January 2008
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
« Dec   Feb »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

Day January 19, 2008

Saving The Economy

High oil prices, a weakened US dollar, the subprime mortgage fiasco and other factors have pushed the nation to the edge.  GW, unlike his father before him (faced with a hurting US economy), has acknowledged the fact and is going to do something about it.  The White House has engaged leaders of both parties and Fed Chairman, Ben Bernake to come up with a quick response in order to avoid a recession.

President Bush has suggested a $145 billion economic stimulus package that includes a tax rebate of $800 for an individual or $1600 for a married couple.  The idea is to put money into the hands of people who will spend the money quickly and spur the economy.  Democrats, including Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, agree and are working with the the White House to iron out the details for a quick response.  The Dems want to extend unemployment benefits and reach out to those who don’t pay taxes, but they have quickly embraced Bush’s ideas.

Stop for a minute.  Ponder for a moment.

It took a couple of days for this to sink in for me.  But now, I’m mad and joyous at the same time.

When faced with an impending economic crisis – when the economy is at a critical mass —- the Democrats are willing to embrace tax cuts and rebates!

Does anyone else see the irony here?  Does anyone else smell the stench of hypocrisy?  Dems are gung-ho about raising taxes and taxing the public into oblivion when times are good.  But when a real crisis looms, they suddenly understand the need to put money back into the hands of taxpayers.

I’ll say it again.  The Democrats led by Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are happily embracing a stimulus package which includes tax incentives for businesses and gives tax dollars back to the American people.  They admit that this will spur the economy and potentially help stave off a recession.

What the F, people?  Why does it make sense for the Dems to advocate such actions at this one moment in time?  But it doesn’t make sense to them to do it ALL the time?  It just betrays their hypocrisy and total lack of economic knowledge.  This all goes to prove that the GOP has it right. 

Bush helped in heading off a major economic catastrophe after 9/11.  His tax rebate plan and his tax cuts infused more money into the economy that kept us from falling into a deep hole.  The Democrats knew that then and they realize it now.  But don’t look for the tax sucking, class-warfare breeding numbskulls to carry this over beyond the moment.

We will help the economy, spur growth, and avoid a major recession and then the Dems will be back to their old games – swearing up and down that tax breaks won’t do enough to help the American people.

Bullcrap!

Time To Discuss McCain

When a writer from the conservative National Review begins to discuss the positive aspects of a John McCain presidential nomination, you know something is up.  The editors of this publication have endorsed Mitt Romney – one of the three more conservative candidates remaining (Hunter and Thompson being the others, in my view).  So, I guess it is time to begin the discussion on McCain.  I’ve alternately praised and lambasted the guy over my past couple of years in the blogosphere. Wynton Hall’s article posted on NRO.com provides a good starting-point for the discussion.

Hall is not rah-rah for McCain.  No conservative would be.  He notes the litany of sins that McCain has committed against the conservative cause.

To be sure, McCain has made an art of putting conservative and Republican noses out of joint. For many, the punch list is hard to read. 2002’s McCain-Feingold campaign-finance bill banned so-called “soft money,” limiting the freedom of political speech. McCain opposed President Bush’s tax cuts in both 2001 and 2003, on the grounds that they did not include cuts in spending. What’s more, he was a member of the infamous “Gang of 14”; he led the fight for an immigration-reform bill that included the much-maligned “path to citizenship” (a.k.a. “amnesty”); he has supported gunlocks and gun-show background checks; he now favors Congressional action to reduce global warming; and he once called Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell “agents of intolerance” (a statement, it must be added, that pales in comparison to Barry Goldwater’s suggestion that “every good Christian should line up and kick Jerry Fallwell’s ass”: there must be something in the Arizona water).

That appears early on in the article in order to clear the air.  And my blood pressure rose a few points as I relived all of the reasons that McCain is not in my top 5 choices.  But Hall also makes a rational, conservative argument as to why he might be ultimately electable.  He isn’t just spouting the MSM crap.  He has a different analysis.  The one that caught my attention the most is exactly what I brought up in my previous post about Obama – the fight for the Reagan Democrats.

Consider the following: Even as Mitt Romney claimed his home state of Michigan this week, John McCain finished a competitive second in a state where 68 percent of primary voters were “mainstream Republicans” rather than the independent and moderate voters who typically form McCain’s base of support. Of the Democrats who voted in the Republican primary, 41 percent supported McCain. To some observers, McCain’s attractiveness to independents and Democrats is evidence of his weak conservative credentials. This is curious logic. Few of them would concede that Ronald Reagan’s support from “Reagan Democrats” in his 1980 and 1984 landslide victories made the Gipper less of a conservative.

That’s unique analysis of the candidate that you won’t hear from CNN or MSNBC.  And it actually makes some sense as well.  It’s not just the ususal blind cheerleading for the Democrats’ favorite Republican.  There is also the old analysis which I have made before that, when you total up the lifetime scorecard for McCain, he still comes out very right of center.

A closer look at John McCain’s voting record reveals more reasons for optimism. The American Conservative Union gives McCain a lifetime rating of 83 (former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich boasts a 90 rating). And although not a “man-the-barricades” pro-lifer, McCain advocates the overturning of Roe v. Wade, calls abortion “a human tragedy,” and lived out his support for adoption when he and his second wife, Cindy, adopted their daughter Bridget, a former orphan from Bangladesh.

Don’t get me wrong.  There are still several people including Mitt, Duncan and Fred that I would support before McCain.  I even like Rudy, but when I compare Giuliani’s bottom line to McCain, Rudy fares no better.  McCain’s problem is that his affronts to conservatives were more high profile with issues like McCain-Feingold and Bush tax cuts.

I still hold out hope that this discussion maybe moot in a few weeks.  This post might be a little premature, but it’s worthy of consideration.  McCain has been lambasted by Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin and other conservative personalities, but if we are faced with McCain vs. Hillary or McCain vs. Obama, what will we do?  If things go the way of McCain in the primaries, I am predicting a McCain/Thompson ticket.  The two are old friends, and Thompson has the conservative-Southern appeal that McCain would need on his ticket.

Until then, I’ll be anxious to see how this all plays out.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 173 other followers