Cutting Through The Crap

Friday, February 13, 2009

If Only



It's more than clear that Congressional Republicans have come to the conclusion that if President Obama succeeds, their party fails. Their only hope -- as a party! -- is if it is he that fails. And so it is that they have most undeniably placed party (and, of course, their personal fortunes) above country.

Obama's words in the above speech, reflective of what he's said ever since entering political life, would be welcomed by any Republican, had they been spoken by a Republican. What is there with which to disagree? And yet we find ourselves, in these critical times, more fractured than ever. When the President reached out as promised, it was taken as an opportunity for destruction by the Republicans.

Clearly they've made the following calculation: if the economy recovers under the stimulus plans, the Republican party becomes irrelevant, whether or not Republicans were seen as signing on. So economic recovery is to be hoped against, worked against, despite the tragic consequences for millions of Americans. Failure is their only option. From which, they hope, they can regain standing by saying "we told you so." It's only in disaster that they see a way back to power. So the party that claims a monopoly on patriots, of "real" Americans, is unashamedly working against all attempts to rescue the economy.

What's even more amazing than the conclusion they've drawn is the glee with which they are pursuing it. We can only win by bringing the country down, and we're happy to be seen as doing it.

They seem oblivious to the flaw in the argument.

[Above image from Daily Kos.]

26 comments:

Bill said...

Looks like 7 House Dems want to wreck the country so that BO will fail, too. I wonder how that works?

Do you think it's a good idea that they voted on 1100 pages--too many for anyone to have read?

Might the Dems at least have let the Republicans into the room during the conference committee?

Do you think the Dems should have kept their promise to post the bill for 48 hours before the vote?


Bill

Sid Schwab said...

Funny how the number of pages keeps going up.

For fun, check out what a page looks like. 25 lines per page, about eight words per line.

Seems like people got to read enough of it to lie about it. And lie. And lie.

Obama met with the Rs. He saw to it that many of their concerns were met in revised versions. The Senate, at the behest of Susan Collins, gutted much from it. And still all the House Rs voted against it. Seven Ds? You mean they're not in lockstep like the Rs? Hold the presses! This is news!!

Bill said...

"The 1,071 page, 8-inch-thick measure"

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D96AU3H80&show_article=1

No, it's not funny how the number of pages keeps going up. That some people saw it is irrelevant. Did the Dems read it before they voted on it? Doesn't it seem important enough that they should?

Bill

Sid Schwab said...

Funny how you care more about the pages than the lies.

And you seem to assume the Rs who are against it read it and the Ds who are for it didn't. That's funny, too.

Bill said...

I never assumed the Republicans read it. I figure they did the prudent thing and at least waited until they could read it.

But my concern is whether you think it was prudent for the Dems to approve something that big and important that they didn't read.

Do you?

Bill

Sid Schwab said...

So voting no on something you didn't read is somehow better than voting yes on something you didn't read? Not knowing what it is that you are against?

I'll agree it wasn't necessary for the Rs to read it, because they were committed in advance, by order of Boehner, to vote no no matter what.

And, no, I don't think people should vote yes or no on a bill they haven't read. It's been the norm for ever, Ds and Rs, for as long as there's been legislation. I've said many times I think they're all a bunch of idiots.

On the other hand, even if they weren't, I can imagine a situation wherein people are properly persuaded to vote on the word of someone they trust. Time constraints, for example. In the case of much of the Republican electorate, it's the word of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. So there you go.

SeaSpray said...

I am appalled that this would be pushed through without being read. I know I am naive because I didn't know that could happen.

Yes...it is better to vote NO on something that has not been read even if you don't know what is in it...because EVERYONE should KNOW what is in it. That's the point.

In my personal life...I don't write blank checks for whatever comes along. I need to know the details.

And if government has always operated this way...it's disgusting and that goes for both sides of the aisle.

But to me it looks like they are kids in a candy store ready to consume everything regardless of the ensuing stomach aches.

When I hear some of the things we are paying for...Dr S...I really am baffled.

Checks and balances... non existent.

Well they own it. I DO hope they are right.

Our VP said there was a 30% chance it could fail.

I don't think anyone knows what they are doing.

I have never felt so Jaded in my life as I do now. I feel like it doesn't matter what we think. The people voted and they have what they wanted. i just still don't see the wisdom in it. I really do not.

I want my country to be successful and I will be thrilled if Obama is the one to make a difference. If you are right and we are all better off because of his presidency...then that will be a good thing.

Frank Drackman said...

Sid, you can't really be that Naive, the party out of power ALWAYS hopes for badness, thats why the Demos supported the South during the War of Northern Aggression, and the Terrorists during the current war...You might as well rail at that lazy-good-for-nothing sun for going down every day...I'm surprised at the total lack of funding for Lung Cancer research in the current proposal...you'd think a 2 pack a day smoker would take advantage of the perks of office....

Frank

PS Bill, those 7 Demos that voted against the stimulus don't count, just like the hundred or so that voted against the Civil Rights act...

Anonymous said...

I don't understand the anger vs the republicans for voting against. You suggest they want the thing to fail so they can come back into power. Maybe but maybe they honestly didn't think it would work? Second it really doesn't matter what the republicans think anymore, because it passed just fine without them. Now we have to wait and see what happens, and I bet it's not going to be anything amazing. I also bet sometime in the near future we will be hearing about how it wasn't enough, and if the republicans had not insisted it be cut down it would have worked, and now we need a new bill to fund everything the first one should have.

Sid Schwab said...

seaspray: you're taking Bill's word on it that no one read it? As to "jaded:" now you know how the rest of us felt for eight years of Bush. The difference being that we gave him some time before we called him a screwup. Watched him screw up. No Republican input? Gimme a break! They got more tax cuts, less spending. Susan Collins held the whole Democratic Senate up. So try something else.

When you hear some of the things we are paying for? LIke what? From whom as the source? Rush?

Checks and balances? Were you worried about it during the Bush monarchy? Seriously, I really mean it. When did Bush ever reach out to Ds the way Obama has (tried) to Rs?


Anonymous: I don't "suggest" they want it to fail. I refer to their explicit comments, saying exactly that. As to not enough: the fact is, most economists I respect say exactly that; that the bill was in fact watered down too much (because of that so-called non-existent deference to Republicans.) We'll see.

It's beyond comprehension that as Bush added trillions to the deficits, no Republican got all exercised like now. As his tax cuts, which were supposed to increase revenues, failed, no R said a word. And now that the Bush policies have led us up to and over the brink, and when drastic measures are invoked to try to save the situation, now the Rs are all balancy and tax-breaky again. It's laughable.

Bill said...

Like you said, Sid, they shouldn't have voted on it without reading it. The Dems called for the vote, so it's their fault. And it was BO who insisted on the bill--on his desk by the 15th!--so he shares the blame.

Am I listening to Rush about what's in it? Not really--nobody knows what's in it. No one can know--it's 1100 pages and they only had 8 hours to read it.

And they had promised to post it for the country to read at least 48 hours before the vote.

This was one pretty big and important piece of legislation. I can't imagine anyone of any judgment doing this.

SeaSpray said...

Dr S -you didn't respond to my saying that no one should push anything through..blindly..without absolutely knowing what was in it.. when is could have distasterous consequences affecting everyone in the country. BOTH sides. If republicans did the same..I promise you I would feel the same.

I never paid much attention to financial things until all this hit the fan with the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac.

It was NOT all Bush policies.

Bush in 2001.. tried to warn against Freddie Mae/freddie mac as did McCain in 06. Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi vehemently defended the programs. 911 did have disasterous consequences and I know you would say and going to war.

My point is..BOTH parties have culpability in where the economy is now... and it DOES seem the freddie mac/fanny mae was the HUGE catalyst that pulled us down and people every where have taken a catastrophic hits to their finances and then after all of this...we learn of even more greed by these people in high places who were entrusted to over see things.

My m-i-l's stocks plummeted AFTER the freddy/fannie debacle was revealed. That was NOT bush' doing.

Even with the bailout on Bush' watch..what the heck? They throw lavish parties for the corporation with the money, the jets, and I don't have to tell you all the disgusting things. And then with the next bailout they renovated and bought expensive chandeliers while people are losing everything they have?

I do not understand why there is no accountability. How can our government give them money for the purpose of helping the economy, etc..and they squander like this? Please help me feel better about this. GREED!

It is DISGUSTING!
And it has been this catastrophic domino effect in jobs lost, etc., since then. Beyond..way beyond what was happening previously. How does barney live with himself?

I have not seen it and should probably try to but I understand there is a youtube... either 2 years ago, or 2004. (I am sorry for stating this without being factual -I will look later and have to leave now) But the dems are vehemently defending Freddie and Fanny and yet it ALL got put on the republicans during election. BRAVO to the spinmeisters for that one! And shame on the lemmings for parroting the same rhetoric.

You simply can not *fairly* blame Bush for this *entire* mess.

BTW - Bush did not hold true to the fiscal conservatism that the staunch republicans hold to and added more to the budget then they would have. That was out of conservative talking head mouths. they were critical about some of his spending.

Frisbie parks? wheeler trails? urban canals research?

maybe those things were removed and yet they also worked it out so that there is a blanket payment.

Like 1.6 billion for science..but they don't specify.

Throckmorton (a surgeon) has a short little post over at "Throckmorton's Other Signs" blog called "Functional Evelyn Wood Syndrome" is an interesting analogy to their not reading the bill. He also has other medical/political comparisons.

http://throckmortonsothersigns.blogspot.com/

I RARELY listen to Rush because I am just busy that time of the day. I caught him more when I worked and drove in between clients.

I do catch radio Hannity towards end of day sometimes. I do watch Fox, MSNBC and CNN though. I do read on line news sights.

Last night...it was fox and I saw the size of the bill. I saw the angry senators speak out about being shut out. I heard how the dems change something that had been in place for *100 years* where BOTH parties had the right to contest and debate. With the new change implemented... they did not have to do that.

So it was hardly read. They pushed something through without debate.

And to think that both parties in congress may have done this in the past...it is disgusting and yes...I am jaded. We elect people to do their best for the good of the people. I have always been an idealist and optimistic and I will get it back... I just never payed attention to bills and the financial end of things until seeing this drastic downward spiral of our economy..exacerbating like on a down hill roller coaster.

So, mea culpa with ignorance on my part too.

SeaSpray said...

Dr S -I didn't want to leave without 1st giving you the source for the youtube I mentioned. It is from C-Span, which may carry more weight then any talking head channels because we can watch for ourselves.

I also did not know that Clinton tried to get the dems to listen about Feddy/fannie... good for him.

And for the life of me...why didn't McCain's campaign USE this info? McCain was ahead until the September debacle where McCain said everything was alright and then flew off to DC.

And while watching this clip...I was wondering...why the heck didn't the republicans who challenged/warned about these things...shout this from the roof tops???

Jaded I tell you..jaded... with both parties.

"Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis"

here is the YouTube address :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

Sid Schwab said...

Bill: you've made your point. And made it. And made it. And made it. Anything new to contribute? You've made your point. And made it.

P.S: you've made your point.

Sid Schwab said...

Also, Bill, as you know the House bill was available online immediately (you know because I linked you to it), as was the Senate version. I don't think there's a reason the final version won't be, do you?

And by the way, with respect to reading the bill, you've made your point.

Sid Schwab said...

And made it.

Sid Schwab said...

For those who want to read the bill, which was posted on 2/12 and took me all of three seconds to find, it's here.

Bill said...

Here's the One on this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5t8GdxFYBU&

Sid Schwab said...

"lands on my desk..." He's signing it on Tuesday. How many days since it was finished? Let's see. 17 - 12 = 5. Or is that just liberal math? I know in conservative math 4 billion = 12 thousand, so maybe that's the problem.

Ivyfree said...

"I don't understand the anger vs the republicans for voting against. You suggest they want the thing to fail so they can come back into power. Maybe but maybe they honestly didn't think it would work? "

You used the word "honest" with referring to Republicans.

I just love irony.

Nancyb

Bill said...

"You used the word "honest" with referring to Republicans.

I just love irony."

Why are there Republicans anyway? Why haven't we sent them back where they came from?

Bill said...

"You used the word "honest" with referring to Republicans.

I just love irony."

Wait--is this coming from the party of tax cheats??? There's your irony!

Bill

Leigh said...

Bill: "Why are there Republicans anyway? Why haven't we sent them back where they came from?"

Seems to me that's exactly what we did in the 2008 election.

We sent, how many was it, 21 Republicans home from the House. And 6, or is it 7 now, counting Minnesota, Republican senators home.

And, as I recall, in the 2006 elections, 6 Republican senators and 27 Republican representatives went home.

Looks like we have it covered, "go back where you came from"-wise.

But as to the rest of your question, I don't know why there are Republicans. After the last 8 years, it makes no sense to me at all.

Frank Drackman said...

If it wasn't for Republicans, Barack would be shinin shoes somewhere....

and I know you'll censure this Sid, cause I speak the TRUTH!!!!

Frank, M.D.

Sid Schwab said...

You make that point about twice a day, Frankie. Got anything new to say?

Fact is, it was LBJ who ramrodded the civil rights act, knowing it would lose the south for the Dems. Which it did, to this day. Without the Democrats LBJ and JFK it never would have happened. And time marches on. You can claim the "victory" for Republicans, but where are they now on that subject? It's like claiming Renee Richards' tennis victories as a win for men.

Bill said...

"Without the Democrats LBJ and JFK it never would have happened"

Without the Republicans, the Civil Rights Act would still be being filibustered...by Robert Byrd. Yeah, the same Robert Byrd (he may already have been 70 yo, btw).

Where are the Rs now? Scratching their heads over how the Dems patronize minorities, and exhibit the "soft bigotry of low expectations," and still get their votes.