Opinions/Editorials
See other Opinions/Editorials Articles
Title: A GOP Pledge to Do Nothing
Source:
David Frum
URL Source: http://www.frumforum.com/a-gop-pledge-to-do-nothing
Published: Sep 24, 2010
Author: David Frum
Post Date: 2010-09-24 10:38:08 by go65
Keywords: None
Views: 31589
Comments: 49
I had a good chuckle at Erick Erickson’s enraged piece on the Republican pledge, now being circulated by Democratic spinmeisters. Question for Erickson: What did he expect? Here is the GOP cruising to a handsome election victory. Did you seriously imagine that they would jeopardize the prospect of victory and chairmanships by issuing big, bold promises to do deadly unpopular things? But if the document is unsurprising, it’s also unsurprising that Erickson and those who think like him would find it enraging. The “Pledge to America” is a repudiation of the central, foundational idea behind the Tea Party. Tea Party activists have been claiming all year that there exists in the United States a potential voting majority for radically more limited government. The Republican “Pledge to America” declares: Sorry, we don’t believe that. We shall cut spending where we can – reform the legislative process in important ways – and sever the federal guarantee for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Republicans will redirect the federal government to a new path that is less expensive and intrusive than the status quo. But if you want promises of radical change? No. Too risky. We don’t think the voters want that – not the smaller, older, richer, whiter electorate that votes in non- presidential years, much less the bigger, younger, poorer, less white electorate of presidential years. And even that smaller, older, richer, whiter electorate is highly wary of cuts to programs that benefit them, Medicare above all. But the real news is this: You can primary a Bob Bennett, you can nominate a Sharron Angle, you can balk Karl Rove and Mike Castle – but when decision hour arrives, the leadership of the party rejects the assessment of the American electorate offered by Rush Limbaugh, Dick Armey and for that matter Erick Erickson. Yet at the same time, we so-called RINOs can take no pleasure in this document. Yes, there is good in it. (Putting legislative language online 72 hours in advance seems Good Government 101.) The silly bits are not too silly: the promise to cite specific constitutional language is an empty sop to those so-called constitutionalists who vainly hope to revive the John Randolph school of constitutional interpretation. But the true sad news is that this is not a document to govern with in the recessionary year 2010. It’s fine to reject Tea Party illusions. But without an alternative modern Republican affirmative program, the GOP will find itself at risk of being captured and controlled by special interests instead. The most admirable thing about the Tea Party is its zeal to find a bigger message for the Republican Party than: do what K Street wants. The message offered by the Tea Party may have been unworkable, unrealistic, or worse – but at least it was large and public-spirited. I’d like to see a Modern Republicanism that responds better to the needs of the country, while retaining still the Tea Party’s reforming spirit. What I fear is the worst of all worlds: a Republican majority that rejects not only extremist ideas, but all ideas.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-9) not displayed.
.
.
.
#10. To: go65 (#6)
I don't hold out a lot of hope for it being different this time. The only thing is - we ARE broke. The laws of economics may finally kick in and force things to be different.
______________________________________________________________________________ WHere is the source?
The GOP is doing just fine here. And the Democrat plan to create jobs is....? (laughing) Thats right, they don't have one.
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
GOP - Kean I think - put a plan in about 25 years ago that polled municipal revenues. Why? Who runs the pension plans? Who promised perpetual funding? The pension plans are an obligation of the state. So? Tim Geitner - GOOD GREIF!the TREASURY SEC'Y - can't do Turbo Tax. BFD Oh...they ALL do it. Glad to see you come around on that. Bullbarack! There's always room to cut. Budgets are governed by statute. Some spending is mandatory. Classy. So you now hate him because he's fat? It underscores a lack of self control.
as long as you can print more money you aren't broke.
How'd that work out for the Weimar Republic?
______________________________________________________________________________ Weimar did just fine after it deflated its war debt. IN fact, it turned around fairly quickly.
GOP - Kean I think - put a plan in about 25 years ago that polled municipal revenues. The pension plans are an obligation of the state. One certainly couldn't run a household or business that way. Oh...they ALL do it. Glad to see you come around on that. Budgets are governed by statute. Some spending is mandatory. It underscores a lack of self control. Do you struggle with anything?
______________________________________________________________________________ As long as you ignore the funny little guy with the funny mustache . . .
______________________________________________________________________________ Do you struggle with anything? I didn't realize war was running for office.
When he moved against Weimar he failed. Mostly because everyone was economically happy. It took a GLOBAL depression to really give the guy with the funny little mustache a goose.
They WERE properly paid for until Whitman "borrowed" from them because her insane tax cuts caused HUGE deficits. OF COURSE they all do it. YOU'RE the one who holds Rs to different standards than Ds I've voted for more republicans than democrats. In fact, it's not even close.
Yea...when I put steamed brussels sprouts into my egg white omelet, I get really bad gas...
OK - that explains why mininggold showed up in post #19
______________________________________________________________________________ Yeah right troll. You are the gas. Of course when posters are compared to the candidates they are discussing (as if any of that is relevant) that's okay with you.
And are you okay with that?
______________________________________________________________________________ And you are always trying to manipulate the discourse here. If he's 400 pounds or on the way to it you betcha! And it's relevant as long as he's running for office or remains in the public domain.
FWIW< I don't think you're a troll. But I do believe that you and are opposite sides of the same coin...
Big difference, their currency wasn't the global standard. We can only go bankrupt when the dollar becomes worthless.
An interviewer was trying to pin a GOP candidate down on exactly how he would cut government spending. Backed into a corner, the candidate finally said he would role back the budget on everything to 2008 levels except the Department of Defense and Homeland Security (I wish they'd dump that name). Doesn't sound like much of a plan to me.
How about a 20 percent across the board spending cut then freeze What about 15 percent? 10 percent? Any takers at 5 percent? You're a loser if you can't at least say 2 percent.
Me too. And the entire department too.
I'd go for 25%, but we look at this the same.
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
______________________________________________________________________________ I'm not sure what you meant here. Did you leave out "I" or "you" (both might apply. Sometimes I'm on the opposite side of myself)
______________________________________________________________________________ Big difference, their currency wasn't the global standard. We can only go bankrupt when the dollar becomes worthless. Okay, help me out here. If you keep printing money, doesn't the value of the money (compared against other currencies or a commodity like gold) go down? Doesn't hyperinflation happen? Isn't the end point of hyperinflation a worthless currency?
______________________________________________________________________________ That depends on the demand for the dollars. We've printed a lot of cash in the last few years and yet inflation is flat.
Well, I suppose it's obvious that I'm not an economist. On the surface, that makes no sense. Supply (of dollars) is up. Value (Inflation) is relatively stable. Which means the final variable (demand) should be up. But it's not. What else is in play? The bad economy? And, if so, does that mean possibly that - if the economy were to improve (say the jobless rate went down) - that hyperinflation is lurking in the background?
______________________________________________________________________________ Yes.
Don't pay attention to FOREX...look at gold and the currency it is pegged to. There is a HUGE demand for dollars and gold is but one dollar investment.
What about 15 percent? 10 percent? Any takers at 5 percent? You're a loser if you can't at least say 2 percent. True, the document talks about the need to cut spending. But as far as I can see, there’s only one specific cut proposed — canceling the rest of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, which Republicans claim (implausibly) would save $16 billion. That’s less than half of 1 percent of the budget cost of those tax cuts. As for the rest, everything must be cut, in ways not specified — “except for common-sense exceptions for seniors, veterans, and our troops.” In other words, Social Security, Medicare and the defense budget are off-limits. So what’s left? Howard Gleckman of the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center has done the math. As he points out, the only way to balance the budget by 2020, while simultaneously (a) making the Bush tax cuts permanent and (b) protecting all the programs Republicans say they won’t cut, is to completely abolish the rest of the federal government: “No more national parks, no more Small Business Administration loans, no more export subsidies, no more N.I.H. No more Medicaid (one-third of its budget pays for long-term care for our parents and others with disabilities). No more child health or child nutrition programs. No more highway construction. No more homeland security. Oh, and no more Congress.” From Paul Krugman, 9/23/10 In short, the Republicans plan to cut nothing.
Starve the beast? Even Stockman is backing away from that.
I went to the grocery store yesterday to buy an item that has been $9.99 for some time; now its $11.99.
That beats the shit out of continuing to dig deeper like the fookin demonrat morons.
EXACTLY. You slander me again, with those 'he thinks we're ruled by lizards' comments, and you'll get more than quotes with no sources, AK. You post my exact words, in context (sources;} when you critique me. Or we'll go round and round. Up to you. ;}
Did you get a raise this year?
Well, I suppose it's obvious that I'm not an economist. On the surface, that makes no sense. Supply (of dollars) is up. Value (Inflation) is relatively stable. Which means the final variable (demand) should be up. But it's not. What else is in play? The bad economy? And, if so, does that mean possibly that - if the economy were to improve (say the jobless rate went down) - that hyperinflation is lurking in the background? You aren't factoring in velocity of money. When the economy picks up the velocity will, so the supply should be lowered, or just no increased as the GDP picks up.
Why? I would much rather point out the flaws in your 'thinking': All candidates with certain letters behind their names are superior, no matter what their vices, to private citizens. Private citizens are here to protect, please and fund the political class. Lobbyists and vested interests rule and should control the political processes! And vote for the candidates presented to us or shut up. lolol
Hey mcclown, how is the Gulf Coast evacuation proceeding? What's the latest death toll as a result of Obama's oil disaster? Don't be such a pussy! Come out from hiding.
Why? I would much rather point out the flaws in your 'thinking': Private citizens are here to protect, please and fund the political class. Lobbyists and vested interests rule and should control the political processes! And vote for the candidates presented to us or shut up. lolol But thanks anyway.
______________________________________________________________________________However there are a lot of folks here who think that it will be different "this time" as they ignore that a GOP take over of Congress means that guys like Boehner, Kantor and McDonnell, who all voted for Medicare Part D and TARP, will take the leadership reigns.
"We've got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois"
--Barack H. Obama, August 2006
#11. To: mcgowanjm (#8)
#12. To: go65 (#1)
#13. To: Ignore Amos (#9)
Why? Who runs the towns?
#14. To: Ignore Amos (#10)
The only thing is - we ARE broke. The laws of economics may finally kick in and force things to be different.
And the Conservative plan to create jobs is......?????
#15. To: go65 (#14)
as long as you can print more money you aren't broke.
"We've got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois"
--Barack H. Obama, August 2006
#16. To: Ignore Amos (#15)
#17. To: war (#13)
Why? Who runs the towns?
OK - so 25 years ago, a plan was put into place to delay the inevitable. Now the day of reckoning is here. Why? Who runs the pension plans? Who promised perpetual funding?
It's a pretty piss-poor way to run a state, don't you think? To take on obligations that you cannot properly fund? So? Tim Geitner - GOOD GREIF!the TREASURY SEC'Y - can't do Turbo Tax. BFD
OF COURSE they all do it. YOU'RE the one who holds Rs to different standards than Ds Bullbarack! There's always room to cut.
And some spending isn't mandatory. Start there. Classy. So you now hate him because he's fat?
Lack of self-control can manifest itself in many ways. He apparently struggles with over-eating.
"We've got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois"
--Barack H. Obama, August 2006
#18. To: war (#16)
Weimar did just fine . . .
"We've got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois"
--Barack H. Obama, August 2006
#19. To: Ignore Amos, war (#17)
Lack of self-control can manifest itself in many ways. He apparently struggles with over-eating.
#20. To: Ignore Amos (#18)
#21. To: Ignore Amos (#17)
To take on obligations that you cannot properly fund?
#22. To: Ignore Amos (#17)
Do you struggle with anything?
#23. To: war, mininggold (#22)
I get really bad gas...
"We've got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois"
--Barack H. Obama, August 2006
#24. To: Ignore Amos (#23)
OK - that explains why mininggold showed up in post #19
#25. To: mininggold, war (#24)
(Edited)
Yeah right troll. You are the gas.
Hmmm . . . I've been told that before, yes. Of course when posters are compared to the candidates they are discussing (as if any of that is relevant) that's okay with you.
It's as relevant as war's pointing out that Christie is fat. Or is being fat now a dis-qualifier for holding office?
"We've got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois"
--Barack H. Obama, August 2006
#26. To: Ignore Amos (#25)
It's as relevant as war's pointing out that Christie is fat. Or is being fat now a dis-qualifier for holding office? And are you okay with that?
#27. To: Ignore Amos (#25)
#28. To: Ignore Amos (#15)
How'd that work out for the Weimar Republic?
And the Conservative plan to create jobs is......?????
#29. To: go65 (#1)
#30. To: lucysmom (#29)
#31. To: lucysmom (#29)
Homeland Security (I wish they'd dump that name).
#32. To: A K A Stone (#30)
How about a 20 percent across the board spending cut then freeze
#33. To: mininggold (#26)
And you are always trying to manipulate the discourse here.
If you don't like what I have to say, then that's what the filter is for. If he's 400 pounds or on the way to it you betcha! And it's relevant as long as he's running for office or remains in the public domain.
It's so good to hear that candidates on your planet are perfect - no flaws. Character, physical, or otherwise.
"We've got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois"
--Barack H. Obama, August 2006
#34. To: war (#27)
But I do believe that you and [. . . ] are opposite sides of the same coin...
"We've got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois"
--Barack H. Obama, August 2006
#35. To: go65 (#28)
How'd that work out for the Weimar Republic?
"We've got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois"
--Barack H. Obama, August 2006
#36. To: Ignore Amos (#35)
If you keep printing money, doesn't the value of the money (compared against other currencies or a commodity like gold) go down?
And the Conservative plan to create jobs is......?????
#37. To: go65 (#36)
That depends on the demand for the dollars. We've printed a lot of cash in the last few years and yet inflation is flat.
"We've got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois"
--Barack H. Obama, August 2006
#38. To: Ignore Amos (#34)
#39. To: Ignore Amos (#35)
If you keep printing money, doesn't the value of the money (compared against other currencies or a commodity like gold) go down?
#40. To: A K A Stone (#30)
How about a 20 percent across the board spending cut then freeze
#41. To: A K A Stone (#30)
How about a 20 percent across the board spending cut then freeze
#42. To: go65 (#36)
We've printed a lot of cash in the last few years and yet inflation is flat.
#43. To: go65 (#0)
A GOP Pledge to Do Nothing
#44. To: A K A Stone (#11)
WHere is the source?
#45. To: lucysmom (#42)
#46. To: Ignore Amos (#37)
#47. To: Ignore Amos (#33)
If you don't like what I have to say, then that's what the filter is for.
#48. To: mcgowanjm, A K A Stone, All (#44)
we'll go round and round.
#49. To: mininggold (#47)
If you don't like what I have to say, then that's what the filter is for.
If this: All candidates with certain letters behind their names are superior, no matter what their vices, to private citizens.
. . . is an example of YOUR 'thinking',
then I'll happily remain with my 'flaws'.
"We've got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois"
--Barack H. Obama, August 2006
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]