Refusing to understand conservative objections to the president’s economic policies and reluctant to acknowledge the failures of said policies, Democrats — and their allies in the mainstream media — have been peddling the notion that Republicans are engaged in economic sabotage, obstructing Democratic legislation in order to forestall an economic recovery and so prevent Barack Obama’s reelection.
The New York Times even called the Republican method “economic vandalism.” Guess they missed all those bills the Republican House passed only to see them die in the Democratic Senate. Or, maybe the paper’s editors missed the classes in college on free market economics (that is, if said classes were taught at all).
Well, some participants in free market movements aren’t waiting for Times editors to take remedial courses in free market economics. They, like resilient individuals do in a (mostly) free society tend to do, are taking action on their own to help get the economy moving again:
Liberate Philadelphia/Liberate America, a Tea Party coalition of groups countering the “Occupy Wall Street” movement, are challenging the latest move by Occupy Wall Street protesters to occupy or boycott publicly traded retailers on Black Friday by instead encouraging consumers to shop on Black Friday to help the economy recover.
“At a time when our economy is most fragile and ratings agencies are talking about another downgrade of the U.S. credit rating, it’s completely irresponsible for Occupy Wall Street to attempt to bring the U.S. economy to a halt on the busiest shopping day of the year,” Liberate organizer and a spokesman for the Tea Party, John Sullivan, stated in a press release.
Emphasis added. (Via Instapundit.) Wonder if any of those folks who accused Republicans of “economic vandalism” will level the same charge against the #OWS folks.
Looks like the Tea Party coalition had some success, as Glenn reports, “RETAIL SUPPORT BRIGADE SITREP: Black Friday sales up 7 percent over 2010. Some people worried that it had become a “hollow army,” but these magnificent troops rose to the occasion one more time.”
Meanwhile, back in October, Tea Party Nation urged small business owners to sign on to their pledge:
In other words, until Obama and the Democrats are out of office, no hiring, no jobs, no end to the unemployment crisis.
This sort of thing is where the narrative came from. This isn’t just an objection, it’s a straight up attempt to hold the economy hostage to get what they want.
#1
Yes, it’s extreme, but it’s no more extreme than what leftists have said about George W. Bush.
And I don’t really see this as sabotaging the economy (in the long term). Obama has been effectively sabotaging the economy since he entered office, and he will continue to do so if he is re-elected in 2012. This is a form of temporary sabotage that has the goal of improving the economy as soon as possible, which means getting a Republican elected in 2012. And the worse the economy is, the more likely electing a Republican is.
Having said that, this is not something I would personally support. And I kind of doubt very many businesses will sign on to it, especially considering the fact that many businesses are not in a position to hire right now anyway, so signing this pledge would be purely symbolic. And given the extreme rhetoric in the pledge, it doesn’t really seem like it would be a good idea business-wise.
Economic sabotage? Economic vandalism? Holding the economy hostage? Boy, the Democrats sure are desperate.
This sort of thing is where the narrative came from. This isn’t just an objection, it’s a straight up attempt to hold the economy hostage to get what they want.
Comment by Serenity — November 27, 2011 @ 9:07 pm – November 27, 2011
Wrong, Pomposity.
THIS is an attempt to hold the economy hostage to get what you want.
And THIS is an attempt to hold the economy hostage to get what you want.
And THIS is an attempt to hold the economy hostage to get what you want.
Barack Obama supports and endorses this sort of violence and vandalism. Barack Obama has called for this violence and vandalism to be made against businesses. The Barack Obama Party and “Progressives” like yourself do nothing but brutalize, burn, and steal, destroying the livelihoods of people. You’ve never done anything but steal your entire life, and now you’re screaming and crying because people refuse to just roll over and shovel the money they earn into your worthless lazy maw.
Hey Stupidity, if you’d bother to read what you posted, you’d see that they lay out the economic sabotage by the SCOAMF. Besides, wtf difference does it make if it’s the government that produces jobs in America? Which is it?
Further, the Republicans on the Super-Duper Committee were willing to give the liberals tax increases in exchange for cutting costs. The liberals balked. If tax increases are going to save us, didn’t the liberals on the Super-Duper Committee engage in economic sabotage?
I appreciate the impulse – of throwing OWS back in the Left’s face and highlighting the Left’s hypocrisy – but in this case, it’s misguided.
Debt-fueled consumption binges are not real economic growth. America needs to deleverage i.e. to use less debt, which means saving more. Higher consumer spending isn’t a good thing in itself (it’s only good if it’s a reflection of higher income, i.e. higher production and trade).
@Naamloos: Interesting that your best defence is to just admit everything and say “Well yes it is economic sabotage, but it’s good sabotage because we’re only trying to kill the economy so we can save it further down the line!”. That doesn’t go against anything I said. Yes, they’ll believe they’re doing the right thing and that the ends justify the means, who doesn’t?
@NDT: None of what you said actually addresses any of my claims. What rioters in England and the Occupy movement are doing is orthogonal to claims of economic sabotage against the Republicans.
@TGC: I remember the ‘tax increases’. $300 billion of revenue in the form of reduced subsidies and tax breaks (many of which would adversely affect middle and lower class income), coupled to a top marginal income tax cut from 35% to 28% that was assumed to cost nothing because of the Laffer curve. Nevermind that the Congressional Budgetary Office has been telling everyone for ages that the cut from 39.8% to 35% cost from more revenue than it made, indicating that you were already below the peak of the Laffer curve, cutting from 35% to 28% will be have the opposite effect somehow!
It was a net tax cut, and an enormous one at that, in the middle of what were supposed to be deficit reduction talks. It was clear at that point that the Republicans weren’t being serious.
The GOP should propose returning to the Carter rates, retroactive for 2011.
I notice, Pomposity, that none of what you say addresses the claims in the pledge that you yourself have introduced here. To wit:
What in that specifically is untrue, Pomposity? Give it a whirl. (Hint: “treason” and “dictatorial” might be a bit hyperbolic… *might*… and only a bit hyperbolic; Obama’s attitude, at least, is certainly dictatorial as he whines about how much easier the rulers of China have it.)
If they were not connected, that might be true. Too bad they are and it isn’t.
Link, or it didn’t happen. The truth is that within 2-3 years of the Bush tax cuts taking full effect in 2003, Federal government revenues were higher than they had ever been (in real terms as well as inflation-adjusted).
Serenity,
Are you s-e-r-i-o-u-s?
What is the scope and power of Tea Party Nation? Forty-two days ago Tea Party nation posted the stuff you link to @ #1. You write:
There are no “other words” needed for interpretation.
But your interpretation does need other words. Are you claiming that this Tea Party Tract has any meaningful legs? Are you claiming that small business people are in a position to hire and employ our way back to prosperity? Let us parse this tract and see if you can shoot down its points in apple pie order.
You can show these points to be false and demagogic? Please have at it.
You can show these points to be false and demagogic? Please have at it.
You can show these points to be false and demagogic? Please have at it.
You can show these points to be false and demagogic? Please have at it.
You can show these points to be false and demagogic? Please have at it.
And finally, you state:
This tract was posted on Oct. 18, 2011. Please find something earlier to demonstrate where “the narrative came from.”
And, repeat, please shoot down each aspect of “the narrative” so we can all be enlightened and join hands with “The Won” and tax and borrow our way back to prosperity.
Heck, lets even save the European Union and the England in the process.
None of what you said actually addresses any of my claims. What rioters in England and the Occupy movement are doing is orthogonal to claims of economic sabotage against the Republicans.
What it shows, Pomposity, is that you hilariously shriek about “economic sabotage” even as you and your OWS Obama Party actively seek to destroy businesses, put people out of jobs and keep businesses from hiring, vandalize and destroy businesses, and outright loot from businesses in the name of “redistribution of wealth”.
And this was funny:
$300 billion of revenue in the form of reduced subsidies and tax breaks (many of which would adversely affect middle and lower class income)
But the Obama Party and “progressives” have been screaming for years that tax increases do not adversely affect income and that people can always be taxed more without causing any problems.
So you just contradicted yourself, Pomposity. Either admit that tax increases negatively affect income – which demonstrates how “progressives” like you want to sabotage the economy by hiking taxes – or continue with the lie that they don’t, which means your entire argument just imploded.
And as to Heliotrope:
Heck, lets even save the European Union and the England in the process.
But they don’t need “saving”. They have the high-tax, cradle to grave, punish the rich, riot and burn down stores to get what you want society that “progressives” like Pomposity have asked for their entire lives.
We just need sit back and watch screaming idiot Pomposity have its checks cut off, its house looted, its medical care denied, and its civil rights abolished in the name of “diversity” and respect for sharia.
There’s no need for us to save Pomposity from anything. Our last economic boom came about because Pomposity and its lazy, worthless ilk blew themselves back to the Stone Ages. This time, it will be the “progressive” rioters and the fanatical Muslims instead of the SA and the Nazis, but the end effect will be the same.
Well, my semantics curiosity has been piqued. What useage did Serenity have in mind when she unleashed “orthogonal” on us? I found this hidden away on the web.
In his 1946, “Politics and the English Language, George Orwell wrote concerning two common misdemeanors of writing:
I like the way Mark Twain put it:
Can’t we all just try to be plain spoken?
Ht, I took it as Pomposity’s way of saying “irrelevant”. But I should have indicated that when I quoted it, like this:
ILC,
I suppose you could derive some convoluted concept of economics from its meaning in geometry. After all, we could start to “chat” about “economic geometrics” and entirely inter any hope of sane communication. But that would be Serenity’s sister Cas who would pull that one on us.
You took it wrong then, Heliotrope’s quote nails it with ‘non-overlapping’.
To explain further, how do riots in England the the Occupy movement refute claims that the Republicans are hindering economic recovery in an effort to damage Barack Obama’s chances of re-election? Answer: They don’t. The riots and protests have no direct relation to the subject in question, hence they are ‘non-overlapping’ or ‘orthogonal’.
I apologize if I confused you. Next time I’ll take the GayPatriot route and randomly quote Friedrich Nietzsche instead.
@ILoveCapitalism & Heliotrope: I think you misunderstand how debates work. The vast majority of the ‘pledge’ is made up of positive statements, and if you believe the positive statements are true, it’s up to you to demonstrate that.
Though the statements I find most plainly ridiculous are “ultimate goal of collapsing the U.S. economy”, “committed treason against the United States”, and the multiple uses of the word “socialist”, which is effectively a four letter word at this point. Demonstrating the first two statements to be accurate and Barack Obama to be a ‘socialist’ by any meaningful definition of the word would be a start.
Translation: I got it EXACTLY RIGHT. (going from the literal ‘non-overlapping’ meaning to the more metaphorical or functional meaning that Pomposity was trying to say that 2 phenomena were unrelated, a meaning that Pomposity confirmed above exactly)
Pomposity, you very clearly and obviously misunderstand how debates work. The statements were introduced (as being somehow noteworthy, even if noteworthy for falsehood) by you. If you believe statement X is untrue *AND* if you were the one to inject it (as here), then, at that point, it is up to you to explain your own objections.
Thank you once again, Pomposity, for providing us the diversion of your patheticness. Really 🙂
Huh? You brought the Tea Party Nation resolution here and you clearly, unequivocally reached this positive, unambiguous conclusion:
You are saying that “I will not hire a single person until this war against business and my country is stopped.” is an attempt to hold the economy hostage.
‘Splain that, Serenity. Do you accept the premise that Obama and the socialists are making war on business or not? Do you accept that Obama and the socialists are making war on the country that Obama and the socialists are trying to fundamentally transform or not? If you reject the war on business and the war on country then you are left with the Tea Party Nation refusing to hire as an unprincipled act aimed solely at punishing Obama and the socialists. If that is your “debate” conclusion, then step up and say so.
No one cares to debate pure idiocy.
You brought the terms of the “debate” to this thread and you proclaimed your conclusion. Now, back it up. Or, just reject all aspects of the Tea Party comments your brought here and restate your conclusion.
Though the statements I find most plainly ridiculous are “ultimate goal of collapsing the U.S. economy”
Actually, that is the stated goal of the Obama Party and the “progressive” movement; it’s called the Cloward-Piven strategy, and it is fully endorsed and supported by Barack Obama, the Obama Party, and the “progressive” movement.
And hence, since Barack Obama’s goal is to collapse the US economy and force the entire country into misery and privation, he can easily be considered a traitor. The overwhelming support Barack Obama receives from “progressives” who hate the United States and want our economy to collapse, such as Pomposity, makes it obvious as well that Barack Obama’s goals are to harm the United States.
And meanwhile, as far as Barack Obama being a socialist, that’s easy to demonstrate: just look at his supporters like Pomposity, who want the government to nationalize private industry, for private assets to be confiscated and doled out to supporters of the state, income to be capped and reduced so that those like Pomposity who do not work receive as much as those who do, and private enterprise to be completely quashed in the name of “equality”.
Pomposity demonstrates why the UK’s economy is collapsing; when you pay people as much not to work as to work, they choose the latter, and when the overwhelming majority of your population is on the dole, nothing is being produced for you to sell or use. Delusional Pomposity doesn’t understand this because Pomposity has been brainwashed since birth to believe that money is magical; it has no understanding whatsoever of how wealth is created, just like the vast majority of “progressives”.
And this was precious:
To explain further, how do riots in England the the Occupy movement refute claims that the Republicans are hindering economic recovery in an effort to damage Barack Obama’s chances of re-election? Answer: They don’t. The riots and protests have no direct relation to the subject in question, hence they are ‘non-overlapping’ or ‘orthogonal’.
Wrong. They demonstrate that those making the claims such as you, Pomposity, in fact actively seek to destroy businesses, put people out of jobs and keep businesses from hiring, vandalize and destroy businesses, and outright loot from businesses in the name of “redistribution of wealth” — but do not call that “economic sabotage”.
In short, what it shows is that you are accusing other people of being arsonists while you’re running around setting buildings on fire. You are projecting your own hateful, destructive instincts onto others.
Given that you support and endorse rioting, punishing businesses, vandalizing places, and putting people out of work, Pomposity, you are committing economic sabotage. And hilariously, given how you support murderous sharia, the only person you’re ultimately hurting is yourself.
Pomposity demonstrates why the UK’s economy is collapsing; when you pay people as much not to work as to work, they choose the latter, and when the overwhelming majority of your population is on the dole, nothing is being produced for you to sell or use.
Correction. They choose the former — that is, not to work.
Okay, here’s my objections:
Their claims are a load of crap. They have no basis in reality.
I can’t object any further because I don’t see anything further to object to. If you think Barack Obama or the Democrats are socialists who are waging a war on business, then prove it.
Premise #1: Small business owners are the biggest driving force in the jobs market.
Premise #2: The pledge directly calls on small business owners to not hire until their political objectives are met.
Conclusion: Their intention is to stall any reduction in unemployment until they like who’s in Congress (which, given that this is by Tea Party standards, probably means never).
No to Obama waging war on business, and nonsensical to socialists waging war on business. What socialists? I’m British, we’ve had socialists governments, and I see no socialists in yours.
No to waging war, and ‘fundamentally transform’ needs to be defined. I’ve heard Republicans call for the privatization of Social Security, transformation of Medicare into a premium-support program, and the elimination of anywhere from three to five government departments. Is that list not pretty damn ‘fundamental’?
I reject the whole ‘war on business’ angle as paranoid nonsense, but the Tea Party Nation (and yourself) seem to take it as deadly serious. I at least believe that you believe it’s true, and that you believe any short term increase in unemployment would be a small price to pay given the apocalyptic consequences you think will happen with four more years of Obama and a Democrat-controlled congress.
But I think you’re totally wrong, you massively overestimate the impact Democratic policies will have on business, and that the real danger is in Congressional gridlock, which is only compounded by rhetoric like “socialists are making war on business”. I know I sure as hell wouldn’t give my opponents an inch if I believed that about them…
The only sources I’ve ever found for this claim are conservative commentators piecing together whatever vague links they can between Cloward/Piven and Obama, and their opinion that Obama’s economic policies looks like it was inspired in part by this strategy.
I find it all incredibly weak and unconvincing. You may have successfully convinced yourself, but I’m going to need a bit more than that.
The rest of your post is just vacuous accusations. Is your time worth that little?
If you think Barack Obama or the Democrats are socialists who are waging a war on business, then prove it.
I already did above.
This is what makes you hilariously delusional, Pomposity. You scream and wet yourself that you and your fellow “progressives” are not waging war on business when we can post link after link after link of live footage of you and your fellow Obama Party members demonizing, attacking, stealing from, vandalizing, and burning businesses.
And we can also show you live footage of your Barack Obama Party bragging that they inspired OWS (Elizabeth Warren), that they support them (Nancy Pelosi), and that they’re the reason Barack Obama himself got into politics. You and your Barack Obama Party have done nothing but encourage and support these riots and this violence against businesses, against business owners, and anyone associated with business.
You have declared war on businesses. Your Barack Obama has declared war on businesses. We have proven it. You are a liar.
Serenity,
You are picking nits. I have asked direct questions based on the language you chose to post and the words you chose to use in your own statements. Then you want to fiddle with the choice of words you chose to post and be obscure about the words you chose in your own comments. That dog won’t hunt.
Obama clearly pronounced that “we are five days away from fundamentally changing America.” Fundamentally, we are a representative democracy with a capitalist, regulated free market economy which has been modified by limited state controlled monopolies and some state socialism.
How do you interpret the meaning of Obama’s pledge to “fundamentally change America” in terms of (1.) representative democracy; (2.) a capitalist, free-market economy; (3.) limited state controlled monopolies; (4.) some state socialism?
If you look at the Tea Party Nation words you chose to post, you can examine their responses to what some/many see as evidence of what Obama had/has in mind about “fundamentally transforming America.”
If you choose to call this some sort of hysteria, then it should be no challenge whatsoever to show that Obama’s words and actions have had absolutely nothing to do with “fundamentally transforming America.”
We will start here. Have at it.
That is not what I said at all. If you read my comment #2, you’ll notice that I said I wouldn’t support what you quoted in your comment #1. I was merely trying to explain why I think the person who wrote that pledge may have thought it was justified.
I also said that many businesses are not in a position to hire right now. The right doesn’t need to sabotage the economy; Obama’s done that already. This pledge is probably counter-productive, as it gives the left ammunition. And they’ll use it to blame everything on the right, when the blame should rightfully go to Obama.
Methinks I hear the crickets chirping… for Pomposity.
Crickets really are amazing. Some old men in China keep them in fancy little boxes which they carry in their pockets.
I was cleaning the hearth today and I found a cricket happily living there. I spared the little, innocuous critter. Oh, sweet serenity, what is more fortuitous than a cricket on the hearth?
Ht, I had to google that to be safe 🙂 Thought it was a Greek myth maybe, but only came up with the Dickens reference.