EXPLOITING TAXPAYER RAGE NOT THE WAY BACK FOR GOP
I have read some speculation in the last few days that it may be possible for the GOP to make big gains in the House and Senate in 2010 if they “tap in” to the rage being felt by ordinary taxpayers against the savior based economy being created by Obama and the Democrats.
As a tactic, it would probably be a winner. But is there another way to achieve the same result without exacerbating the already deep divisions in American society? We may be in a period of low employment, sluggish growth, and high inflation for a while if the Japan model is any indication with their “lost decade.” This is especially true since the Obama administration shows no signs of lessening the flow of cash from the federal spigot. Taxpayers have seen where most of this money is going already and feel betrayed by a government that is seeking to reward failure and bad decisions. The chances are pretty good at this point that all the “stimulus” in the world is not going to head off a deep recession and the federal government is apparently setting itself up to decide who wins and who loses in this shakeup.
The inevitable populist backlash is predictable. The problem is that mass movements based on populist rage have generally led to untoward and unanticipated consequences. History is littered with these populist outbreaks - especially those that happen as a result of great cultural and economic changes being enacted by a perceived elite. The last major populist movement in America was George Wallace’s candidacy in 1968 (to a much lesser extent in 1964 and 72) that saw the Alabama governor get an astonishing 13.5% of the vote and carry 5 states in the general election. Wallace tapped into the rage and fear being felt by white, working class men who felt threatened (thanks to Wallace’s sneering, bigoted rhetoric) by African American agitation for equality. Nixon and the GOP then mainstreamed the tactic albeit using much more subtle language and even Clinton got into the act with his famous “Sister Souljah Moment,” assuring whites he wouldn’t pander to black racists like Jesse Jackson (Clinton is the only Democrat since JFK to carry any states of the traditional “Deep South.).
Tapping in to the rage of taxpayers by exploiting their fears then, would almost certainly result in unanticipated problems for the GOP. But beyond that, is this the way the Republicans wish to return to power? The Rovian strategy of using wedge issues to cleave the electorate over gay marriage, abortion, and other social issues got Republicans elected but also sowed the seeds of their own destruction. By the time 2008 rolled around, those wedge issues had lost their potency and there was ample evidence of a backlash by center-right and center-left moderates against the GOP and their perceived intolerance. It was Obama who exploited this backlash by promising to govern based on not what divides us but by what unites us. His “post partisan” message - a campaign gimmick we know now - resonated powerfully with the center who had tired of the back biting and poisonous partisan atmosphere in Washington and longed for “change.”
There is only one campaign theme more powerful in American politics than fear; optimism. This is especially true in dire economic times or when America is threatened from abroad. Not only would running a campaign based on tapping into the native optimism of the people score political points with the electorate, it would give the GOP if not a mandate, then certainly the political clout to slow down the Obama Dependency Express and restore some sanity to our fiscal situation. It would also give the Republicans some leverage to moderate the Democrat’s bail out policies and give the party more input into legislation
What a marvelous opportunity for the GOP to show that they have indeed changed their tune if the party were to adopt an enthusiastically optimistic message while presenting viable solutions to our economic problems. With President Obama criss crossing the country trying to scare people into supporting him, the contrast between the GOP’s confident, optimistic agenda and the Democrats “America Held Hostage” policies would be pronounced. And, they would result in the kind of gains we can only dream of at this point.
But if the GOP were to descend to the Democrat’s level - scaring people by screaming about “socialism” and the attendant imagery of economic doom and gloom, the party may indeed make some gains but with what kind of mandate? And would it be as effective as preparing the people for tough choices by playing to their native optimism and saying that as Americans, we are capable of anything if we pull together? Coupled with some new ideas about targeted tax cuts and real “stimulus” spending instead of the porked up monstrosity offered by the Democrats, that rage could turn to optimism and hope which would attract a helluva lot more people than scare tactics.
Obama has ceded this territory to the Republicans. He has embarked on a course where in order to get his agenda passed, he will be forced to appeal to the basest instincts of the people. We are already seeing the result as it has pitted ordinary Americans who are resentful of where the bail out money has been going against other Americans who will be the beneficiaries of government largess. He may have underestimated the extent of this backlash although it remains to be seen if this rage can be channeled by Republicans into doing something constructive. For that, they simply cannot exploit the emotions of the day but must help make people feel good about themselves. Already, the feel-good aspect of the Obama candidacy - electing the first African American president - is fading. And as Obama’s policies to fundamentally alter the country become obvious, I suspect that feeling will disappear for all but the most committed Obamabots. The Republicans can reclaim the “feel-good” mantle by appealing to one of America’s greatest strengths; the ability of our citizens to look to the future with hope. Obama played to that strength during the campaign and is now abandoning it in favor of fear mongering. It’s s delicious political opening that the GOP ignores to its detriment.
Newly minted GOP chairman Steele is just the sort of person to lead a newly energized GOP into this fight. His ideas on reforming the party at the top to bring transparency and ethics to the fore as evidence that the Republicans have learned their lessons is a gigantic first step toward reviving the party’s fortunes. But if the GOP were to then simply fall back on failed strategies involving dividing the electorate, any good work accomplished by the chairman will probably go for naught. The party needs new ideas, new solutions that can be presented to the people as evidence that they have gotten beyond the past and are ready to lead the country to a bright future.
I must say that I am not optimistic that the GOP has learned such lessons. The temptation to exploit fear and anger is almost irresistable since it is the easy way back, a shortcut to where the party wants to be. The hard thing to do would be to eschew such tactics and be positive, optimistic, and forward looking while offering solutions that recognize how serious the trouble we are in but remaining true to our first principles and beliefs.
Then again, I may be pleasantly surprised…
Smart thinking, good post. I think a dose of optimism is a good prescription for the GOP, but not right now. Not yet. We have reason to be ticked, let it fester a minute. (And you may be saying the same thing, it depends on when you think campaigns start.)
I’m not convinced that Obama has necessarily ceded the HOPE territory. Once he uses fear to enact his agenda, which he’s doing at lightning speed, I think he’ll quickly revert back to campaign mode. That’s where he’s most comfortable, under the “O” orb.
At that point, we will either have already claimed the mantle of the party of optimism and “bright future”, or we’ll have to wrestle it from Obama.
So, it comes down to timing, doesn’t it? If we had a willing media, we could flip a switch and the buzz would change with a new template within minutes. But we don’t, so whoever is going to create our message has to hit the target right on, timing-wise.
Comment by sara in va — 2/22/2009 @ 10:14 am
I see no evidence of this taxpayer “rage.” Obama’s sitting in the high 60’s, 10-15 points higher than his election number.
The chances are pretty good at this point that all the “stimulus” in the world is not going to head off a deep recession and the federal government is apparently setting itself up to decide who wins and who loses in this shakeup.
False dichotomy: yes deep recession or no deep recession. Even deep recessions come in different strengths. No one has promised this will keep us out of recession. We’re already in a recession. We’re just trying to take some of the edge off and shorten the recession. Federal spending doesn’t drive us deeper, it keeps it shallower.
I’d love to see the GOP come up with a positive message. But I’ll bet a hundred bucks (to your favorite charity) that a year from now the GOP will still be playing its usual games. I think there was a moment a couple of months back when your party might have gone a different direction. But the GOP’s chairman is not Mr. Steele, it’s Mr. Limbaugh. It will continue to be Mr. Limbaugh, at least until the 2012 campaign gets going in earnest and we start to see a strong GOP candidate emerge. Even then a GOP standard-bearer will have to tug a forelock and bend a knee to the nuts.
Face it, Rick: it’s 1856 and you’re a member of the Whig party.
You are a serial exaggerator. Can’t you make any point at all without hyperbole and spin? Guess not.
ed.
Comment by michael reynolds — 2/22/2009 @ 11:45 am
Beyond the mandatory Obama ankle biting, this is a great post. I hope a lot of people read it — starting with the governor of Louisiana.
Comment by Shaun Mullen — 2/22/2009 @ 11:47 am
The GOP’s DNA is geared to attack,divide and lie. They made their bed with Rush, Hanitty, Savage and company. Theres not a chance they will turn to optimism,imho they love the angry over-the-top rhetoric. What they don’t realize is they can’t win a majority without the 18-29 year olds, the Hispanic vote, the African-American vote and the Asian-American vote. They are the party of no, not the party of Ronald Reagan. The gop spent almost a trillion dollars on the war in Iraq, didn’t hear anyone besides Democrats complain how it would bankrupt our country and not make us any safer. Now when Obama wants to spend money on Americans the gop is up in arms. The American people have seen thru the bs of the far-right, thats why they rejected them in the last 2 election cycles. Yes Rick, an optimistic approach would probably work for the gop…….nevah” gonna happen.
Comment by Joe — 2/22/2009 @ 11:48 am
I’m a serial exaggerator? Do you read your own blog?
You refer to taxpayer rage, I question that, (and supply data) you supply no data to support your assertion and accuse me of exaggeration.
Comment by michael reynolds — 2/22/2009 @ 12:29 pm
For Liberals, anger=challenging Democrats on the issues; hate speech=challenging Democrats on the issues; lies=challenging Democrats on the issues.
“The Rovian strategy of using wedge issues to cleave the electorate over gay marriage, abortion”
Utter nonsense. Gay marriage fails wherever voted on, even in the most liberal areas. How is that a Rovian wedge issue? The only wedge re: Gay marriage in America are the voters who are routinely against it versus the trial lawyers and liberal lobbying groups that stand to make money from it.
“The gop spent almost a trillion dollars on the war in Iraq, didn’t hear anyone besides Democrats complain how it would bankrupt our country and not make us any safer.”
Hey, Joe, anyone who makes the above argument is, um, you know, clueless. Even with the Iraq War, defense spending is approximately 5% of GDP. Education is more than 7%.
Oh, as for the Iraq War not making us safer. Really? You think Obama goes to bed at night wondering of Maliki is funding international terrorism? He’s not.
The difference is, Joe, the Constitution (which is not living by the way) mandates the federal govt. to deal with foreign enemies. It doesn’t mandate giveaways to special interest groups, which is exactly what the Stimulus Bill is.
Here’s a clue, Joe: Raytheon is the new Halliburton! But you won’t hear a peep about it from the people who are leading you around by the nose. Because you’ll believe anything.
Joe, you want real anger: check out MSNBC and Air America.
Comment by Long time Lurker — 2/22/2009 @ 12:42 pm
Just one thing, Rick.
Obama did not create the “savior economy”. Even in our most recent history Bush and Paulson created the TARP and the auto bailout.
This is reality.
We should not pretend this is all Comrade Obama’s doing.
Comrade Bush was there first doing his part.
Comment by bsjones — 2/22/2009 @ 1:08 pm
The GOP must forge a three-pronged attack. First must come the realism of what is wrong, then the well-founded optimism of how we can fix it all, and then the sound and basic principles of conservatism to be applied by the GOP to ensure it all stays that way.
Comment by mannning — 2/22/2009 @ 2:15 pm
I highly doubt the GOP will ever go for a “Unity” strategy over a dividing strategy. Division has been their stock in trade for so many years. How will they explain this to members of the base that have found so much comfort in the poor-hating, gay-hating, liberal-hating hysteria the GOP already churned up?
At least both strategies are better then the previous one where the GOP took advantage of a terrorist attack that killed thousands in order to stir up fear and win over hawks and create new ones.
That one was like finishing terrorist’s job for them.
That was pretty sickening. I’m sure whatever else you guys come up with will be equally sickening. We already have a disastrous economy thanks to the GOP. What more damage can they do?
Comment by Tim — 2/22/2009 @ 2:24 pm
Mike Reynolds - Don’t sweat it. You’re talking to a loyal, GOP sock puppet whose job is to sow doubt in anything our president does. President Obama doesn’t have to royally screw up anything like his republican predecessor did. He just has to be a democrat.
Imagine an entire party that closed their eyes and shut their mouths while their fearless leader spent us into an almost inescapable hole. While members of congress gutted every rule that would have protected the average American.
Now all of a sudden they’re the responsible spending cops. Literally almost bankrupted the most powerful nation on earth in only 6 years and they’re the waste-police? What a laugh.
Oh - And Sara - Yes - if only you could just pull a switch and get the entire country to believe a lie. Yes - That wouild be really great…
- if you’re a republican.
Comment by Tim — 2/22/2009 @ 2:42 pm
Hey longtime lurker, I listen to Rush everyday, he’s always angry. And don’t talk to me like I’m a little kid, I’ve been a political junkie my whole life and have forgotten more about politics then you know today. Same old conservative bs, they always know better than anyone else, yeah right buddy. Don’t even think of bullying this old boy(53) I laught at far right worshippers of Rush and company. Iraq helped bankrupt us, your the only person I’ve ever heard arguing that.
Comment by Joe — 2/22/2009 @ 4:33 pm
Rick,
Surprised you let Tim slide.
:
:
Tim, you are to be commended. You completely hit the nail on the head. Rick Moran IS a “loyal, GOP sock puppet”. I couldn’t have described him any better.
That was incredibly astute. And everything else you said about GOP as “poor hating, gay hating” and “gop as terorists” also broke new ground.
What we missed are your ideas for the GOP, how we can better appeal to incredibly astute voters like you.
Comment by sara in va — 2/22/2009 @ 4:33 pm
Sara,
I’ve been coming to this blog for years. I see the same thing over and over, “I’m angry W/ Bush too..I’m a conservative just trying to get my party back…blah blah”.
But by the way Rick goes after our president day in and day out, you would swear Obama did everything Bush did and worse *before* he was elected.
Oh and Sara - Don’t quote “gop as terrorists”. I never said that so how can you quote it? What I said was they “took advantage” of the fear Americans felt after the attacks.
Case in point - What ’s with the 30 min documentary by Pajama Media being advertised on this site? “The Next Jihad” or whatever it is. If a senior member of Al Qeada saw that, he would say, “Hey! Who sent the check to these Pajama people? I love their ads!”
And to answer your question - How could the GOP appeal to astute voters like me?
1.Sincerely apologize for telling us (twice) George W. Bush should be President of the United States of America. (you really told us that and Yes - He was that bad)
2.Stop with the wedge issues. Roe v. Wade will never be overturned. Stop distracting the country with it.
3.Stop telling us who can and who can’t get married. Stick to your belief that the government shouldn’t get involved in our lives.
4.Get behind completely overhauling campaign finance. No corporate or industry-group contributions for any candidate.
5.Stop being such angry dicks all the time and stop pandering to the rest of America’s angry-dick population.
6. Fire Rush Limbaugh as your party’s leader.
7. Decide once and for all that the GOP is here to serve America and not just the GOP - at all costs.
Because as it is now, there is nothing your party won’t do to win. Nothing. Nothing too low, nothing too cynical, no divide too caustic, no prejudice too unfair, Nothing!
That’s why the GOP doesn’t particularly appeal to me… to put it mildly..
Comment by Tim — 2/22/2009 @ 5:33 pm
Joe:
Who is making the argument that Iraq bankrupted us? Is Obama saying that? I’ve never heard anyone seriously make that argument? The left trots it out, but again, the US spends more on education than defense.
I don’t get “angry” from Rush. Rush doesn’t hang up on callers or yell. He’s pompous and sarcastic and a bit wry. But angry?
Are you thinking Mark Levin? Now he comes across angry.
Comment by Long time Lurker — 2/22/2009 @ 5:35 pm
Tim:
You lost me at “astute voter.”
Comment by Long time Lurker — 2/22/2009 @ 5:38 pm
Tim
Thanks for your input.
1. George Bush, again.
2. Abortion? You’re a guy, dude. Ever had one? Then Shut Up.
3. I would agree.
4. Never, unless Obama defunds ACORN. We all saw the videos of these so-called non-partisans. A joke.
5. You know, that’s not even clever.
6. That’s even more stupid, come on. Howsabout Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid? Oh, and Barney Frank. There’s someone to be proud of.
7. At all costs? Good grief. Your idealism isn’t noble. It makes you look silly. And besides, I again refer you to Nancy Pelosi. You wanna defend her, Tim?
By the way, why do you come to the site of a “sock puppet?” Because the leftist sites are dull and you are just another voice, shouting, and you can’t get the attention you need? It’s not like you’re offering anything new here, really.
Comment by sara in va — 2/22/2009 @ 5:56 pm
Sara and Lurk, why bother? Reynolds, the Junkie, and Tiny Tim wouldn’t vote for a Republican even if his name were Obama. They would just throw Oreo cookies at him, like they did to Michael Steele. Screw them and move on.
I believe there is a significant majority ( a silent one, if you will) that are outraged at rewarding failure, whether from the top or the bottom. How anyone can deny the basic unfairness of taking hard earned taxes from honest, play by the rules, Americans and giving it away in bushels to the 7 to 10 percent that f’d up,is beyond me and most of us. This is an emotion the GOP could harness.
I absolutely agree that a positive message is needed. Obama has significantly exposed Hope and Change to his real belief, along with his wife, that America is a bad country. Our economy is worse than the Great Depression, according to him. He said it explicitly in his campaign. We can’t continue to use the majority of the world’s resources (even though we create the majority of the world’s wealth). The socialist view is to bring the producers down to the level of the takers. Conservatives want to raise all people according to their abilities. Yet when people see the way these elitists live, it’s not them who have to sacrifice, it’s us. I believe common people of good sense understand this and despise the hypocricy more than they succomb to jealousy.
Comment by cdor — 2/22/2009 @ 8:24 pm
About that “rage” thing ..
Currently, takers of TARP money have to surrender bonds to the federal government, in effect giving partial ownership to the federal government of their business.
Will those who receive help with their mortgages be surrendering any part of the ownership of their homes to the federal government ?
Comment by Neo — 2/22/2009 @ 8:41 pm
So sad that somehow you know the future and that all things bad are Obama. If it were the GOP doing these things you’d be throwing a parade. Get off the bandwagon and think about things without your party agenda. This is no party, baby, no one said it was. Fixing the economy will require undoing the credit default swaps the 2000 lame duck congress voted as legal for the first time in nearly a hundred years. So called predatory loans are made when the assurance of them failing will cause your gain by betting they will default. Several trillion dollars later it is easy to see how the boom of these will pull (is pulling, has pulled?) the economy apart but no clear way, partisan or otherwise, to fix it. Stop advertising your political bias (and subsequent idiocy) when this is the last thing anyone’s energy needs to be wasted doing. Opposition and negative polarizing predictions with no grounds other than your hunch are just absurd. Get off.
Comment by Ken Smith — 2/22/2009 @ 9:22 pm
Anybody heard of TALF?
It’s the new Wall Street give away. $200 Billion in non recourse loans for speculators who buy securitized debt from Wall Street Banks. The debt investors think is junk.
It’s a can’t lose for the speculators. As the NYT says, “the Obama administration hopes to jump-start the securitization markets by effectively subsidizing the profits of big private investment firms in the bond markets.”
Great for speculators with deep pockets. Great for Wall Street. You and me, not so much.
Wow!! Government subsidies for Hedge Fund operators!! I can’t wait!! Neither can Santelli!!
Read all about it here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/business/20lend.html?_r=2&th&emc
Enjoy the masters of the universe at work.
Comment by bsjones — 2/22/2009 @ 11:03 pm
I agree it is easiest to see all the fault in your political opponent but in this case it is just not true. Some on the right are happy to point to Fanny and Freddie whereas the left points out excessive deregulation. As always there is some truth to both arguments but then there is more. Part of the problem also seems to be our trade imbalance with many overseas investors looking to invest their money back into American real estate; pair that with greed on Wall Street etc. However, that was a problem well known and both parties did the same thing: nothing.
So while I am worried about the extent of the money flowing I’m absolutely convinced that we need stricter regulation of the financial sector. What does capitalism really mean? How can you run a system that has to be selfish to a degree but still benefit the society?
However, as Americans I think there are areas where we all pretty much agree on like being less dependent on foreign oil, generating more renewable energy sources, finding ways to be less wasteful etc etc.. Again, here the problem is that the Democratic talking points are correct and the Republicans too. Sadly, it took Paris Hilton to point that out. Be that as it may, still a good place to put ones energy, optimism etc. Doesn’t conserve, conservation somehow go with conservative?
Comment by funny man — 2/22/2009 @ 11:29 pm
I watch Fox News. I watch Glen Beck. I saw this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPgjpbHI5gI&NR=1
There are three more parts on the youtubes.
Enjoy!!
“But if the GOP were to descend to the Democrat’s level – scaring people by screaming…”
Comment by bsjones — 2/22/2009 @ 11:31 pm
[...] are destined to have unintended consequences and collapse under their own weight, and instead proposes that the GOP adapt a politics of optimism. This politics of optimism would argue that better days are ahead, that American exceptionalism [...]
Pingback by The Politics of Optimism | Axis of Right — 2/23/2009 @ 5:50 am
There are plenty of GOP “new ideas”, or more aptly stated, “better ways” than the Obama way.
Didn’t the Left mostly use rage to drive it to victory over a seven year period along with Bush’s and the GOP ineptitude and mistakes. Most of those that voted for Obama didn’t have a clue about facts or even who they were voting for. It seemed to be all, well, emotional? It did seem to work? Doh?
We now have Obama making egregious acts, sometimes several times a day. It would seem the GOP should pick up the outrage cry along with presenting their ideas. I don’t believe anyone will get voter attention by shouting “we’re transparent” from the rooftops and byways of America.
Voter memory has a shorter lifespan than an ice cream cone on a hot day in Aruba. Saying you’re now no longer dishonest or whatever is simply wasted breathe.
Comment by cedarhill — 2/23/2009 @ 6:59 am
I think it is unrealistic to believe that any group as large as the GOP would have a unified message. Steele needs to lead the charge with an optimistic message, but a multi-prong attack is not only realistic, but probably effective. For example, Steele’s message would not convert some center-left voters, but pointing out Obama’s broken campaign promises may be effective for that bloc. Red-meat from Limbaugh and Hannity fires up the base. Gingrich’s intellectual counters to the Obama plan (see here ) will attract some, and taxpayer rage will play well to others.
As far as taxpayer rage goes, what surprises me as much as anything is that more leftys aren’t outraged by the method by which this stimulus bill got passed. There is certainly consensus that: nobody has read the entire bill; that it is laden with pork; that some, if not most of the pork will have no effect on stimulating the economy; that this gigantic spending package needed more analysis and debate. There’s no magic money tree, and somebody is going to have to pay for it- that’s you and me (both leftys and rightys). I suspect that the taxpayer rage issues is now in its infancy. Wait until it starts coming out of our paychecks.
Comment by lionheart — 2/23/2009 @ 7:43 am
Oops, screwed up the link… didn’t mean for it to redirect, only to pop up a new window. Sorry, Rick.
Comment by lionheart — 2/23/2009 @ 7:44 am
The GOP can be both optimistic and, yes, exploit the mounting rage over Obama’s gross over-reaching, particularly in regards to deadbeat mortgagees.
When you write:
it happens to be correct. So how to construct a positive message from the gross inequities responsible citizens have been forced to swallow? First, acknowledge their anger is very legitimate. Then, show them a positive way out of the crisis that doesn’t involve responsible home owners bailing out rift-raft in McMansions in the middle of former hay fields. The policy will have to be practicable and explained.
I’m not pessimistic about the GOP’s chances in 2010 and 2012, not because it has done such a good job (although the opposition to Obama’s excesses has been helpful), but because the Democrats have taken what is a suicidal course.
We can do two things at once. Legitimate taxpayer anger not only should be acknowledged because it is good politics, but because it is the right thing to do. That alone won’t get us back to majority immediately, but along with a positive alternative we will be well along our way.
Our opponents have handed us a golden opportunity. I hope the two-track approach I have laid out will be taken.
Comment by jackson1234 — 2/23/2009 @ 9:48 am
I would point to what I would consider mistake in the judgement of history; the last populist in our lifetimes that had any degree of success would ahve been that ittle fireplug from Texas, Ross Perot.
That point aside, I suggest that the anger is out there. Any winning strategy is going to have to include dealing with if effectively. There’s two ways Republicans can be in front of this crowd… leading it as a parade, or running from the angry mob they’re becoming. I warn you, the latter option is not a winning strategy.
Comment by Eric Florack — 2/24/2009 @ 8:00 am
And should we note, Rick, that your ad block contains “American Tea Party” ads? (Chuckle) I know, I know… just sorta struck me as funny is all.
Comment by Eric Florack — 2/24/2009 @ 8:02 am
Eric Florack,
According to some recent polls, it seems the Republicans are already on the run.
Here’s the poll (it’s a pdf linked on the page):
http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/23/does-bipartisanship-matter/
Never fear. joe the plumber is here.
Comment by bsjones — 2/24/2009 @ 2:26 pm
Bipartisanship =
Conservative Captiulation to the liberal establishment.
Comment by Eric Florack — 2/24/2009 @ 2:47 pm
[...] ain’t the way, Bro: I have said this before, I’ll say it again, Rick Moran: Taxpayer anger is already out there. Any winning strategy on either side… Democrats or [...]
Pingback by Nightly Ramble: The “It’s snowing again” edition | BitsBlog — 2/24/2009 @ 3:02 pm
The $400 billion funding bill is coming up this week, if I heard correctly. It has by count 9,000 pork line items in it. Obama is not going to try to fix it. Surprised?
Comment by mannning — 2/25/2009 @ 11:26 am
Too many of his Congressional supporters live from pork, and will defend having pork to the death.
Comment by mannning — 2/25/2009 @ 11:28 am
By the end of this year, I expect that most Conservatives, those that are above the adulation of Obama, will be in full and highly vocal revolt against the Obama Administration, and will turn on their rath here on the web as well as in every media that will publish the rants. This Administration will by then have earned the people’s rath twice over, I believe. The Honeymoon will be over and done with.
Every hint of creeping or galloping socialism will be castigated, and every decision that moves us in some other liberal spend, spend, spend direction will be challenged thoroughly, competently, and I hope without foul language from our side. Let us make it unlike the last 8 years of dirty-mouthed and hypocritical Liberal rants and lies.
Does anyone think that we should be giving a billion dollars to Hamas?
Perhaps the trigger indicator will be Obama’s slide in the polls to under 50%. Watch for it!
Comment by mannning — 2/25/2009 @ 11:50 am
How about something positive. Ronald Reagan never did get much traction with the huge problem of paring back the regulatory state but going for this is a positive approach that would unite the nostalgics (Reagan’s unfulfilled agenda!) as well as the small government types (it’s about directly shrinking government after all) and shouldn’t offend sane Democrats (who really supports regulations that do more harm than good?) and thus could be a bipartisan initiative that would embarrass Pelosi and Reid.
The key is that identifying the bad regulations is a huge information processing problem. When Reagan was President the processing power needed to track and attack the worst of the worst was big and expensive. Today we still have a tools problem but it’s one of compiling the data in a standard format and parsing it out for analysis so that we can go pick off the high impact ones. This is doable.
Comment by TMLutas — 2/28/2009 @ 11:13 pm
Fairness “Red Herring” Doctrine…
…
Trackback by MLoger — 3/6/2009 @ 4:38 pm