Category Archives: Fiscal Policy

Andrew Sullivan, astroturfing Republicans and GOP hypocrisy

Andrew Sullivan gets it right, and wrong, at the very same time.  He scribed:

The remarkable thing about today’s partisan Republicans is their capacity to forget instantly and entirely anything that went on for the past eight years. And so suddenly we are rushing toward socialism, even though by far the biggest jumps in state power and debt occurred under a president they worshiped and worked hard to re-elect. There were no tea-parties to protest the $32 trillion Medicare prescription drug benefit. There was no Randian rumbling as Bush took over local schools. There was no defense of the Constitution as Bush and Cheney secretly suspended the fourth and first amendments. But put a moderate Democrat in office tackling a historic collapse in demand – and spending must be frozen! Reading the partisan right blogs, this ability to disappear the past is striking, and it helps explain base GOP loathing of Obama (even if the base is much smaller than it was).

Sullivan has noted what many of us have been complaining about since the Tea Party craze started. At this site (even as late as last night), and many others, we’ve been screaming about hypocritical, astroturfing, big-government Republicans.  So much so that it may be time to coin a new term: RINOturfing.

However, some of us have always been vocally and actively opposed to the very issues Sullivan raises. Ron Paul supporters, Libertarians, libertarians, paleoconservatives and even some (primarily) fiscal conservatives have been hitting the streets as well as the blogs for years.  That we are frequently ignored by publications like The Atlantic (Sullivan did cover Ron Paul fairly well) may have something to do with Sullivan’s apparent forgetfulness on the issue.

Essentially, Sullivan is disregarding publications like Reason and American Spectator, organizations like Cato (and Heritage on some days), candidates like Ron Paul and Bob Barr, personalities like John Stossel and Andrew Napolitano, parties like the Libertarian Party, elected officials like Ron Paul and Jeff Flake, conservative icons like Bruce Fein and Richard Viguerie, pretty much any self-described libertarian, ad infinitum.

A good definition of partisan is “a fervent, sometimes militant supporter or proponent of a party, cause, faction, person, or idea.”  It’s my opinion that all of the individuals and groups listed above indeed qualify.

There was plenty of  “Randian rumbling” and “defense of the Constitution” during the Bush years.  Perhaps Sullivan chose to ignore most of it.

In March, I wrote:

To be clear, I think it is cool that it appears that libertarians have some newfound friends on the small-government team.  However, it’s fair to color us a bit skeptical, as we are still licking our Republican-inflicted wounds.  It may take a bit of time for us to recover from the political PTSD we are suffering after fighting Republicans for the last eight years over government spending issues.

I still stand by these words.  It’s possible that April 15th may be the day that begins the healing process.  It could also be the day that the more cynical of us are proven correct.

UPDATE: I’d like to welcome our The Other McCain and The League of Ordinary Gentlemen readers.  I’d like to send a special medical marijuana smoking and lesbian loving shoutout to Moe Lane and our good friends at RedState.  I’m sort of curious about why the folks at RedState don’t approve of two women getting married to each other.  This sort of stuff is fantasy material for most red-blooded males that I know.

Another Republican pot calls kettle black

bachusfrank

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) and ranking member Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL) on left

Speaking of astroturfing Republicans, Alabama Congressman Spencer Bachus told folks in Trussville, Alabama that there are exactly 17 socialists” in the House of Representatives.  The  National Taxpayers Union just gave Bachus a failing grade of 56% (which they upgraded to a C+ on their liberally-curved grading scale) on spending issues.  Perhaps Bachus should realize that while his index finger points at 17 congresscritters with worse spending records than his own, the rest of his fingers are pointing back at himself.

Just to ensure his conservative bona fides, the Birmingham News also reports this gem:

Bachus did not support small city officials who asked if he would oppose all gun bans. Instead, he said, it may be necessary to support some assault weapon bans in order to keep all guns from being outlawed.

He also likes bailouts.  From the Birmingham Regional Chamber of Commerce newsletter:

Rep. Spencer Bachus recently provided an in-depth analysis of the nation’s economic struggles to more than 250 members at the Chamber’s Fall Congressional Forum. Bachus explained his role in the passage of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (EESA), a $700 billion bill that will, among other things, provide the federal government the power to purchase distressed loans and guarantee troubled assets held by financial institutions. Bachus said supporting the bailout bill was one of the most difficult decisions he has ever in Congress. Despite his reservations, Bachus said the EESA was necessary due to the intensity of the financial crisis.

In other words,  the slick S.O.B. had second thoughts about taking money from my children and grandchildren to give to his cronies, but he did it anyway! I certainly hope Bachus shows at the Birmingham Tea Party event where I’ll be on the 15th.  I’m sure I’d have to stand in a very long line to give him a piece of my mind.

Yet another blithering idiot reporter calls for a newspaper bailout

Some day I'm expecting a cry from the loony-left to bailout corpulent prostitutes.  After all, they are certainly "too big to fail."

Some day, I'm expecting a cry from the loony left to bail out corpulent prostitutes. After all, they are certainly "too big to fail."

I certainly disagree with former-Washington-Times-Assistant-National-Editor-turned-freelancer-and-new-media-personality-father-and-personal-friend Robert Stacy McCain from time to time.  One thing noteworthy about him is that he’s constantly begging for donations to support his online writing habits.  It’s hard to find a post on his personal blog where he doesn’t directly ask folks to hit his tip jar.

At the same time, the cries from dying newspaper companies for a taxpayer-funded bailout continue to increase both in frequency and shrillness. This time the offending piece of journalistic excrement graces the opinion column of the LA Times.  To be sure, this page of their paper is far too soiled to be used even as toilet paper.

“It’s time for a government bailout of journalism, ” Rosa Brooks writes.

“If we’re willing to use taxpayer money to build roads, pay teachers and maintain a military; if we’re willing to bail out banks and insurance companies and failing automakers, we should be willing to part with some public funds to keep journalism alive too,” Brooks continued, apparently to add insult to injury.

The first thing I want to know is who in the hell is this “we” Ms. Brooks describes.  I’m not willing to bail out banks, insurance companies, automakers, AIG, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or even fanny packs.  The money is being taken from me, by force, to give to others who did not earn it.

Anyone who has heard the term “Tea Party” lately must be well aware of the fact that millions and millions of Americans are incredibly irate over the recent plethora of federal bailouts.  Being as she’s a journalist and all, surely Ms. Brooks has heard of this by now. If she is so certain that “we” want to bail all of these failing institutions, perhaps she’ll be willing to stand on the stage at some Tea Party event and repeat what she wrote in the Times.

If she will be so kind as to pick her favorite city, I’ll be happy to talk with the event organizer about it.  However, I have no intention of working on her security detail — people wanted to string up the Governor at the last major Tea Party event I attended.

The woman who wants to use government force to steal my hard-earned money concluded:

The problem is that many of these subsidies are currently structured in ways that have actually contributed to the decline of high-quality journalism by enabling monopolies, freezing out smaller and locally controlled media outlets and encouraging large corporations to treat the news as just another product, no different from video games or sports teams.

Years of foolish policies have left us with a choice: We can bail out journalism, using tax dollars and granting licenses in ways that encourage robust and independent reporting and commentary, or we can watch, wringing our hands, as more and more top journalists are laid off or bail out, leaving us with nothing in our newspapers but ads, entertainment features and crossword puzzles.

The news is just another product, like video games or sports teams.  In the real world, consumers decide the viability of a product or service.  Video game producers don’t demand taxpayer dollars.  If their product doesn’t sell, they enhance it or come up with a new one.  Why the hell should we pay for newspapers which aren’t selling?

One wonders if Ms. Brooks has ever stopped to consider that once a newspaper has taken federal dollars, then the federal government will control the policy of the paper.  If they can tell General Motors and Chrysler what sorts of cars to build, then they’ll likely tell newspapers what sorts of articles to publish.  I’m sure this won’t bother Ms. Brooks for the next four years, as she’s heading off to the Pentagon to work her Messiah.  However, I’d like for Ms. Brooks to ponder this one for a minute: Would you wish to be working at a newspaper where George W. Bush (or his newspaper czar Karl Rove) called the shots?

Like a plague, bailout fever has spread from one industry to another to another.  Some day, I’m expecting a cry from the loony left to bail out corpulent prostitutes.  After all, they are certainly “too big to fail.”

In the meantime, mostly in response to this ludicrous LA Times article, I just canceled my last subscription to a print publication and left a few bucks in Robert Stacy McCain’s tip jar.

Action item for libertarians and small-government conservatives

20080925_wallst_protest_33For years, believers in small government have been fuming at egregious Republican spending. All of a sudden, more mainstream Republicans are livid about bailouts. Even elected Republicans who supported bailouts are suddenly jumping on the anti-bailout bandwagon because they’ve been popped upside the head by their own supporters. Even Republican governors accepting bailout money are at increased political risk. If we want legislators and other political leaders to respond to the small-government message we wish to promote, it’s necessary to kick them where it counts. What better way than to hurt them with their own fundraising, activist and voting bases?

Here’s the mission for the small-government crew: Every time a Republican politician promotes or supports a plan which expands government spending, it’s up to us to call them on it with terminology which will hurt their political career.

As an obvious example, if a Republican presidential and vice presidential candidate team up to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, we need to call them out on it. It this case, it probably cost McCain and Palin the election.

Again, on the obvious side, Republicans should be aware of whether their congressman voted to bail out auto manufacturers or not.

Regular old pork counts, too. If a Republican wants to spend a couple of million dollars on fish, we need to call him out on it. “Senator Shelby bails out out Catfish Genome Project” would be a good one. Or course, such fishy-smelling pork isn’t limited to Alabama senators. Maine Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe just love bailing out the Lobster Institute.

When a Republican governor wishes to increase taxes, let’s make sure folks know that Governor Riley wanted to bail out the Alabama Education Association or that Governor Huckabee taxes the elderly at the old folks’ home to bail out failed government programs.

Senator Hatch not only supports slavery, but he wants to bail out organizations which can’t obtain enough “volunteers.”

Of course, if it’s an omnibus spending bill, one omnibus target is lobbyists. For example, Congressman Smith and Jones vote “yes” on Obama budget bill to bail out DC lobbyists.

If it’s legislation aimed at lowering the amount of smokers in the country, it’s now a bail out for people too stupid (myself included) to quit.  The same general logic could be applied to about any nanny-state legislation. Even anti-Second Amendment legislation could be considered a bailout to the mortuary industry.

As bailouts are viewed very negatively by most Republicans I know, we need to change the rhetoric in a way that is meaningful to them.  I’ll predict that it will be tough for a Republican constantly tagged with the word “bailout” to win a primary election for the next couple of years, at least.

Pretty much every spending bill coming out of Washington contains the transfer of money from the producer of the money to someone who didn’t earn it.  The formula is simple:

(Insert politician name) (votes, supports, promotes, as appropriate) the bailout of  (beneficiary of government largesse).

Obama’s April Fool’s Joke

This just landed in my inbox:

Friend —

In just 24 hours, Congress will begin voting on President Obama’s budget. It’s a big test not only for President Obama, but for our entire movement. Taking just a few minutes to call Congress now could make a major impact on this crucial vote.

Will you call your elected representatives to let them know you support a budget that tackles the long-term challenges to our prosperity?

Use our simple tool to look up your elected representatives and tell them where you stand right away.

With this vote, we have a historic opportunity to create jobs, restore our economy, and invest in energy, health care, and education for our future.

Don’t let this important moment slip away. Pick up the phone for President Obama today:

http://my.barackobama.com/callcongress

Thank you,

Mitch

Mitch Stewart
Director
Organizing for America

I’d recommend calling your congressman to demand that he/she oppose Obama’s budget, one which further erodes our chance of prosperity.

1 20 21 22 23 24 26