Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

January 31, 2009

THE OTHER REPUBLICAN OFFICIALS.... Congressional Republicans oppose the Obama administration's economic stimulus package. Media Republicans oppose the Obama administration's economic stimulus package. But then there are those other Republicans who actually have to govern during this economic crisis.

Most Republican governors have broken with their GOP colleagues in Congress and are pushing for passage of President Barack Obama's economic aid plan that would send billions to states for education, public works and health care.

Their state treasuries drained by the financial crisis, governors would welcome the money from Capitol Hill, where GOP lawmakers are more skeptical of Obama's spending priorities.

The 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, planned to meet in Washington this weekend with Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and other senators to press for her state's share of the package.

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist worked the phones last week with members of his state's congressional delegation, including House Republicans. Vermont Gov. Jim Douglas, the Republican vice chairman of the National Governors Association, planned to be in Washington on Monday to urge the Senate to approve the plan.

"As the executive of a state experiencing budget challenges, Gov. Douglas has a different perspective on the situation than congressional Republicans," said Douglas' deputy chief of staff, Dennise Casey.

You don't say. States facing unprecedented budget crunches and mounting healthcare, education, and transportation costs support the idea of a federal rescue package. Who knew?

Gov. Jodi Rell (R) of Connecticut called up Democratic Rep. Jim Himes to ask, "What can I do, who can I call to make sure this passes?"

Even South Carolina's Mark Sanford, perhaps the most reactionary of the Republican govenors' neo-Hooverite caucus, is facing such severe pressure from South Carolina mayors and even Republicans in the state legislature that he's officially "undecided" about Obama's plan.

It's doubtful that congressional Republicans will pay much attention to what governors -- even governors in their own party -- have to say about this. But it's just one more example of far-right lawmakers being isolated, whether that matters to them or not.

Steve Benen 4:00 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (35)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Yeah, not very surprising: Governors deal more with the nuts and bolts of what's happening "on the streets" and can't afford as much ideologue or party-hack grandstanding, so R-Govs wanting to cooperate with Obama's plans is expected. The US House Rs tend to be the worst in the latter regard, right?

Posted by: Neil B ◙ on January 31, 2009 at 4:02 PM | PERMALINK

California has, since late last year, suspended saturday service at the DMV. Sometime in the past few days-- and I only know this because we've had repeated business with them, and have had the need to repeatedly refer to the website so we noted the change, but can't give a date-- now suspended service on the 1st and 3rd Fridays of every month.

Can't imagine this will have a positive impact on the wait time.

Posted by: Shantyhag on January 31, 2009 at 4:29 PM | PERMALINK

Ah, meant to close that with "But I guess it's a sign of the times."

Posted by: Shantyhag on January 31, 2009 at 4:30 PM | PERMALINK

"...Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, planned to meet in Washington this weekend with Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and other senators to press for her state's share of the package."

Sounds like SOCIALISM ta me.

Posted by: hellslittlestangel on January 31, 2009 at 4:31 PM | PERMALINK

Yeah, that Palin sure is standing up for small government by saying no to that gosh-darn Bailout to Nowhere.

Also.

Posted by: Catsy on January 31, 2009 at 4:34 PM | PERMALINK

Some lawmaker should submit a bill that says that any state that doesn't have an income tax and sends oil revenue money to the residents is not eligible for stimulus money. (That means YOU Palin!)

Posted by: Estamm on January 31, 2009 at 4:38 PM | PERMALINK

Wonder if the G0P recruited Palin by dragging a dollar bill through a trailer park.

Posted by: hells littlest angel on January 31, 2009 at 4:42 PM | PERMALINK

The Republican congressmen can remain aloof from the problems their constituents are facing only so long. Their state counterparts are already seeing what the realities of the economy are and are adapting to the truth - we're ALL in this together, Democrats and Republicans.

Posted by: phoebes in santa fe on January 31, 2009 at 4:45 PM | PERMALINK

Didn't these guys' mothers ever tell them the story of the Little Red Hen?

Posted by: Danp on January 31, 2009 at 4:49 PM | PERMALINK

In case not fully clear, I meant House Rs tend worst re ideologue or party-hack grandstanding.

Posted by: Neil B ☼ on January 31, 2009 at 4:55 PM | PERMALINK

I guess those rabid Republicans in congress, will be barking up the wrong tree, when 2010 comes around and they're fishing for their Republican Governor's endorsement.

Maybe their governor 'may' entertain endorsing someone to challenge those wingnuts in the primaries - someone less abrasive, someone with common sense.

Posted by: bruno on January 31, 2009 at 5:05 PM | PERMALINK

This may not effect the congresscritters, but this suggests that the Senators are going to be getting it from all sides.

Posted by: Walker on January 31, 2009 at 5:05 PM | PERMALINK

You left out Ole Haley Barbour - he was down here a week or so ago crying that Mississippi wasn't getting enough federal welfare for children's health programs.

It amazes me that jackasses like these spend their entire political careers trying to tear down federal programs like these, but when they end up as a governor of one of their ass-backwards states, they see that these programs actually serve a purpose - until, of course, they move on to that high-paying lobbying job & start trying to tear the programs back down again...

Posted by: GMF on January 31, 2009 at 5:10 PM | PERMALINK

I didn't think that the portion of the stimulus bill that was going to the states was the part that was giving those in Washington pause. It makes sense that the Governors want their portion.

But the remainder of the bill? I agree with Alice Rivkin, formerly of the Clinton Administration...

In testimony before the House Budget Committee yesterday, Alice M. Rivlin, who was President Bill Clinton's budget director, suggested splitting the plan, implementing its immediate stimulus components now and taking more time to plan the longer-term transformative spending to make sure it is done right..."Such a long-term investment program should not be put together hastily and lumped in with the anti-recession package. The elements of the investment program must be carefully planned and will not create many jobs right away," said Rivlin, a fellow at the Brookings Institution. The risk, she said, is that "money will be wasted because the investment elements were not carefully crafted."

So break out the non-controversial parts and get it out. Spend some time and get the rest right.

Posted by: red state mike on January 31, 2009 at 5:34 PM | PERMALINK

So break out the non-controversial parts and get it out. Spend some time and get the rest right.

For Republicans, the only "non-controversial" parts are the tax cuts. You'd think that the last 8 years would have shown them that tax cuts are not in fact the magical answer to every economic dilemma but, no, the Republican gamblers want us to double down on the same failed policy in the hope that maybe we'll manage to hit the jackpot this time.

Posted by: Mnemosyne on January 31, 2009 at 5:54 PM | PERMALINK

The strategy during Clinton's first term was to delay/obstruct everything and the Republicans were rewarded for the behavior. They obviously are following the same game plan not realizing that the conditions at home have changed. Not an observant bunch.

Posted by: jen f on January 31, 2009 at 5:56 PM | PERMALINK

"As the executive of a state experiencing budget challenges, Gov. Douglas has a different perspective on the situation than congressional Republicans," said Douglas' deputy chief of staff, Dennise Casey.

Indeed? How come? Doesn't Gov Douglas see that what the Limbo Party's Congresscritters are doing is for the best of the country's future? Why can't Gov Douglas -- and all the other Limbo executives -- push their own, *state*, legislatures for some more tax and spending cuts, to get the economy moving? Whatever happened to the states' rights of self-determination?

Dante had it all wrong... Limbo may be the first and the mildest circle of hell but the people there, are there through a fault of their own. And it's no coincidence that the Repub's main philosophical leader (Limbaugh) is named after it.

Posted by: exlibra on January 31, 2009 at 6:29 PM | PERMALINK

Since those republicans in the congress are so firmly against the stimulus pkg I say that the districts they represent get no money.
I hope someone in the media keeps a close eye on how they line up to get money portioned out to their cronies and districts.

Posted by: Gandalf on January 31, 2009 at 6:32 PM | PERMALINK

I like that last comment, “Crafting”, that says it all. Let’s put it this way our Congress and a lot of the money Journalist know where all IRS booby traps are and if they don’t the other side will, and use it for political gaming. It is so obvious that most of the cable dailies know the, who, what, where, and when if anything will fail or pass. Whats funny, the Government is Broken, the Economy is broken, our Military is Broken, hey what do you know even News is Breaking.

Let’s face it all America get is professional polished ignorance and "dumb-down". Oh we didn’t even see it coming dialog. If you believe that stuff, and every thing seems to be Nancy Pelosi’s or Harry Reid’s fault I have a broken Bridge in Minnesota to sell you.

When a guy like Limbaugh day after day calls Harry Reid dingy, and then wishes’s Obama policies fail why think this guy is sensible, heck Limbaugh just proves there are some twenty million American who are freqazoids.

Then, we have Michael Savage telling every one being Liberal is a disease, every thing coming out of government is Marxist, or Communist just gives me a compelling feeling to wish I was the key holder of soles like that. They would never re-enter society for eternity and beyond. How did Newt Gingrich say it one time about withering on the vine? Perhaps we are witness to Republicans withering on the electromagnetic spectrum.

My final thought and a simple one that would get action really fast in congress. It is this;

Were as we People declare that all legislation that fails to move through Congress and the Senate per the rules in timely fashion that means in filibuster time or any stalling time all “Interest on any payment related to any and all banking stops” during this time. Then after proper electorate oversight continues after such bills pass Congress and the and then signed into law. Hey, you want to turn a page in history. Wooo…

What I am getting at these Polished Representatives of ours are working for their long term concerns not yours or mine, other wise ladies and gentlemen we would not be in this economic mess.


Posted by: Megalomania on January 31, 2009 at 6:37 PM | PERMALINK

So break out the non-controversial parts and get it out. Spend some time and get the rest right.

If only you were willing to show the same studied caution for the Patriot Act, which members weren't given time to read and contained all sorts of Republican loopholes which have cost the American taxpayer hundreds of billions in contractor fraud.

Remember when Republicans locked Democrats out of committee so they wouldn't even know what was going into bills? Or when they held votes open for hours in the middle of the night and blackmailed members into changing their votes? How about when the White House sent their lackey to give a false estimate of cost of the Medicare bill at under $400 billion when in fact the true cost was over $1.2 trillion?

Good times. Where was your sense of deliberation then and bipartisanship them? Where was your cry of putting the interests of the American people first?

And a little preemptive fuck you to whatever flaccid hillbilly-scientist rejoinder you dream up.

Posted by: trex on January 31, 2009 at 6:47 PM | PERMALINK

Baroness Munchhausen strikes again!

In Alaska, according to Mudflats, she's been making a big winkin' noise about how she doen't want no nuthin from the Federal Gummint, you betcha, except for help with the (non-existent) pipeline.

Posted by: Prup (aka Jim Benton) on January 31, 2009 at 7:08 PM | PERMALINK

If only you were willing to show the same studied caution for the Patriot Act...
Posted by: trex

Show me where I defended the speedy passing of the Patriot Act, and maybe the rest of your post won't be your typical complete total BS.

Besides which, what is your point? You're using the Patriot Act and the repubs who passed it as your role model? You think knee-jerk responses are what is best for the country? How stupid is that?

Posted by: red state mike on January 31, 2009 at 7:20 PM | PERMALINK

You think knee-jerk responses are what is best for the country? How stupid is that?

Not at all. In fact, I've been arguing against these legislative abuses for years. It is you who has been conspicuously silent on this issue until Democrats came into power, and that is my point. You're a partisan shill who pretends some kind of independence and objectivity. Poorly, I might add.

Posted by: trex on January 31, 2009 at 7:25 PM | PERMALINK
So break out the non-controversial parts and get it out.

It's ALREADY out.

Have you LOOKED at the bill? It's immediate, or as immediate as can be type of stimulus. Anything longer term is being left for later.

Posted by: roger Tang on January 31, 2009 at 7:30 PM | PERMALINK

Red state mike didn't say a single word as the Republicans decided that the best way to spend trillions was to murder innocent Iraqis. Oh, wait, I lied here is red state mike's most vocal demonstration of his commitment to the protection of innocent life. Our sociopathic friend has nothing against spending government money - so long as it results in massive death and destruction. He's also okay if it only provides the means for dealing out more death and destruction (see his insistence that throwing more money at the military is "stimulus").

No one who supported the war on the Iraqi people long after it was revealed that it was entirely based on lies and that Iraq posed zero threat to the United States has any standing to whine about wasteful government spending.

Posted by: the on January 31, 2009 at 8:13 PM | PERMALINK

Why do all the Republican governors sound like they're whistling past the conservative Republican graveyard in Congress?

Back in 2006 when the House and Senate (and the White House) were under Republican domination, the Bush administration decided that in case of an emergency being declared in any state (as defined by them and for whatever duration), they didn't want any "obstructionist" governor getting in their way, blocking attempts by BushCo to federalize the security in a state, thus denying private "for-profit" security firms like Blackwater access, like Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco (D) did during Hurricane Katrina, when she repeatedly refused to turn over her state's security to BushCo, prompting BushCo to launch a smear campaign against her while withholding federal disaster relief aid from Louisiana and the flooded city of New Orleans.

When all fifty state governors, both Republican and Democrats, learned of this anti-American, anti-Republic power-grab by BushCo in 2006, they vehemently protested to the Republicans controlling Congress not to do the bidding of the criminals in the White House, but to no avail. This law passed and Bush signed it.

Now, no state governor has any say in their state's security during any emergency once the White House gets involved.

During Hurricane Ike last year along the Texas Gulf Coast, for instance, the silence of Gov. Rick Perry (R) was deafening. DHS head Chertoff and his political underlings ran the show. Gov. Perry had no say in anything happening in the coastal area devastated by Hurricane Ike because he had no authority. He literally stopped being governor of Texas as soon as BushCo declared a state of emergency after Hurricane Ike made landfall, essentially making President George W. Bush the de facto governor of Texas...again.

Anyway, I really doubt that congressional Republicans will listen to any of the governors of our nation's states, whether they are a Republican or a Democrat.

I just wonder if President Barack Obama will send a letter to all of our nation's state governors, reaffirming their authority over their state's security during an emergency, or will he keep in place the anti-American, anti-Republic policy of the previous, criminal Bush administration?

Posted by: The Oracle on February 1, 2009 at 12:53 AM | PERMALINK

red state mike: You're using the Patriot Act and the repubs who passed it as your role model?

how about the fact that the last time the gop had total control over any budget process...

The number of earmarks swelled to almost 14,000 projects worth $27 billion in 2005, according to Citizens Against Government Waste in Washington, an early pioneer in providing data on special-interest projects.

The CAGW assigned credit for the drop in 2006 to 2,658 projects worth $13 billion to the Democrats' moratorium in 2007 following the GOP Congress' failure to pass 9 of 11 appropriations bills in 2006.

gop = didn't pass 9 of 11 appropriations bills the last time they had a chance..

and when they did pass appropriations in 2005..they set a record for pork..

gop: any suckers left?

Posted by: mr. irony on February 1, 2009 at 6:50 AM | PERMALINK

It's ALREADY out.

Have you LOOKED at the bill? It's immediate, or as immediate as can be type of stimulus. Anything longer term is being left for later.
Posted by: roger Tang

Then why is Alice Rivlin, no republican she, saying you're wrong? Those are her words, and she was Budget Director for Clinton.

Posted by: red state mike on February 1, 2009 at 9:45 AM | PERMALINK

You know, I'm beginning to think those Repub Senators and Congresspersons that oppose economic stimulus are onto something - it's expensive. So why don't we only have economic stimulus in those states where a two thirds majority of the Senate and Congress have voted for it. We really have no reason to provide aid where none is wanted. I'm super positive all the Republican governors out there will get right behind such a fiscally sound idea.

Posted by: Glen on February 1, 2009 at 1:40 PM | PERMALINK

Just so we're all clear on our appeals to authority and what they entail, Alice Rivlin believes in:

* Raising taxes
* Implementing a Value Added Tax (VAT)
* More regulation of the credit markets
* More regulation of banks and tightening of lending standards
* Nationalizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
* Nationalized health care
* Extending the retirement age
* Lowering Social Security accruals for people under 50
* Government bailing out troubled banks
* Allowing Medicare to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies for better rates
* Prohibiting "exotic" financial instruments
* Government forcing lenders to renegotiate existing loans with homeowners

She also believes that CEO's and industry leaders have become "completely out of touch with the average citizen" as a result of her experience serving on the boards of corporations.

She may be correct on all of these issues and probably is, it's just good to know who you're hitching your wagon to. Her recommendations don't come in a vacuum and she is about as close to a socialist economist as one could come up with.

Maybe some form of collectivism will yet save the day. Huh. What a stick in the eye that would be to the wingnuts: to be saved from their own disastrous policies by an ideology they loathe.

Posted by: trex on February 1, 2009 at 1:41 PM | PERMALINK

She may be correct on all of these issues and probably is, it's just good to know who you're hitching your wagon to.
Posted by: trex

I well know who is in the majority here, and what decision making comes with it. I'm hoping that they'll make decisions that are well thought out, and not knee jerk responses taken just to stick their thumbs in the repub's eyes as some sort of cheap payback for getting your feelings hurt by the last administration.

Larry Summers, Harvard economist and now a top economic advisor, argued the stimulus needed to be "timely, temporary, and targeted." Seems like Nancy didn't get that word.

Posted by: red state mike on February 1, 2009 at 3:39 PM | PERMALINK

as some sort of cheap payback for getting your feelings hurt by the last administration.

Clearly that is not happening, as Obama has shown himself to be everything that is not: sober, serious, thoughtful, focused and non-ideological.

Our feelings weren't hurt by the last administration. Rather the economy was hurt, the military was hurt, civil rights were hurt, our standing in the world was damaged, and environmental crises were left unaddressed, to name a few.

Never ONCE did you rise in defense of these issues or take Bush and the Republicans to task.

As I said before, the point isn't that we shouldn't follow Rivlin's advice and carefully examine our cost/benefit for stimulus programs; it's just that you spent the last eight years never giving a shit being careful in policy matters while haranguing us for calling attention to the very things that have caused the fucking country to collapse around your ears. You and your wingnut cousins couldn't help but be naked partisans and now we're all paying for it.

Frankly, we don't need your fucking opinion. You've shown abysmal judgment, careless thinking, and you've done enough damage.

Posted by: trex on February 1, 2009 at 4:04 PM | PERMALINK

Never ONCE did you rise in defense of these issues or take Bush and the Republicans to task.

BS as usual. I called out Bush on Katrina, on torture, and on energy among others, water boy. But unlike you I feel no need to pile on the repubs when you give pass to any and every Dem mistake. Plenty of others here are willing to call out Daschle and Blagovich for their malfeasance, but not you. It's repubs 24//7/365, which makes it easier to ignore your own shortcomings.

The Stimulus Bill is just like the Patriot Act. Knnejerk, poorly thought, and a cover for all the little social programs you want, while doing little for what it is actually meant to tackle. In short, new masters, business as usual.

Feel free to carry their water now.

Posted by: red state mike on February 1, 2009 at 4:24 PM | PERMALINK

Feel free to carry their water now

If you examine the body of my posts, you will see that they reflect principle, not party.

The Stimulus Bill is just like the Patriot Act. Knnejerk, poorly thought, and a cover for all the little social programs you want

Most of the social programs I want (universal health care, free higher education) are not in the stimulus bill except as small rescue measures. For the most part, to the extent that the bill contains social programs beyond rescue packages is because they are stimulatory, although offhand I think the faith-based funding which is a cookie for the fundies should be stripped. But there are no perfect bills.

Your champion Alice Rivlin doesn't agree with you that the stimulus package contains leftist fluff: she is FOR most of those social programs. She simply wants to make sure that the timing of the short term and long term investments is correct.

But the larger point: in all the discussions of the Patriot Act that took place on this blog, or bloated legislation like Medicare, how come you could never bring yourself to criticize them? Bush threw trillions at Wall Street firms (much more than this bill includes), demanded there be no oversight by Congress, made sure bankers got to keep gazillion dollar bonuses, and refused to provide an account of who got what money from the American taxpayer.

Where the fuck were you, Mr. Fiscal Responsibility?

But unlike you I feel no need to pile on the repubs when you give pass to any and every Dem mistake. Plenty of others here are willing to call out Daschle and Blagovich for their malfeasance, but not you

In my opinion, Blagovich should have been removed from office via impeachment immediately following the initial press conference with the prosecutor. In my opinion, Daschle should be voted down. There you go!

You can assume as a rule going forward: any standard I would apply to Abramoff, Duke, Delay, Bush or Cheney I apply to Democrats. Being further left than the Democratic Party and concerned with principles over party politics, this is not a problem for me. In the future, if you would ever like me to speak up on these issues and condemn a Democrat who has been convicted of breaking the law or violated ethics rules all you have to do is ask, I would be more than happy to. Bookmark this permalink.

I will give you one thing. Once or twice you weakly said that waterboarding was torture -- you just never demanded it stop, and never criticized Bush for it. Other than that, you have never vocalized any strong criticism of Bush for either his incompetence or his criminality, beyond oblique statements that things might have been handled differently.

In fact, on the NSA issue you blamed the minority party for not acquiring some kind of magical powers and stopping a president who'd invested himself with monarchical authority -- inviting calls of treason and jail time. Then you blamed the NYT for sitting on the story and called into question their motives. But you never called for the accountability of the lawbreakers themselves. That's your MO.

Oh and BTW, we know now from whistleblowers that we were correct on that issue as well, and that Bush was spying on ALL AMERICANS, singling out journalists and left wing groups for special attention, and not just ones making or receiving foreign phone calls to suspected terrorists. Whoopsie for you!

Obama's strongest critics have already been the left and will continue to be. I am disturbed with the story that Obama has chose to keep rendition as a tool in his kit. If evidence arises in the future that he ordered someone sent to another country to be tortured then you can bet your ass I will be in public forums excoriating him for it and calling for his impeachment and prosecution.

That is the difference between us. One of the lessons you failed to internalize over the last eight years is this: we are a nation of laws, not men.

Posted by: trex on February 1, 2009 at 6:17 PM | PERMALINK

Most of the social programs I want (universal health care, free higher education) are not in the stimulus bill except as small rescue measures. For the most part, to the extent that the bill contains social programs beyond rescue packages is because they are stimulatory

It's hard to find any spending that isn't stimulatory in some sense, so you can rationalize any spending.

Your champion Alice Rivlin...

She's not my champion. She's yours. There are democrats who disagree with the bill, too many and too prominent to demonize all of them.

But the larger point: in all the discussions of the Patriot Act that took place on this blog, or bloated legislation like Medicare, how come you could never bring yourself to criticize them?

First, I post on what I know or am interested in. I've come out against the FISA, for example. But in general, I despise the "me too also" that passes for discussion here, where if you don't pass the ideological litmus test of spittle-flecked ranting at Bush you're a "troll". If 100 posts are already out there yelling, you don't need another blue dittohead. I'd much rather poke a hole in an argument. I hate groupthink, red or blue. And, boy, does this place reek with groupthink.

Bush threw trillions at Wall Street firms (much more than this bill includes), demanded there be no oversight by Congress, made sure bankers got to keep gazillion dollar bonuses, and refused to provide an account of who got what money from the American taxpayer.

I must have missed it, Mr. Principle. Did you lambast Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, and cast for obstructing to the best of their ability oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Because the FMs are at the core of the meltdown, and the Dem's actions did not give them the moral high ground. Oh, I know, they were the minority party. Well, now they aren't, and I assume past is prologue. The same actors now have their hands on the tiller. How about Sen Chris "Countrywide sweetheart deal" Dodd...have you been calling for him to come clean? I don't recall reading those posts.

In my opinion, Blagovich should have been removed from office via impeachment immediately following the initial press conference with the prosecutor. In my opinion, Daschle should be voted down. There you go!

Well said. How about Rangel and Dodd?

You can assume as a rule going forward: any standard I would apply to Abramoff, Duke, Delay, Bush or Cheney I apply to Democrats.

Good enough.

I will give you one thing. Once or twice you weakly said that waterboarding was torture -- you just never demanded it stop, and never criticized Bush for it.

I said it was torture, period. I voted against it, period. But I know a lot of people who feel otherwise, and frankly I feel about abortion the way you probably feel about torture, but I still have to live with people who think it is OK.

Other than that, you have never vocalized any strong criticism of Bush for either his incompetence or his criminality, beyond oblique statements that things might have been handled differently.

I don't hate the man. If that is an ideological litmus test here, yea I fail. Nor do I put on blinders for anyone. I see plenty of incompetence and corruption on the Democrat side too. The crooked timber of humanity. I don't serve them. They serve me.

Obama's strongest critics have already been the left and will continue to be.

I voted for Obama for a number of reasons, one being that I sensed he was more of a pragmatist than people thought, and therefore he would move to the center. He hasn't disappointed. Another reason is that he believes in American Exceptionalism, as voiced in any number of foreign policy speeches. This clashes with the moral relativism often voiced by the left. So, yea, I'm not surprised he has disappointed people.

That is the difference between us. One of the lessons you failed to internalize over the last eight years is this: we are a nation of laws, not men.

That's a whopper. Case in point, I live in PA, where Murtha pronounced a group of Marines guilty without trial of crimes for which they have since been exonerated. And while I think highly of Obama, the Cult of Personality that grew up around him during the campaign was creeptacular. Kudos for managing to not give another Kennedy a Senator-ship, but why was it even in the mix? It was by a small margin that we didn't have 20 years of Bush-Clinton. Hope Daschle and Geithner can hire Rangel's tax attorney. How's Jefferson's fridge working down in New Orleans? Keeping his money chilled? What's Elliot Spitzer up to these days?

Fact is repubs have always thought they were morally superior and dems thought they were smarter. Both are wrong. And you don't get to pick who's a dem and who isn't. If Illinois or a New Orleans parish wants to elect a crook, or PA wants to elect a corrupt Porkmeister named Murtha, or etc...that's what you get. Somehow assuming they're better because they're a Dem is stupid. You will be let down.

Posted by: red state mike on February 1, 2009 at 11:14 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly