Regardless of whether the President's bipartisan outreach is producing legislative results, there is a handful of conservatives and Republicans that the president and his White House team respect. By respect, I mean, quite simply, the degree to which the White House responds to their worries and needs and believes that the time spent responding is useful and necessary. It is unclear whether the quality of this outreach differs from the respect accorded to Sen. Ben Nelson by the Bush White House.
The Mainers, Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe -- They don't ask for much, but they are among the first senators consulted by the White House on any major decision. Why? Their votes matter. In fact, so far as the White House is concerned, on major issues where a 60-vote supermajority is needed for cloture, they're the only Republicans who matter. Their every concern is heard by the White House.
Dick Lugar -- He gets as much attention from the White House as Snowe and Collins. He is close to Obama, having partnered with him early in the president's aborted Senate career to combat nuclear trafficking overseas, and Obama regularly consults with the Indiana Republican on matters ranging from defense appropriations to Afghanistan to Russia policy and loose nukes.
John McCain -- I've speculated that McCain's post-campaign frustration has limited his influence with the Obama White House. I'm wrong. McCain's imprimatur on major national security policy matters to the general officer corps is quite powerful and is a sign to the consensus foreign policy establishment (the post-Bush consensus) that Obama is acting respectfully. On Gitmo, torture, Afghanistan, and procurement reform, McCain's voice gets into Obama's head -- and that's the way Obama wants it.
David Brooks -- It's an open secret in Washington that White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel telephones the conservative New York Times columnist more than just about anyone else except for his wife. Brooks's columns have been quite critical of Obama as of late, which testifies to Brooks's independence and to Emanuel's sticktoitiveness. Their friendship predates the administration by many years, but the White House understands that Brooks's voice, even when not embraced by conservatives, influences how centrists and many intellectually honest liberal Democrats look at the world.
Harvard Law Professor Jack Goldsmith -- A former Office of Legal COunsel head in the Bush Department of Justice, his writings on terrorism and the law are often cited by the president's advisers in conversation, and the president himself has been known to cite his admiration for the way in which Goldsmith engages the problems from all angles -- political, legal, philosophical. Don't be surprised if Goldsmith ends up on a WH commission or task force at some point. So far as I can tell, Goldsmith is not yet in regular contact with the administration.
Others: Sen. Chuck Grassley, on budget and health care matters, as well as government operations; Sen. Orrin Hatch on health care; Sen. Mel Martinez on immigration; Govs. Schwarzenegger and Crist on policy matters, the environment and the stimulus; George Will; the National Association of Manufacturers (much more bipartisan recently) on labor and taxes; Sen. Lindsey Graham on detainee issues; Sen. Judd Gregg (still); what of Charles Krauthammer, who dined with Obama pre-inaugural? He's read...but not influential.
Obama and Goldsmith also were on the faculty together and the University of Chicago Law School.
Where are the conservatives you speak of? All I see are a bunch of liberal Republicans.
Really, Stan B, you're going to kick Snowe, Collins, Lugar, McCain, Brooks, Goldsmith, Grassley, Hatch, Martinez, Schwarezenegger, Crist, Will, NAM, Graham and Gregg out of your party? Really?
So if you're not from the Deep South or the evangelical parts of the Midwest, you're not conservative?
Stan, I respect your ideological purity. I encourage you to speak loudly and often and keep the Republican party on the path of righteousness it has followed for the last ten years.
If you guys can think of any other ways to make the tent smaller, that would be great too.
Actually, the GOP tent could be a lot bigger if they'd dump those who are corrupt, including some of those listed. McCain is an incompetent loser who supports massive illegal activity. MMartinez is an ethno-centric hack who supports SS's "wise" comments. And, here's Arnold Schwarzenegger promoting illegal activity as strongly as a Dem leader would.
there have been 10 years of liberals screaming that the "religious right has taken over the Republican Party" while the leadership of the Republican Party, including George W. Bush and John McCain, has moved further and further away from conservative principles. There has been no "Republican party on the path of righteousness it has followed for the last ten years."
Who told you this? Seriously. I doubt there are many Democrats outside the Village who are influenced by Brooks, except perhaps to greater antipathy to what passes for conservative thought.
Bingo!! I was about to post the same thing.
I read all of Brooks's columns. I usually disagree with his policy conclusions but his analysis is sound, he frames issues well and he fleshes out issues well. Very good expository writing. Further, I thoroughly enjoy when he engages subjects from a neuroscientific point-of-view.
He does good work (the point about earnest flakiness well-taken).
I think the Times may have just set the bar really low for commentary by employing both Tom Friedman and Bill Kristol. Brooks is a rich Eastern establishment snob who has made a career of pretending that east coast democrats find "America" distasteful, but he does not.
Over the years, he has defended Rick Santorum; sucked up to Dick Cheney; dismissed criticism of Bush voters as snobbery, and credited "a desire to escape vulgarity" for Bush's 2004 victory; blamed gangsta rap for France's riots; drawn false equivalence between the damage the Ayn Rand lovers have had on our country and the supposed damage environmentalists have caused (?); and claimed that it didn't matter where you went to college during a presidential election between two Bonesmen.
And he wrote this sentence "Ford and G.M. totter and almost nobody suggests using public money to prop them up."
I guess he just seems like a hack to me. (And I guess with a science background, I don't find science writing from a non-scientist very compelling.)
Well, I'm one, living in Alabama. I read Brooks a lot and respect his intellectual curiosity and rigor, but I'm a Democrat through and through. So there.
This Democrat read Brooks regularly, earnest flakiness notwithstanding (we all have off days).
Ambinder is casting a wide net here but he's not probably far off the mark. Most conservatives and not a few liberals live in a poster book world of black and white stereotypes where no one has anything approaching a professional relationship. It doesn't bear much relationship to the real world in which these folks are constantly meeting at political and social events, having a drink, shooting the breeze. As for those with real influence I suspect it's the Mainers, Lugar, Hatch, Goldsmith, Grassley, Crist and Arnie. I'm sure McCain, Brooks and Graham are communicated with but influence.....I doubt it. And Will I more than doubt it.
I live in California, a state that voted 2 to 1 for Obama last year. And, yet, we have many genuine Conservatives here. The most Conservative President in my lifetime, so far, was Governor of this state. Furthermore, the Deep South was formerly a Democrat stronghold. But a bigoted preemptive strike prevents honest questions such as, "What, then, defines a genuine Conservative?" or "Are you saying that the above mentioned Republicans should be cast out of the party?"
There is no doubt that the Fifth Column within the Republican party is the only faction under this big tent to which the Obama White House reaches. If the Republican party was like the Democrat party, the Fifth Column would continually be purged and/or prevented from the tent.
If Obama really wanted to respect and value the opinion of Conservatives, he would reach out to Republicans like Michele Bachmann, Bobby Jindal, Devin Nunes and Sarah Palin. But the values of Thomas Jefferson and The Constitution do not fit his method of operation.
Let's see: Government now owns the means of production for General Motors and a number of large financial institutions. Check the Socialism box on the list. The Obama White House has deemed its authority sufficient to fire, hire and regulate the pay of private sector citizens, a practice not authorized by The Constitution. Check the Fascism box.
I can hardly wait to see the exciting conclusion of this administration now that the one-party system of bipartisanship is being pursued.
"If Obama really wanted to respect and value the opinion of Conservatives, he would reach out to Republicans like Michele Bachmann, ....and Sarah Palin."
Now THAT is comedy!!!!!
Yeah, let's reach out to those big thinkers. Thanks for the laugh.
Words used: bigoted, Socialism, Fascism. Name calling and nothing else. Please. Debate in serious decline.
Mythbuster, I can't think of anyone more hostile to the ideas of Thomas Jefferson than Michele Bachmann. And though I respect Jindal and think Palin got screwed by McCain when he put her center stage before she was ready, I don't think any of those three politicians are Conservative in any meaningful sense of that word.
"If Obama really wanted to respect and value the opinion of Conservatives, he would reach out to Republicans like Michele Bachmann..."
Can we make a Goodwin's Law ruling on the representative from Minnesota? After spraying my monitor with coffee when I read that sentence I stopped reading your post. You might as well have offered up Ann Coulter as an example.
Palin? Bachmann? Are you serious? At least Jindal is a Rhodes scholar (although he seems to hide it pretty well). Don't know much about Nunes.
And once and for all, could you explain to me how someone can be a fascist and a socialist simultaneously? McCarthy died a long time ago...people aren't buying that Red Scare stuff anymore. However, seeing as you are apparently one who was right in blackshirt lockstep with the ramrod cowboy wanna-be dictator and his sidekick Lonesome Dick with allowing the defense contractors to rip off the taxpayers over the last eight years, I can see your sudden fear of a future where logic, reason and human concern takes precedence over subservience to corporate concerns disguised as "patriotism".
Just read up on Nunes...anti-abortion, anti-gay rights,pro-Patriot Act, etc. Don't know of any particular anecdotal evidence of utterances or actions by him to compare to the other three better-known buffoons.
> If Obama really wanted to respect and value the opinion of Conservatives, he would reach out to Republicans like Michele Bachmann, Bobby Jindal, Devin Nunes and Sarah Palin.
On what should he reach out to these people? Michele Bachman: perhaps her stance on "government re-education camps"? Bobby Jindal: perhaps his opinion that volcano monitoring stations are boondoggles? Sarah Palin: perhaps her ... actually, I really am at a loss with this one. I can't even think of a *sarcastic* thing that would be worth consulting her for.
In all seriousness, on what items should he consult them? What practical things of worth can they contribute to the national debate? Point me to detailed policies; buzz words, talking points, and "starbursts in your knees" don't count.
> Check the Socialism box on the list.
Yay! Actually, if you want to talk socialism, check your girl Sarah there with her yearly thousand-dollar subsidy for Alaskans, sharin' that oil wealth and progressin' the redistribution of dollars, also too.
>Check the Fascism box.
Fascism? How about all that domestic wiretapping and surveillance authorized by the Bush administration? How about that obscenity of a camp down in Cuba, and its clones in centers around the world?
We had eight years of fascism already, so invoking that term re: an administration dedicated to re-establishing competence in government and a civil and functioning relationship with the legislative branch *does not carry water*. We've seen fascism, and it don't look like the current guy.
In fact, the whole "socialism" and "fascism" thing as bugaboos falls flat. It sounds like McCarthyism, like red scare-ism, like turn of the century anti-union propaganda. It sounds *old*, like your aging and slightly racist grandpa going on about the Battle of the Bulge and about who things were better before "they" started moving into the neighborhood. If one of your goals is to convince other folks that your points deserve consideration, I'd advise dropping these two terms from your arguments.
Otherwise, I suspect that, as soon as you use them, you start to lose your target audience.
<grammar rant>
Ack! Don't use sticktoitiveness! Tenacity! TENACITY!!!!
</grammar rant>
Lovely. Those of us who read Brooks and say "blech" are now intellectually dishonest liberal Democrats.
1)I'm pretty sure that this is the first time I've ever gotten a pair of bowling shoes to laugh. Perhaps I've outdone a professional comedian who made a joke about the daughter of a politician, the daughter who never did anything more than what many or most youngsters do in The United States of America nowadays. Of course, that was a very low bar. But, hey, he gets paid millions every year for that sort of comedy.
2)Some words are accurate and true. I routinely check even the most common of words that I'm using in dictionaries as I'm writing. I love that about Google. This is the best typewriter I've ever owned. Saying that Conservatives only come from the Deep South or the evangelical parts of the Midwest is intolerant of the views of people who know that Conservatives abide in all parts of this land. This is the very definition of bigoted. I've already defined Socialism and Fascism. Calling the grass green and the sky blue (when they are) offends them who call an ascent in debate something other than what it is.
3)I'm pretty sure that Thomas Jefferson would make an effort to stop a criminal organization from fixing elections. That's something that Michele Bachmann is currently doing. Whether all her views align with Thomas Jefferson is doubtful due to the diversity of individual human beings. Of course, I received no definition of conservatism with this reply. Neither did I receive any expose of words or deeds from Bachmann, Jindal or Palin indicating that they are, in fact, meaningless to Conservatism. I certainly didn't witness any proof as to their hostility to the values of Thomas Jefferson.
4)A thing that I love about Mike Goodwin is that he saw that discussions inevitably grow longer when dissent is involved and that people end up using analogies to demonstrate good vs. evil and truth vs. lies. I think it's notable that while I never mentioned Nazism or Hitler, this replier escalated, ostensibly through extrapolation, that my base point was an escalation from the article at hand. I live for this sort of thing. Thank you for an incline in debate. We all know which side Hitler was on. And I wasted no time at getting to the truth with my first post. Here's the definition of Goodwin's Law: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches." I think it's also notable that the Conservatives which are most viciously attacked and lied about are the ones who are genuinely Conservative. Take Ann Coulter as an example.
5)I love it when posters are sarcastic. They have unfurled the skull and crossbones and displayed their standard of war against Truth and Freedom. Thankyou for being one of the best players on my team. Let's start with Government Reeducation Camps. These are commonly known as The Public School Systems. As soon as Government starts funding something, it's theirs to do with as they please by force of "law." Volcano monitoring stations are great and wonderful things when nobody has taken private property, whether money or land, from some citizens and given it to others. I admire anybody who would climb a volcano to install something which the private sector created. It's an awesome form of courage. I've heard about volcanoes and they sound dangerous. Whenever I see somebody absolutely speechless against a genuine Conservative, I suddenly veer toward that Conservative with visions of Freedom Fighters dancing in my head. Sarah Louise Heath has all of that. Detailed policies include warring against criminal organizations funded by my work, sweat and blood to fix elections. Detailed policies include refusing Federal money which enslaves the states to The District Columbia in direct violation of The Constitution of The United States of America. Detailed policies includes warring against Federal Government cutting off the water supply to the farmers in California which provide the greatest bulk of food to our citizens so that they may buy up our land cheaply after ridding my homeland of those evil capitalists who have fed me all my life and made my own personal living in this world not only possible, but richly so, so that they may turn the water supply back on for the state-owned farms in an effort to control the unwashed masses through the most basic of means not unlike what they did to the native Americans by accomplishing the near extinction of Buffaloes. Detailed policies include not accepting Federal funds (with strings attached) in a state which is thriving at the hands of a Freedom loving Governor in the midst of what is, ostensibly, the intentional destruction our national economy. Thankyou for the inclination of serious debate in pointing out that Alaska's Governor has gotten involved in a Socialistic redistribution of the wealth of investors in oil companies. That's a valid point. I don't deny the inherent truth of that statement. Those poor saps who invested in your ability to drive to work and back every day deserve a break from opression and theft. Of course, I'm guessing that you actually earn a living in this present world and an automobile is one of your career tools. Should I consider this statement as support for the Freedom of people who own Alaskan oil companies? How does the person working at the Wasilla 7-11 Store (if there is one) deserve to reap the benefits of something he never risked his hard-earned money in? Darn. That statement was a spot-on exposition of Socialism. It makes me wonder what you'd do with my own hard-earned money if Government handed it to you. Would you give it back to me? I'm pretty sure that Bush is not one of the four Conservatives that I listed. Thankyou for unfurling your standard so that I may see your imaginary weapons fit your ship of political war, perfectly. Distraction from truth is a great tool of our creator's enemy. He uses truth to change the topic in an effort to win the debate and to enslave to his ideology. Furthermore, why on Earth would I count George Walker Bush as a Conservative? Sheesh. Are the acts of preempting a 1)I'm pretty sure that this is the first time I've ever gotten a pair of bowling shoes to laugh. Perhaps I've outdone a professional comedian who made a joke about the daughter of a politician who never did anything more than what many or most younsters do in The United States of America nowadays. Of course, that was a very low bar. But, hey, he gets paid millions every year for that sort of comedy.
2)Some words are accurate and true. I routinely check even the most common of words that I'm using in dictionaries as I'm writing. I love that about Google. This is the best typewriter I've ever owned. Saying that Conservatives only come from the Deep South or the evangelical parts of the Midwest is intolerant of the views of people who know that Conservatives abide in all parts of this land. This is the very definition of bigoted. I've already defined Socialism and Fascism. Calling the grass green and the sky blue (when they are) offends them who call an ascent in debate something other than what it is.
3)I'm pretty sure that Thomas Jefferson would make an effort to stop a criminal organization from fixing elections. That's something that Michele Bachmann is currently doing. Whether all her views align with Thomas Jefferson is doubtful due to the diversity of individual human beings. Of course, I received no definition of conservatism with this reply. Neither did I receive any expose of words or deeds from Bachmann, Jindal or Palin indicating that they are, in fact, meaningless to Conservatism. I certainly didn't witness any proof as to their hostility to the values of Thomas Jefferson.
4)A thing that I love about Mike Goodwin is that he saw that discussions inevitably grow longer when dissent is involved and that people end up using analogies to demonstrate good vs. evil and truth vs. lies. I think it's notable that while I never mentioned Nazism or Hitler, this replier escalated, ostensibly through extrapolation, that my base point was an escalation from the article at hand. I live for this sort of thing. Thank you for an incline in debate. We all know which side Hitler was on. And I wasted no time at getting to the truth with my first post. Here's the definition of Goodwin's Law: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches." I think it's also notable that the Conservatives which are most viciously attacked and lied about are the ones who are genuinely Conservative. Take Ann Coulter as an example.
5)I love it when posters are sarcastic. They have unfurled the skull and crossbones and displayed their standard of war against Truth and Freedom. Thankyou for being one of the best players on my team. Let's start with Government Reeducation Camps. These are commonly known as The Public School Systems. As soon as Government starts funding something, it's theirs to do with as they please by force of "law." Volcano monitoring stations are great and wonderful things when nobody has taken private property, whether money or land, from some citizens and given it to others. I admire anybody who would climb a volcano to install something which the private sector created. It's an awesome form of courage. I've heard about volcanoes and they sound dangerous. Whenever I see somebody absolutely speechless against a genuine Conservative, I suddenly veer toward that Conservative with visions of Freedom Fighters dancing in my head. Sarah Louise Heath has all of that. Detailed policies include warring against criminal organizations funded by my work, sweat and blood to fix elections. Detailed policies include refusing Federal money which enslaves the states to The District Columbia in direct violation of The Constitution of The United States of America. Detailed policies includes warring against Federal Government cutting off the water supply to the farmers in California which provide the greatest bulk of food to our citizens so that they may buy up our land cheaply after ridding my homeland of those evil capitalists who have fed me all my life and made my own personal living in this world not only possible, but richly so, so that they may turn the water supply back on for the state-owned farms in an effort to control the unwashed masses through the most basic of means not unlike what they did to the native Americans by accomplishing the near extinction of Buffaloes. Detailed policies include not accepting Federal funds (with strings attached) in a state which is thriving at the hands of a Freedom loving Governor in the midst of what is, ostensibly, the intentional destruction our national economy. Thankyou for the inclination of serious debate in pointing out that Alaska's Governor has gotten involved in a Socialistic redistribution of the wealth of investors in oil companies. That's a valid point. I don't deny the inherent truth of that statement. Those poor saps who invested in your ability to drive to work and back every day deserve a break from opression and theft. Of course, I'm guessing that you actually earn a living in this present world and an automobile is one of your career tools. Should I consider this statement as support for the Freedom of people who own Alaskan oil companies? How does the person working at the Wasilla 7-11 Store (if there is one) deserve to reap the benefits of something he never risked his hard-earned money in? Darn. That statement was a spot-on exposition of Socialism. It makes me wonder what you'd do with my own hard-earned money if Government handed it to you. Would you give it back to me? I'm pretty sure that Bush is not one of the four Conservatives that I listed. Thankyou for unfurling your standard so that I may see your imaginary weapons fit your ship of political war, perfectly. Distraction from truth is a great tool of our creator's enemy. He uses truth to change the topic in an effort to win the debate and to enslave to his ideology. Furthermore, why on Earth would I count George Walker Bush as a Conservative? Sheesh. Are the acts of preempting a 1)I'm pretty sure that this is the first time I've ever gotten a pair of bowling shoes to laugh. Perhaps I've outdone a professional comedian who made a joke about the daughter of a politician who never did anything more than what many or most younsters do in The United States of America nowadays. Of course, that was a very low bar. But, hey, he gets paid millions every year for that sort of comedy.
2)Some words are accurate and true. I routinely check even the most common of words that I'm using in dictionaries as I'm writing. I love that about Google. This is the best typewriter I've ever owned. Saying that Conservatives only come from the Deep South or the evangelical parts of the Midwest is intolerant of the views of people who know that Conservatives abide in all parts of this land. This is the very definition of bigoted. I've already defined Socialism and Fascism. Calling the grass green and the sky blue (when they are) offends them who call an ascent in debate something other than what it is.
3)I'm pretty sure that Thomas Jefferson would make an effort to stop a criminal organization from fixing elections. That's something that Michele Bachmann is currently doing. Whether all her views align with Thomas Jefferson is doubtful due to the diversity of individual human beings. Of course, I received no definition of conservatism with this reply. Neither did I receive any expose of words or deeds from Bachmann, Jindal or Palin indicating that they are, in fact, meaningless to Conservatism. I certainly didn't witness any proof as to their hostility to the values of Thomas Jefferson.
4)A thing that I love about Mike Goodwin is that he saw that discussions inevitably grow longer when dissent is involved and that people end up using analogies to demonstrate good vs. evil and truth vs. lies. I think it's notable that while I never mentioned Nazism or Hitler, this replier escalated, ostensibly through extrapolation, that my base point was an escalation from the article at hand. I live for this sort of thing. Thank you for an incline in debate. We all know which side Hitler was on. And I wasted no time at getting to the truth with my first post. Here's the definition of Goodwin's Law: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches." I think it's also notable that the Conservatives which are most viciously attacked and lied about are the ones who are genuinely Conservative. Take Ann Coulter as an example.
5)I love it when posters are sarcastic. They have unfurled the skull and crossbones and displayed their standard of war against Truth and Freedom. Thankyou for being one of the best players on my team. Let's start with Government Reeducation Camps. These are commonly known as The Public School Systems. As soon as Government starts funding something, it's theirs to do with as they please by force of "law." Volcano monitoring stations are great and wonderful things when nobody has taken private property, whether money or land, from some citizens and given it to others. I admire anybody who would climb a volcano to install something which the private sector created. It's an awesome form of courage. I've heard about volcanoes and they sound dangerous. Whenever I see somebody absolutely speechless against a genuine Conservative, I suddenly veer toward that Conservative with visions of Freedom Fighters dancing in my head. Sarah Louise Heath has all of that. Detailed policies include warring against criminal organizations funded by my work, sweat and blood to fix elections. Detailed policies include refusing Federal money which enslaves the states to The District Columbia in direct violation of The Constitution of The United States of America. Detailed policies includes warring against Federal Government cutting off the water supply to the farmers in California which provide the greatest bulk of food to our citizens so that they may buy up our land cheaply after ridding my homeland of those evil capitalists who have fed me all my life and made my own personal living in this world not only possible, but richly so, so that they may turn the water supply back on for the state-owned farms in an effort to control the unwashed masses through the most basic of means not unlike what they did to the native Americans by accomplishing the near extinction of Buffaloes. Detailed policies include not accepting Federal funds (with strings attached) in a state which is thriving at the hands of a Freedom loving Governor in the midst of what is, ostensibly, the intentional destruction our national economy. Thankyou for the inclination of serious debate in pointing out that Alaska's Governor has gotten involved in a Socialistic redistribution of the wealth of investors in oil companies. That's a valid point. I don't deny the inherent truth of that statement. Those poor saps who invested in your ability to drive to work and back every day deserve a break from opression and theft. Of course, I'm guessing that you actually earn a living in this present world and an automobile is one of your career tools. Should I consider this statement as support for the Freedom of people who own Alaskan oil companies? How does the person working at the Wasilla 7-11 Store (if there is one) deserve to reap the benefits of something he never risked his hard-earned money in? Darn. That statement was a spot-on exposition of Socialism. It makes me wonder what you'd do with my own hard-earned money if Government handed it to you. Would you give it back to me? I'm pretty sure that Bush is not one of the four Conservatives that I listed. Thankyou for unfurling your standard so that I may see your imaginary weapons fit your ship of political war, perfectly. Distraction from truth is a great tool of our creator's enemy. He uses truth to change the topic in an effort to win the debate and to enslave us to his ideology by corrupting our hearts. Furthermore, why on Earth would I count George Walker Bush as a Conservative? Sheesh. Are the acts of preempting a terrorist strike against The People of Los Angeles or liberating tens of millions of Arabs from the ruthless acts of Sadaam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden, while ensuring that Hussein had no nuclear war capability, Fascist values? It's true. Baby Bush delivered $700 Billion to people I detest (bankers) before he moved back to Texas. You're worried about the Governor of Alaska? Obama has quadrupled or quintupled Bush on Socialism in less than 5 months. It's an awfully big tent we have here. Does the empirical implementation of policy to protect human lives in The United States of America qualify as fascism? If so, does the value of human life mitigate the fascism? Is the bother of wondering whether George Walker Bush listened to or read your personal conversations (which should be blameless considering your pontification to me) more important than the lives of human beings in Los Angeles? Is it obscene to make a man who murdered more than 3,000 people in New York City think he's drowning to death while doctors and nurses are in the next room to make sure that no harm comes to him? The definition of fascism is "A political theory advocating an authoritarian hierarchical government." Obama has accomplished Fascism with threats to private sector constituents of destroying their means of making a living so that they should obey him as he Socialistically took over Walter Percival Chrysler's legacy and gave it to people who did not own it. It's authoritarian, but the authority did not come from the law of our land, The Constitution. This authority comes from the heart of Hussein Obama. Fascinatingly enough, a genuine Conservative whose career involved being in the midst of a Red Scare more than eight hours per day testified to Senator McCarthy about the truth of what was happening in his workplace. This Conservative deconstructed The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics with his Strategic Defense Initiative and let his Vice President preside over the tearing down of The Berlin Wall. I feel comforted knowing that Sarah Louise Heath governs the land in which this prevention of nuclear war resides, along with my own state. Labor unions once had a good position and production in our society. They defeated the mistreatment of coal miners and insured, at the very least, a livable minimum wage to every human being who created wealth for them who gave them the means of living. Today, labor unions have the position of confiscating wages from them whom they represent and giving such wealth to the very people who are destroying our magnificent economic system that they may further entrench their ability to fly in pizza chefs from Saint Louis for dinner and spend hundreds of thousands of my hard earned dollars on date nights in New York City. Dare I mention $540+ sneakers? Darn. I got mine at Walmart for $9.95. They're great. I've been walking about, comfortably, for years, in them. It's historic. I just love those labor union employees who made a living in China to make my life better. Spectacular people. Those labor union leaders so totally have my best interests at heart. If you think that my grandpa fought at the battle of the bulge, you're hallucinating. My grandpa, my daddy and I all were soldiers in The United States Army. But our genereations were precisely in between the wars of the 20th century, unless you count my service to Ronald Reagan in The Cold War as a nuclear rocket technician serving during war time. Really, I think my grandpa would have laid down his life in The Battle of the Bulge to stop the murderer of Blacks and Jews who resided in Berlin back in the day. Of course, things were better before Karl Marx moved into the neighborhood of Harvard back in the late 19th Century and spread his nation throughout my public school system, right down to Kindergarteners. What sort of weirdo are you? Oh my pie! You were making a racist remark without knowing, for a fact, what my skin color is! Divide and Conquer is not all it's cracked up to be. You underestimate the nation that George Washington established and Abraham Lincoln sealed. Can you say "Republican Party?" Does this offend you? Did Washington's slaves love him or hate him? Yes or no. But you can't give a truthful yes or no because you do not deal in facts. And, really, who other than George, his slaves and their creator know(s) the truth of this question? Your weapons against truth are imaginary weapons. You make them up as you go along. Is my assessment correct? Yes or no. Don't change the subject. Who, exactly, did my imaginary grandpa complain about moving into the neighborhood? I admire your proficency at trying to get me to drop my weapons, my terms. You could totally get Colin Powell to lick the dog food out of your hand. I'm pretty sure that Powell runs in the same pack of dogs as the six "Conservatives" to which Hussein Obama is reaching out. By the way, if you read this, I did not lose my target audience.
1. Yes, your words are accurately used per their definitions. But their purpose and use in your original post were strategically used as an empty scare tactic, and in that, the accusations of McCarthyism are not baseless.
(That said, it should be clarified that the previous writer was writing a simile in which he used a hypothetical racist grandfather, and was not saying that your grandfather was a racist. It was poorly written, but the “your” in that sentence was, I think, a poor attempt at universal prose. But if I am wrong, yes, that guy is a dick. But either way, thank you for you family’s service. People need to know that it is servicemen in both war and peacetimes that are protecting this nation.)
Yes, our country has become one of democratic socialism. But it happened a long time before I as even born. Government has had a long history in this country of dipping it’s hand into the private sector to urge and edit the course of our free market. For example, when the automobile first emerged in the private sector the automobile industry observed the failing economic model of a privatized rail system and lobbied the government to take the ownership of roadway infrastructure. If the price of road construction and care had been included in the price of an automobile, like it is with trains, the average American would never have been able to afford a car, and that entire private sector might not be around today. What that socialistic decision the wrong one simply because it is a form of socialism? Should I tell my uncle that his job is bringing the country down because he works for a socialized organization: The New Jersey State Troopers? I highly doubt the private sector would care to protect and serve the population of Camden, NJ.
I do agree with you that there is a level of fear that should be associated with any push to move %100 into a socialized sector. But that is not what we are seeing happen. The private sector is a tremendously powerful engine, and our entire economic model of conservative vs liberal mindsets balancing it out, keeps it from either being extinguished or from spinning wildly out of control. I enjoy being able to live my life and use competition to find the right price, but if I can’t get an education to get a job, drive to the store to buy things, or not get mugged walking out of the store, it is all for nothing.
I understand your fear of what could come, but I see little proof that Obama’s decisions, will ultimately extinguish the free market system. If anything, it looks like the exact opposite. Everything he is spending, and investing, is being done to re-ignite aspects of our free market that we A. need, and B. were on the verge of being extinguished.
If I ever see the government getting too involved to the point where they choose their own power over the free market engine, I will fall in behind you and yell “Socialism” in order to wake people up to the impending problem. But as long as Obama continues to use socialistic tactics to reignite the dependable engine, I will think before I scream. That is the absolute beauty of our country. When we see it headed down one of those roads, the people react and change things. Americans on both ideological sides, more so than any nationality I have met, are always willing to fight for a common good to change things, be it with their blood or at the ballot box. Calling each other Socialist, Democrat or Republican, are all moot points compared to this passion.
2.) Can’t both sides please agree that our forefathers were above all, philosophers and thinkers? Thomas Jefferson was a man who studied the Koran, rewrote the Bible to remove mysticism, and arguably laid the groundwork for the end of slavery within the Declaration of Independence. I for one think it is silly to assume anyone would know exactly how he would react in a specific situation. He probably would behave like any reasonably intelligent person and think each individual problem through based on its own conditions. (I am often curious if he would hate or love the current political discord. I am torn between his love for the conservative thought process versus his understanding of the necessity of cultural rebellions.)
While I agree and disagree with a number of your points, I will admit that I have already written too much on my two favorite disagreements. So I will leave you with this.
The democrats right now have large majority across the board, both politically and in public opinion. So why does Obama reach out to conservatives when he doesn’t have to? Do you see them as merely paper gestures?
You yourself speak of the variances of the human individual. Is it possible at all that Obama is humble enough to understand this and look for insightful people to influence him in his areas of weakness?
((I for one see a good deal of conservative influences in his actions, decisions, writings and speeches. My major qualm when I voted for him was a fear of rash military decisions; his “Pull them out immediately” campaign. I am happy to see he has and continues to listen to conservative voices about things of this nature. Like him, I enjoy the company and insight of my conservative friends who are serving in the armed forces. But even they find it difficult to question his commitment to keeping conservative voices in his ear.))
I'm sympathetic to your viewpoint, but your formatting makes my eyes bleed.
Wow, Mythbuster, are you for real? Or merely tuned in to Fox's alternate reality 24-7?
And, Stan B., maybe you can explain what his actual viewpoint is?
The top republican Obama tistens to is Rush Limbaugh.
Although Rush claims he is not a Republican but a Conservative, is the most powerful force we have out there.
I know you Moderate GOPers will not agree but this fight is for the soul of the party.
You must take the Conservative path or we will fail and become a socialist nation on the was to destruction.
Now you pointy egg heads argue all you want but I speak the truth.
If you disagree, I guess my first Presidential vote is 1964 for Barry Goldwater was a waste. But then I never have felt comfortable with Rockefeller Republicans.
You middle of the roaders will play into Obama's handlers hands and you will be obliterated. I'll take Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levine all the time, anytime and they have the formulas for winning.
Well Fumbler,
Then I suggest you encourage these fine Americans to run for publice office. That way they can share their formulas with the rest of us..
How many Democrats did Bush respect enough to listen to? None! He railroaded every policy he wanted, without the slightest consideration for opposing views! Republicans should count themselves lucky that they have a voice left in government after Bush's treatment of ½ of the political constituency!
pcnerd:
Care to be more specific? Bush was operating with a Democratic Senate and House his last 2 years, and a Democratic senate his last 4. Even before, he didn't have room to "ramrod" things through like Obama, lacking the clear majorities Obama has today. So what are you talking about?