Regards,
Peter H.

And in French: L’État c’est Moi.

Big, progressive government is an obvious failure to anyone willing to look. They’ve been working at it for years all over Europe (and in Canada).

They keep the masses entertained (more or less) while the bureaucracy grows and grows – feathering its nest at the expense of future (shrinking) generations. But if you’re one of, say, California’s part-time [you-name-it] board members who gets $300K a year – why would you care?

“Public service” has become THE way to wealth, power, and security. I don’t think it was supposed to work that way.

If I had kids, I’d tell them to shoot for a career in gubmint.

Sorry, couldn’t resist.

Regards,
Peter H.

The Democrats must be crazy, or blind to fiscal reality

No. Everyone is looking at the “economic stimulus” plan under the assumption that Democrats first priority is to stimulate the economy.

It isn’t.

Their first priority is to craft a permanent Democrat majority. Everything on their agenda makes perfect sense when looked at with this in mind. Everything they are doing is designed to empower current Democrat constituencies and make new people dependent on Democrat majorities. The economic stimulus would be much more accurately titled the “Democrat donor payoff and permanent majority act”.

You’ll remember Obama’s plan calls for something like 600,000 new government jobs. But what few are pointing out is the vast majority of “private sector” jobs created will be union jobs, or as Democrats refer to it, “infrastructure”. This is also why card check is so high on their agenda and Harry Reid is already working on amnesty. Democrats want open borders because new unskilled immigrants overwhelmingly vote Democrat. Their immigration bill will undoubtedly include expedited citizenship, and I wouldnt be surprised if they make registering them to vote part of the process.

Its why Obamas tax cuts will effectively make tax payers a permanent minority. Less than 50% of American workers will pay income tax when all is said and done. Then throw in “free” healthcare, “free” college, “free” preschool and all the other handouts Dems and Obama have at the top of their agenda, and it is clear their real purpose is to make as many Americans dependent on or beholden to them as possible.

But lets quit trying to see the logic from a stimulus point of view. Thats not where they are coming from.

The House rules the GOP enacted in 1995 (recently undone by Mrs. Pelosi and her gang) made it easier fo the minority to introduce legislation and propose amendments.

Bush reached out to Democrats in 2001, renominating some of Clinton’s judicial nominees who had not yet received Senate confirmation. Bush negotiated with Democrats on No Child Left Behind, removing provisions for vouchers as they were anathema to Democrats.

You may well be right that the president didn’t seek to exclude the Republicans; it appears the Democrats in Congress have done that.

So, no, the Republicans, as you presume, did not shut out the Democrats, but rather it was the Democrats who, more often than not, shut out the GOP.

The stimulus bill the president says “is still on track.”

The first time I read that sentence, I thought it said “crack”.

It makes a lot more sense that way.

They said screw you to their colleagues in Congress as well as the American people. Now that they’re no longer the majority in congress nor hold the white house, they quake in their boots and say “ooh….ooh, please, we really have to work together…”

I for one always have hope that they will work together, but I won’t be surprised in the strange world of politics if they go kicked in the pants a few times along the way…

And what lets them get away with that? (1) The media’s laziness, (2) People’s own laziness and forgetfulness. It’s human nature to vote for the flowers and unicorns and not want to have to think about politics.

So, every generation or two, the leftists finally make it into power, and Americans learn once more how awful it can be. And the rest of us just have to hope that the United States isn’t totally corrupted (or destroyed) in the process. When it’s over, we’re OK, sort of, for another 15-30 years.

None of this is to deny that for those of us who wish to a prosperous USA with opportunity for all, the democrats’ initiatives are both stupid and crazy. (The “Buy USA” part of the stimulus bill scares me far more than the overspending does, though that is bad enough.) However, if that is not their goal, then arguing about the means is futile.

I don’t mean to sound condescending; I’m speaking from hard personal experience. The truth is that I’ve more or less given up on logical argument. People want to believe what they wish to be true far more than they want learn which of their beliefs is true. Instead, argue emotionally: “Your daughter should graduate from college in 5 years. What do you want the job market to look like?” Or, in discussing socialized medicine, “Last year, when your father got sick, you took him to a special clinic in Philadelphia. Do you still want to be able to do that?”

Anyway it’s all pretty sickening.

The next time we see Lindsey Graham, he’ll be in a Gimp costume.

Alas, it was not meant to be.

So much for “bipartisanship.”

Regards,
Peter H.

Regards,
Peter H.