Comments on: away from Joe=towards success?

By: Redefining Prosperity | The League of Ordinary Gentlemen

Redefining Prosperity | The League of Ordinary Gentlemen — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 16:53:54 +0000

[...] Yet, as we’ve been increasingly driven into our roles as individuals – through political and economic policies as well as through rapid technological development – and as our faith in community and family has [...]

By: Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle

Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 07:51:02 +0000

Noonan:
Why do you think that people like Bill “William the Bloody” Kristol were so adamant that Clinton’s health care overhaul be killed?

By: iamnotstarjones

iamnotstarjones — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 21:30:38 +0000

‘They are not dedicated to the idea to the degree that they are actually willing to sacrifice to make it a reality.’

You summed up why I don’t believe in the Republican party platform. It’s the hypocrisy (also exemplified when asking for small government but restricting a woman’s right to control her health) and insult to my intelligence that amazes me.

By: Noonan

Noonan — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 13:47:01 +0000

You make a good point about Americans generally liking federal programs despite the rhetoric. That’s why Obama’s proposal to make improvements to health care – lowering the cost for businesses and individuals – while making it universal is a big worry for the GOP. Once Americans get a successful program it’s nearly impossible to get rid of it.

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 03:40:35 +0000

Not that I think Ruffini would ever intentionally exclude [racial minorities and women]

Much as I try to avoid the argument ad hominem, I’m going to have to disagree. My girlfriend went to high school with Ruffini in Greenwich, CT. He was, by all accounts, a sexist right-wing nut in one of America’s richest towns.

By: Ottovbvs

Ottovbvs — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 03:23:34 +0000

Freddie, you couldn’t be more right. Talking about small govt when the combined federal and state budgets last year, let alone this year, totalled $4.5 trillion is just another one of those myths we are so totally in love with in the US. $4.5 trillion is several times the govt spending of any other sovereign state in the world. As is frequently pointed out our military expenditures IN TOTAL are more than the rest of the world combined. Is this the sort of small govt were talking about. Then ask the American electorate over 65 to give up SS when for 80% of them it’s AT LEAST 50% of their total income…for 50% of them it’s 100% OF THEIR TOTAL INCOME. In short the whole conservative perception of the problem is skewed. But then conservatism seems to have lost the faculty of being clear eyed about things.

By: Plan-9

Plan-9 — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 02:02:48 +0000

well, oops, in attempting to quote matoko-chan I seem to have gotten the avatar, apologies.

By: Plan-9

Plan-9 — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 02:00:27 +0000

matoko_chan said Except….the middle is shrinking. Larrison had an excellent post at AmCon on this very topic and has his own thoughts on Ruffini's article.

By: Mike at The Big Stick

Mike at The Big Stick — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 22:29:03 +0000

Mark, I agree that 80/20 is really hard right now given the political environment ( the search for relevance on the Right and the sense of mandate on the Left). I also think big legislation often breeds partisanship.

I had hoped back in November that Obama would roll out elements of the stimulus / economic recovery in several accelerated phases. Give them all catchy names like Recovery 1, Recovery 2, etc (although that kind of sounds like space probes). That way we could debate each phase separately and then I think 80/20 moments are more possible. Lumping it all into one huge bill almost guarantees we come down along party lines.

By: Mark Thompson

Mark Thompson — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:01:58 +0000

Mike: In many ways, I agree with you, which is why I think the Gingrich idea is not a bad one. I just don’t think it can be more than a temporary band-aid. But even if it’s just a temporary fix, it’s not something that has any real downside to it. I think it suffers from another shortcoming, which is that the economic crises has placed the public’s focus squarely on issues where an 80/20 consensus is just about impossible. Still, like I said, it doesn’t have any downside, and it at least gets the Republicans talking about things that are relevant and don’t just sound like tired old cliches.