Frum on NY-23 and the conservative dilemma
David Frum is a staunch conservative - and a great critic of the conservative movement's recent melodramas.
In a column for CNN, he puts the NY-23 race in a national context, and includes this gem:
Read the entire essay here.A few days ago, I was talking to a roomful of young conservatives about the crisis. All agreed in denouncing both the bank bailouts done under TARP and the stimulus. I asked: OK fine -- what was the alternative?
There was a short pause, and then somebody laughed: "I guess it's lucky that we weren't in power."
That's not much of a motto for a would-be national governing coalition. If all we conservatives have to offer is oppositionism, then opposition is the job we'll be assigned to fill.
Labels: election09
posted by Brian Mann @ 11/17/2009 12:41:00 PM
21 Comments
21 Comments:
If McCain had won, what would have been done differently? What plan did the other side have? Obviously , if they had a plan they would have used it before the November 2008 elections. Even Sarah palin has said the economy, that was created by Republicans was the reason McCain and her lost that election.
Give her credit for admitting it..
The D's are not totally blameless here. I just can't see any way that the curent economic conditions were totally the fault of George Bush. The wars, different story. But the economy is almost 50/50 between the two parties.
NO- It is NOT a 50/50 Dem/Rep. blame.
Here is the information from the CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE in 2004.
" IN JANUARY 2001 WHEN BUSH TOOK OFFICE, CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATES OF THE FEDERAL BUDGET SHOWED $5.6 TRILLION IN SURPLUSES FOR THE 10 YEARS FROM 2002 TO 2011. As of last summer, the CBO was instead projecting a net deficit of nearly $400 billion for the same period, rising to $2.1 trillion if the president's budget proposal for fiscal year 2004 passed.
The single largest policy change responsible for this fiscal reversal was the Bush tax ... "
And there you have it. And that is why we are where we are. And what do some propose? To do it AGAIN. That my freind is the definition of INSANITY.
Yeah, Bush, Bush, Bush ad nauseum. Be honest people. Itg was both parties spending their black little hearts out that got us here and we let them.
Those young conservatives need to start thinking. TARP and the other bailouts were patches on a broken system. You have to fix what caused the hole first. That means an end to corruption in Washington- a HUGE undetaking.
BTW- maybe some of you libs can tell me why most of the TARP money is sitting in a bank someplace waiting for next summer (right before the mid term elections) to be spent? That must be Bushs doing too, eh?
You are missing Frum's point. It's not about blaming one side or the other, it's about "what would you do to address this issue?" His point is that the conservative side has not come up with any realistic alternative to what is being done at the moment and only seems to be in the blame game ("oppositionism"). Criticize the Obama administration all you want but come up with a specific alternative... besides something as vague as "end corruption".
It's the same thing with health care - the Republicans are against anything that has been brought forth so far... but they haven't presented anything as a realistic alternative. As a matter of fact, they only opposed any efforts by the Clinton administration, did nothing for health care reform during the Bush administration and are now opposing everything again - oppositionism.
Mark, Saranac Lake
Come on. We know exactly what conservatives would have done. What they've always done. Cut taxes and continue the spending.
Mark, Saranac LakeYour assessment is fair. I would argue that the just do nothing strategy of the Republicans is exactly that. Their strategy. Let each entity and individual make it or fail on their own. If that means Banks closing and Businesses closing and people not having Health Care except in emergency rooms, then so be it. I think many conservative leaders have said as much. Nothing is the plan.
It would seem to come down to this. Democrats can be accused of tax and spend, and Republicans of Cut and spend.
Theloud " NO" to everything from the right is really about posturing for the 2010 and 2012 elections. That is more important to them than any solutions or compromises. It is all about regaining power. That is the sad fact.
"maybe some of you libs can tell me why most of the TARP money is sitting in a bank someplace waiting for next summer (right before the mid term elections) to be spent? That must be Bushs doing too, eh?"
I think you have become paranoid after watching the Cheney/Bush White House pass out his stimulus money right before the 2004 election with the check gimmick. Or perhaps it was the phony " ORANGE" Alerts that homeland Security was ordered to put out right before the 2004 election as admitted by Tom Ridge. They are out of office now, you can relax a bit.
Can Conservatives please make up their mind. Are mad that there was a big stimulus bill passed, or mad that the money hasn't been spent, and may never be spent? And if it has not been spent, what math are you using to say anybodies grandchildren will have to pay it back? Very confusing.
I think Conservatives were more than happy to lose the last election. It is easier to to complain about the mess that was left , a failing economy, two unfinished and unpaid for wars, rising national debt, a foreign policy in shambles and a ruined and a reeling justice department, blame it all on the next guy and bank on the short memory of the public in the next election cycle.
Pretty smart of them really.
Look, that money is sitting someplace ready to be used to buy votes in the 2010 election. Not only is that wrong, but it's not serving the purpose that it was borrowed for. Can anyone else understand simple things like that?
You want answers? I've given some of my ideas before and all the lib intelligentsia here poo-poo it. Cut spending gradually over a course of years, go through the budget line by line an eliminate duplication and waste, end new entitlement programs, make every expenditure in the budget subject to a recorded vote, cut the practice of add on's to bills (PORK). These are simple things. We need to run Gov't like a business and we've never done that.
There have been some conservative offering viable alternatives to the proposed "health care" (I read that "Money/Power Grab) bill. Personal health savings accounts, competitive health insurance across all 50 states, tort reform, etc. No one wants to consider anything short of a single payer system it seems.
Hi, Wall St. Exec and high roller, Shirleymay Dophwell here. Just drove up from the Hamptons to go bear hunting at my new 12,000 sqft. cabin in the 'Dacks. Paid for the place with your bailout money, suckers! :-)
I just don't understand the teapartiers who are against giving bailouts to Wall St.? Don't they realize that what is good for Wall St. is also good for our uberlobbyist friends on K St.? Also, buying friendly GOP Reps and Senators is costly (boy, could that Tom Delay make a million dollars squeak! Miss the old curmudgeon).
I've also used some of that chump change to pay my bill at the exclusive Bucksrun Country Club and Polo Grounds.
Anyway, I'm in the 'Dacks and see that my BFF Sarah P. is in the area. So I invite her over to my cozy cottage on my lake. The next day, Sarah P. wakes me up at 6:30 a.m.. She was having her coffee out on my wrap-around deck,
when she spotted 3 black bears, about 300 feet away, nuzzling around the bait, er...food I have my staff set out for them. Sarah, was like, "let's get our guns and go get 'em! I'm like, "Sarah, hunting black bears is not that easy." Sarah says, "I know everything there is about hunting black bears, I could see them from your deck!" Can't argue with that logic. You betcha.
Anyway, thanks for listening. Keep the bailout money coming in. Glad Obamamomma is retaining the good ol' boys from GoldmanSach in our Treasury and Federal Reserve.
PS. You poor people are used to being poor. We wealthy would just die without the perks your money can buy for us.
I know an old man (ok, my dad) who gets a whopping $600.00 a month from the Feds because he's too lazy to get a job. And just because he's diabetic, blind and confined to a wheel chair is no excuse, he could hire himself out as a living store window mannekin or a mattress tester.
But, anyway, if his monies were cut, his life would go on. He would just switch to a cheaper brand of cat food. I on the other hand could not imagine giving up caviar for sardines. Ewwww!
You betcha.
The ignorance of the left as to what has ultimately caused our economic demise is striking. To even think that an economy the size of the US would go where it has because of 8 years of Bush is insane. Go look at the roots of the problems. It wasn't Bush's tax cuts, it was toxic assets (bundles of bad mortgages) that took down banks and put banks in the position of needing the bailouts.
Why did we have so many toxic assets? I like to go back to the late 70's when the Democrats went to bat to help the inner cities and other people who didn't deserve mortgages because of their financial situations. Then groups like ACORN jumped on the pile when banks resisted giving loans that put the banks at risk. ACORN legally extorted the banks to give loans to the inner cities that the bank knew were never going to be paid back. All this so that the banks would be able to make mergers and acquisitions and continue growing business.
Then came the market of bundling these bad mortgages and selling them to get hte off the books. Who bought trillions of dollars of these toxic assets, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Those two happened to be backed by our great government and happens to own something like 60% of all mortgages in the country. So the government technically already owns over half of our houses and has a good head start, for those of you wanting us to go down the road of communism.
So what happens when loans start being defaulted on in the billions of dollars? Banks balance sheets go to crap and banks have no money and fail or need to be propped up with cash to stay liquid.
What is so hard for the left to understand about this? It is a much bigger problem than some tax cuts. This ball started rolling 70 years ago and it finally steam rolled us all and the markets. Ever hear about what goes up will come down? Did people honestly think that the stock market would stay above 14000 forever. There was going to be a correction. It happened, let the market take care of itself.
The left really needs to go back to economics 101 and hit the recent history books. If they get off their collective Bush hating arses and actually look at things from a big picture point of view, instead of the minute "Bush did it" mentality, they may have their eyes finally opened to their closed mindedness.
Same goes for health care and cap and trade. Appease the wacko, trust fund baby, far left base. There are solutions that would be steps to fixing many problems but all these politicians are looking towards are their legacies and the next election and what demographic can we swindle votes from. Immigration will be the next scam. As Bill Clinton said, it's all about the politics, get the health care bill passed just to pass one. Who cares about the merits of it or what it will do in the long haul to all of our pocket books... We need the votes of the illegals and inner city poor minorities (who don't pay any taxes by the way). So let's have everyone else pay higher taxes so we can give coverage to people who haven't paid a dime in taxes. All for votes.
Anon. good writing, but much nonsense involved in the process.
First, just the other day, a video clip was presented of Pres. Bush speaking to ACORN about the need to help poor families become home owners and how he was going to make that possible.
Second, your grossly inaccurate attack on inner city minorities and immigrants smacks of racism and xzenphobia.
I didn't stop at History 101. I took graduate level courses and never read or learned of such tripe as you present here as fact.
No wonder some folks choose to remain anonymous.
"Anon.November 18, 2009 10:12 AM"
Whew! wow. There, you feel better? So,tell us all once again how come 8 years of Regan and 8 years of Bush and why were not all these things ever fixed then? And the surplus? what was that all about after the Clinton 8 years? I mean, where did that go again. I am sooo slow.
And can you please explain how the Defense part of the Budget has grown FOUR times faster than any other part of the budget the last 8 years ( more than all those social programs combined) and what you think we need to do about that.
Please go through this trickle down thing again. It just does not seem to be trickling down much. Must be we are doing something wrong.
"TORT REFORM?"..
I know this has been a talking point by the far right for years. It is a populist theme. Red meat. But tell me, what guarantee is there that if you did it that any savings would be passed on? Or would it just be pocketed?
And , " Tort Reform" for whom? I mean, if youare saying for everybody and that if I go out drinking all night and run a red light and hit your car and kill your wife and your kid is in a wheel chair the rest of his life and you in a neck brace but I am not going to be responsible, then do tell me more. But if you are only talking about drug companies and insurance companies not being responsible for much anymore, then I have a real problem with that.
do not just throw out the " tort reform" line, tell me for who. It is not 1% of the problem anyways, but it makes for a great talking point for conservatives..
The CBO ( Congressional Budgt Office ) has released their report today the the Health Care Bill before the Senate will SAVE $127 Billion Dollars off the deficit over the next ten years.
That would be a good place to start then. Now, if we could only do something about all the Red State Welfare going on. Those states like South Carolina that receive twice as much from the Federal Government as they receive. It will be a hard sell for the Republicans and Conservatives to go against their Base States, but hopefully they will put America first.
There was no conservative candidate in the last election, and no conservative president since Reagan. McCain, Newt, Huckabee, Romney, Guiliana, et. al. are not conservatives.
When and if we get a true conservative back in the White House and/or a conservative majority in the House or Senate, then we can have a debate.
TARP was a bad idea from a conservative perspective. Global warming is a hoax, from a conservative perspective. The fact that these perspectives aren't getting voiced is that there is no one with the guts to stand up and be called a conservative, at least not now. We'll see. We have someone on the national scene with more guts than any man has.
I can't wait to hear the libs backlash this post. But I can take it. I have guts, too.
JDM
"I can't wait to hear the libs backlash this post. But I can take it. I have guts, too."
JDM
Not sure what you mean by " Lib?". All I know is all of our founding Fathers and Framers of the Constitution were Liberals. Or " Libs" as you call them.
Conservatives have to let the rest of us know someday "who" the conservative leaders are. You always say any person that does not do exactly as you like is therefor Not a Conservative. It is setting yourself up to no debate at all. You can never lose because the person you voted for was " not " really a consevative. Just let us know before the game is over which team you bet on. Thats all.
And you are right, Palin has more "guts" than all those names you mentioned have put together, and add in cheney and bush and armitage and all the rest. No clear thoughts, and no committment to the State of Alaska to not quit her job as Gov. as she promised she would do when elected..she put book money and personal profit ahead of the people there...but lots of guts. On that we agree.
Liberal today refers to those who favor transfer of wealth from the working rich to the working poor.
Liberal today means pro-choice (with the choice being to kill a baby).
Liberal today means man caused the Earth to do what it always does, gets warmer, then colder, then warmer, then colder.
Why is so hard to admit that?
"Why is so hard to admit that?"
The people have spoken. Elections matter. We have " Libs" in the Executive and Legislative Branches because we want them there.
Problems were not only not being solved by the " Cons" but they denied the economy or health care were even a problem.
We voted, the majority of the people got their way. Let Democracy do what it does best.
What part about elections don't you get....
Post a Comment
<< Home