Gay Patriot Header Image

Credit to Obama Where It’s Due

Posted by ColoradoPatriot at 2:54 pm - March 7, 2009.
Filed under: Credit to Democrats

Lest we be charged with simply bashing the president because of who he is (alas, not that any degree of deference will disuade the true Obamaphiles from making that accusation), two* full-throated cheers to the president for his latest move of sober and responsible action in the War On Terror. You do remember there’s a war on, right?

The Obama Justice Department has adopted a legal stance identical to, if not more aggressive than, the Bush version. It argues that the court-forced disclosure of the surveillance programs would cause “exceptional harm to national security” by exposing intelligence sources and methods.

The president deserves credit here. And we, as conservatives who are serious about protecting America from terrorist attacks (especially those that have roots here within our own borders) should be willing to congratulate him on this good move. Ronald Reagan is commonly credited with believing that it’s amazing what you can accomplish when you don’t care who gets credit. Well I for one am glad to give Obama and Holder (shiver) credit here, where it’s due. Thank you, President Obama, for ignoring the hysterics of the radical Left, and doing your job: Protecting America.

*(Only two cheers, because as the Journal suggests, it’s likely Holder released the anti-Bush bait that he did this week specifically to draw the attention of the jackals away from this wise policy. So much for ignoring the hysterics of the radical Left. Nevertheless, maybe he deserves credit for knowing that such a move would be required in order to get away with it. On the other hand, sounds kind of, how do you say? Cynical?)

-Nick (ColoradoPatriot) from HQ

Obama’s Disapproval Ratings Climb Steadily

Ruh-roh, Chairman Obama

Looks like the lines will cross in…. oh about a month, if not sooner.

Dear Leader — what are you doing wrong?  We, The People all know…. it is time for you to figure it out.

Here’s some free advice.  Stop partying on the taxpayer dime while the rest of America is dealing with your declining economy.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

They Keep Coming to Bury Reagan, Not to Praise Him

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 12:00 pm - March 7, 2009.
Filed under: Economy,Liberals,Obama Watch,Ronald Reagan

For the past twenty-seven years at least (perhaps longer), Democrats and their allies in the media have been trying to write the obituary for Ronald Reagan’s ideas.  The latest to do so is former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich who claimed that the very unveiling of President Obama’s budget sounds the death knell for Reaganomics:

It is the boldest budget we have seen since the Reagan administration, and drives a nail in the coffin of Reaganomics. We can basically say goodbye to the philosophy espoused by Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.

I’m not quite sure how the mere introduction of a spendthrift budget kills off Reagan ideas.  It does clearly show that his campaign rhetoric notwithstanding, the current president intends to govern in an entirely different manner than did the Gipper and that he has learned nothing from the Fortieth President’s economic record.

This budget would only mark the end of Reaganism if two things happen.  First, this budget needs to pass Congress and be followed by economic growth similar to that which followed the enactment of the Gipper’s tax cuts and regulatory reforms of the 1980s.  Second, a candidate espousing spending increases of such magnitude (i.e., as in Obama’s budget) needs to win election campaigning on increasing the size of the federal government.

Recall, Obama’s campaign promise of a “net spending cut.”  With such a proposal, the Illinois Democrat didn’t repudiate Reagan’s economic ideas, he seemed instead to embrace them.

Indeed, the last Democrat to win the White House didn’t do so by running against Reagan.  In 1992, Bill Clinton was careful to run against George H. W. Bush who, in rasising taxes and favoring greater spending increases than the Gipper, had all but repudiated the domestic policies of the man he had served so loyally for eight years.

And during his near-successful campaign for the White House in 2004, John Kerry made quite a show of paying homage to the Gipper when he died that June.

The Massachusetts Democrat had learned an important lesson:  every Democrat who ran against Ronald Reagan lost.


How Many on the Left “Need” a Villian:
Whether Confronting Opposition to Gay Marriage
or the Administration’s Policies

On Wednesday after first blogging on the eagerness of the Administration and its MSM allies to attack Rush Limbaugh personally rather than address his criticisms of their policy directly (or just plain ignore him), I realized they reacted to this outspoken entertainer in the same manner as many on the gay left (alas)  react to any opposition to gay marriage.

In both cases, those on the left side of the political aisle demonize their opposition in a manner reminiscent of a political campaign where the goal is to prevent an opponent’s election.  In short, they seem to see politics as a battle of personalities not ideas.  They always need a villain.  Yes, I grant this is true for many on the right, especially certain extreme social conservatives.

Why is it they believe they can best advance their argument not by taking apart their opponent’s case, but by taking that opponent apart (or defining someone as their opponent so as to eviscerate him)?

In the case of gay marriage, the adopt-a-villain strategy is backfiring, in large part, because they lose support from many otherwise sympathetic to the villian du jour.  But, when you make a case for gay marriage, some of those “sympathicoes” who might otherwise be turned off by your rhetoric might end up listening to your argument.