greg h wrote on 02/10/09 12:49 PM

Hi Russell,

Well said!

Amazing when a tech blogger gives clearer analysis of matters of profound importance at the moment of the greatest crisis of all our lifetimes. (The crisis being the onset of the depression being precipitated by the deleveraging necessitated by the last decades' unsustainable lending. (Every "toxic asset" today, was some financial guy's book of business 3 to 5 years ago.)

Some in the press have got it right on the fraud of Obama's so called post partisan era by referring to the President's recent statements as "mocking".

I vote that CNN add you as a political commentator (and drop perennial partisan hack Paul Begala ;-)

Best regards,

g

db wrote on 02/10/09 12:52 PM

When did the Republicans suddenly become fiscal conservatives? I somehow missed that over the last 20 years...

I'm unaffiliated, and I'd find this inane posturing from both sides incredibly funny if it weren't so incredibly damaging to the interests of the people they supposedly represent.

For God's sake, can't ANYONE come up with a credible third party?

Matt Giger wrote on 02/10/09 1:21 PM

The Republicans are very much against using taxpayer money to keep up our bridges, roads, schools and other essential government services running and stimulating demand that has fallen off the cliff. They magically think that these things that we all use are not needed, or it just doesn't fit their "what's in it for me" mantra.

Since '68 we've had a Republican in the White House 70% of the time, and they have created the enormous deficit and removed all roadblocks to unscrupulous business practices. The Republican ideal of self regulating markets has proven to be an utter failure, one which we will be paying for during the next several decades.

Your perceptions will change if you look with a critical eye at not only what Democrats say, but also what demonstrably false and irrelevant statements that Republicans are using as a reason to oppose any stimulus. Sadly, Republicans feel that it is in their best political interests for Obama to fail, thus the US must fail for them to win. Even more sadly, there are plenty of Americans that are cheering for the next Depression so their "team" can win. Very corrosive to the soul I'd imagine.

Hopefully you aren't in that camp.

Mike Rankin wrote on 02/10/09 1:21 PM

Obama is a Communist.

Steve 'Cutter' Blades wrote on 02/10/09 2:04 PM

@Matt - I think you really need a history lesson.

Republicans believe in less government, less intrusion on the personal rights of the people, enforcing the law and protecting the citizenry. They don't have a problem with building bridges, roads, schools, or essential (and that is the critical word) government services. They DO have a problem giving away hard earned money to those to lazy to work for their food. I'm not talking about those who are unable, I'm talking about those third generation welfare recipients who are content to smoke crack and make babies on our dime.

Republicans, in general, do not want the President to fail in his task of public stewardship. Rather, they want him to do so responsibly, without placing our country on the brink of chaos and anarchy through piss poor planning and execution of a stimulus that isn't held in proper balance.

Sadly, some people can't tell who really has an agenda in these affairs, because they don't think for themselves but only listen to what the media tells them through TV or 'news'papers. Have you read the stimulus bill? http://www.readthestimulus.org

Matt Giger wrote on 02/10/09 2:21 PM

@Russell: Sadly the stimulus that will pass the Senate has been stripped of most of those infrastructure items to overcome the Republican filibuster threat. Republicans will obstruct any kind of spending that will help the economy, they feel that it isn't in their political interest to have America come out of the depression their ideology caused. They just can't give up on their precious "Government doesn't work, elect me and watch me prove it" methodology. Check the bill that passed the House of Representatives, that is more in line with what the White House wanted.

@Steve: Republicans believe in less government Since 1970, spending has grown 64% faster when a Republican sits in the White House than when a Democrat does. Less intrusion on the personal rights of the people: Warrentless Wiretapping means that now Obama has a copy of every phone call you have made. Enforcing the law and protecting the citizenry: Valerie Plame, a NOC dealing with nuclear non-proliferation was outed by Cheney for revenge. Lazy? Welfare? Didn't that argument die in the late '80s? Perhaps you need to read more about current events. I think that the Republican party that you (and I) admired in the '80s is no longer in existence.

Perhap

Dan Laughland wrote on 02/10/09 2:30 PM

Russell, I think you're right on the money. Obama's arrogance lately has been astounding. He's acting like his election means the entire American populace is ready to follow him and he should be able to dictate policy however he wants. You still have to convince some of those Republicans that you're right if you want them to vote for you!

Steve 'Cutter' Blades wrote on 02/10/09 2:36 PM

@Matt - I Still think you really need a history lesson.

If you research a little deeper you will see that there has only been one two year period, over the past (almost) 50 years where a Republican has sat in the White House with a Republican Congress. (This was the first two years of G.W. Bush's administration)

You (and so many others) are giving way more power to the President than he actually has. If the President can not get the support of the House and Senate, then he is overruled by a 2/3rds vote. You can blame all our woes on the Republican party all you want, but we (all of us) are the ones at fault for continually voting these fools into office (how long have Kennedy and Bird been in office?). Presidents supply strong suggestions, but Congress write and vote in policy.

Matt Giger wrote on 02/10/09 2:46 PM

@Steve: You make my case. If the President isn't as important as Congress as you state, from 1994-2006 it has been primarily in Republican hands. Look where we are today. The problems we are facing are *entirely* due to the failed ideology of industry regulating itself (and creating laws to benefit themselves). Democrats are implicated in this scheme for sure. Keep your head in the sand and hold on to that ideology as long as possible while the country crumbles, denial seems to be a virtue with the GOP.

David wrote on 02/10/09 3:15 PM

"The simple truth is, 90% of this so called stimulus package goes against 100% of a fiscally conservative's belief system of what government is and should be."

Russell, the problem is that it's only against the fiscally conservative belief system when a Democrat is President. It was the Republicans that grew the deficit from 5 to 10 trillion dollars. What the Obama Presidency is promoting only increases the debt by 8% - hardly what I'd call the straw to break the Camels back.

David

Steve 'Cutter' Blades wrote on 02/10/09 3:29 PM

@Matt - Actually you make my point. Republicans controlled both the House and the Senate from 2000 - 2002. That is the only time, in the past 50 years, where Republicans controlled Congress.

This isn't an idealogy discussion by anyone other than yourself. 'Denial' is a word that seems to suit you. I am a moderate, and believe in common sense, which hasn't been very common in too long a time. 'x' amount of dollars for contraceptives (yeah, I know, but it's the first one I could think of off the top of my head) is stupid. That didn't create jobs, or stimulate the economy.

And I understand that some of these government initiatives would create jobs, but many would be government jobs. We have too many of those now (and few who 'work' enough to justify their pay, believe me).

We have a history of creating government stop-gaps that are supposed to be temporary but end up permanent: Welfare, Social Security, IRS, Department of Energy. Regardless of what you might think, these really haven't worked out so well.

I'm going to go back to work now, so I can give 30% of my pay to the government everyday, to support all of those to lazy to work for their own food. We could go on for hours, but in my experience it is usually a waste of time to argue with the ignorant. Even the seemingly educated ignorant.

Matt Giger wrote on 02/10/09 3:54 PM

Less than 0.1% of your taxes goes to "lazy" welfare recipients. What you are working for now are the lazy bankers that bet all of our money and lost and are crying about how they need more bonuses for the great work they do. Republicans are fine with welfare for the rich and powerful. Another irrelevant strawman to prop up a failed ideology.

Sooner than you think, things will become very dire indeed in our country. You may yourself be one of those too "lazy" to get a job.

Trini wrote on 02/10/09 4:29 PM

LOL you are funny... REPS want bipartisanship LOL real funny... LOL

David wrote on 02/10/09 4:30 PM

Russell - I take you at your word that you were always against big Government spending, it's just that I've looked back at the political section of your blog, and I don't see any ranting or raving about high spending during the Bush Presidency. It's the same with what's going on now. All of a sudden the Republican party is getting all holier-than-thou about deficits, and that's why they don't want to inject money into the economy. Out of the 178 Republicans that are in the house, you're telling me there wasn't even the statistical 1% who agreed with the stimulus package?

All of the Republicans were told by the leadership to vote against it, and they followed in-step. They did exactly what they were told to do. That's not the independent critical thinking that Conservatives pride themselves on. That is Partisanship, plain and simple.

David

Mike Rankin wrote on 02/10/09 4:58 PM

@David: The house Republicans are idealistic than the Senate Republicans. It's easy to imagine that 100% of the House Republicans voting against this atrocity of a bill. It is an affront to what should be their core beliefs. What's hard to imagine is that 75% of the House Democrats DIDN'T vote against this bill. I mean, come on; it (and I'm including TARP here) dwarfs the $130B that's going to be spent on the Iraq war this year. We could pay for 10 Iraq wars at that rate and yet Democrats are eager to pass this.

I'd be for the stimulus bill if every American taxpayer was willing to accept their bill for it. Feel free to get out your checkbook and cut that EXTRA $6500 check to the government. They know what to do with your money better than you do any way.

David wrote on 02/10/09 10:19 PM

@Russell, what you're saying makes no sense. 0% of Republicans in the House voted for THIS spending bill from THIS President when the House was, for many years essentially a rubber stamp for the Bush Administration. They were able to vote the National deficit from 5 to 10 trillion dollars in the past 8 years - did the JUST discover their "good conscience"?

@Mike - TARP was proposed by a Republican President, and supported by Republican Congressmen and Senators. Even John McCain supported the TARP bill. And quite frankly, I'm STUNNED to see Iraq come up in your post. That fiasco is going to cost us over a trillion dollars....wow, sure would be nice to have THAT money lying around right about now, wouldn't it? Oh but wait, we borrowed that too, didn't we? Hey, I'm all for paying as we go - sign me up! But why NOW? Where the heck were you guys when we were borrowing up the wazoo for the past 8 years? When we borrowed the entire cost of the Iraq war...and while we're at it why don't we share the responsibility of fighting that war, with a draft during war time? Did it actually take a THUMPING in the electoral college for Republicans to finally come round and smell coffee?

And it's not that there's "not much" in your political section, but it's 80% anti-Obama/Gore. There is no even-handedness whatsoever in your political blog posts. I mean, you couldn't find ONE thing to rant about during the Bush administration and/or the McCain Presidential bid? Not one??? Who are your clients, the RNC? Ya don't seem to worry about pissing off Democratic clients. Dude, you're gonna have to do a little better than that.

Look, let's face it, "This entire fiasco surrounding Obama" is the fact that he got elected. The Republican attack machine threw everything at him - he was a terrorist, a communist, an arab, a muslim and much more I'm sure. The people who fell for that hook line and sinker, and were being fed Fox News by IV drip have remained in a stunned state that somehow THEY knew something that the other 69 million people in America didn't, and it's eating them up.

You know what guys, come on - you want to go all attack dog on the President, go ahead, but don't wrap it in some candy coated principle pill. This is partisanship, plain, simple, and same-old same-old. You got better ideas? Let's hear them.