defined themselves in opposition to the Democrats rather than creating a base of ideology. Consequently, they tend to attack more so than suggest alternatives. This is precisely what causes the hypocrisy when they do achieve power. Because the focus was simply on what the Democrats were doing wrong, the Republicans did not have a ideological framework to base their administration on. Instead, they go about it as righting wrongs and rewarding patrons. The best example of this is 2000-2004. For decades the Republicans had been complaining about "tax and spend" Democrats. They finally gain control of all three Houses, and what do they do? Skyrocket spending. Sure they cut taxes, but only for 10 years. Even if the tax cuts didn't sunset, they would eventually have to be repealed, as you can't cut taxes while increasing spending indefinitely.
As a result of a lack of agenda and hypocrisy, the Republican Party, is limited to opposition. True conservatives must not bow to the lesser of two evils mantra that is rolled out each election cycle when the Republicans field another lousy field of candidates that are "not great but at least they're not a Democrat". Aren't true conservatives against rewarding mediocrity? Until we demand excellence, we will keep getting the same welfare-grade candidates. We need to make our voices heard, and let the GOP know that they won't get our votes until they start standing for something, and following through on it when they have the chance.
However, it misses the larger point. The Republican's problems go much deeper than Limbaugh. At the heart of them are a lack of firm ideological foundation and worse, a tendency towards hypocrisy when they do gain power. Both of these are rooted in the modern Republicans near constant opposition status. Since the end of the second World War, for only a few years did Republicans hold both Houses of Congress and the White House. When they did, they abandoned the principles they claimed.
Because they were in opposition for so long, to a large degree the Republicans defined themselves in opposition to the Democrats rather than creating a base of ideology. Consequently, they tend to attack more so than suggest alternatives. This is precisely what causes the hypocrisy when they do achieve power. Because the focus was simply on what the Democrats were doing wrong, the Republicans did not have a ideological framework to base their administration on. Instead, they go about it as righting wrongs and rewarding patrons. The best example of this is 2000-2004. For decades the Republicans had been complaining about "tax and spend" Democrats. They finally gain control of all three Houses, and what do they do? Skyrocket spending. Sure they cut taxes, but only for 10 years. Even if the tax cuts didn't sunset, they would eventually have to be repealed, as you can't cut taxes while increasing spending indefinitely.
As a result of a lack of agenda and hypocrisy, the Republican Party, is limited to opposition. True conservatives must not bow to the lesser of two evils mantra that is rolled out each election cycle when the Republicans field another lousy field of candidates that are "not great but at least they're not a Democrat". Aren't true conservatives against rewarding mediocrity? Until we demand excellence, we will keep getting the same welfare-grade candidates. We need to make our voices heard, and let the GOP know that they won't get our votes until they start standing for something, and following through on it when they have the chance.
Friday, March 6, 2009
The "Obama Bear Market"
The WSJ has an excellent write up on what is causing the "Obama Bear Market". With the jobless rate at a 25 year high, things are looking grim in the short term. Tent cities are starting to pop up, though they are not yet called Obamavilles. Declaring war on the successful is a sure way to slow down the growth that is needed. Hopefully President Obama realizes this before we are fully mired in the Second Great Depression. However, it looks doubtful that he learned the lessons of that time. Even the far-left New York Times notes that raising taxes during the Depression made it worse. Indeed, there was a surge in investment in 1938 when the Democrats lost 72 seats, dramatically reducing the attack on the successful. Hopefully we will repeat that in 2010, and not later.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
The War On Success
As the Obama Administration's War on Success continues to be announced, the stock market continues to slide in the face of technical analysis that would suggest a rise. This is because the traders can read the writing on the wall. In fact, the Wall Street Journal opined that President Obama's actions may actually make the recession longer and recovery weaker.
There is also a growing sentiment of resistance to the punitive tax on success. People are realizing they really don't want to work just to have much of that money taken away, so individuals that run small businesses are considering working only part time so less of their income is taken from them. Why bother working so the money can be given to someone else? Of course, this will be devastating to the economy, as small business are the engine of job growth.
Before you get too nostalgic for Republican rule, read the memos the Bush administration kept secret for their whole administration. Basically, they claim the Constitution doesn't apply if they don't want it to. Scary stuff.
When will Americans stopping looking at politics as the lesser of two evils and start actually working towards a prosperous and free future? Hopefully before it is too late.
There is also a growing sentiment of resistance to the punitive tax on success. People are realizing they really don't want to work just to have much of that money taken away, so individuals that run small businesses are considering working only part time so less of their income is taken from them. Why bother working so the money can be given to someone else? Of course, this will be devastating to the economy, as small business are the engine of job growth.
Before you get too nostalgic for Republican rule, read the memos the Bush administration kept secret for their whole administration. Basically, they claim the Constitution doesn't apply if they don't want it to. Scary stuff.
When will Americans stopping looking at politics as the lesser of two evils and start actually working towards a prosperous and free future? Hopefully before it is too late.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Corruption We Can Believe In
Apparently President Obama's "Urban Czar" whatever that is, has some pretty shady habits. It seems that when people "contributed" to him, their projects got approved and funded. This is typical of the Chicago machine politics where President Obama got his political start.
The real question is: Can some of the wealthy pay off the Obama Administration to keep from destroying the economy and punishing success? It'd probably pay off after everything is said and done.
The real question is: Can some of the wealthy pay off the Obama Administration to keep from destroying the economy and punishing success? It'd probably pay off after everything is said and done.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
