The good news for the SEIU is that the “official” named in the complaint does not appear to be head honcho Andy Stern. The rest of the news is not good. This report explains:
[T]he federal investigations cast a shadow over the Service Employee International Union, a quickly growing alliance of more than two million workers. Tuesday’s complaint noted that Gov. Blagojevich spoke at least twice with an SEIU official to discuss a separate possible candidate for the vacant Illinois seat. The complaint indicates that in exchange for naming a candidate seen as friendly to organized labor, Gov. Blagojevich was open to being named national director of the Change to Win federation, a six million member partnership that includes SEIU.
An internal communication from the Illinois office of the SEIU, viewed by The Wall Street Journal, indicated that the SEIU official was Tom Balanoff. The communication also indicated the representatives from the Federal Bureau of Investigation visited Mr. Balanoff’s house at about 6 a.m. Tuesday, which is the same time that agents arrested Mr. Blagojevich. Sources say Mr. Balanoff had flown to Denver on Monday, ahead of SEIU meetings.
Aside from the potential criminality, the public is going to get a lesson in just how dependent the Democratic Party is on Big Labor:
The SEIU, meanwhile, spent about $29.2 million to support to Mr. Obama’s presidential campaign this year, more than any other outside group, according to Federal Election Commission records. The union’s earliest ties to Mr. Obama appear to have been forged by Mr. Balanoff, who is a longtime friend and supporter of the Chicago Democrat.
The Republican National Committee said on Wednesday that the Obama team had used the SEIU to “keep Blagojevich at arms length.” The federal affidavit says Gov. Blagojevich approached SEIU, hoping that union officials would reach out to the Obama team to get him the lucrative job at Change to Win. In exchange, the affidavit said, Gov. Blagojevich discussed appointing a “Senate Candidate No. 1.” Congressional sources familiar with the Senate-seat portion of the probe say Candidate No. 1 is Mr. Obama’s friend, Valerie Jarrett.
The SEIU denies any wrongdoing and says it is cooperating with the investigation. But the nature of the union’s involvement is likely to cloud things. (Mickey Kaus has similar thoughts here.) How long before the calls go out to return funds from the union? How likely is it that SEIU officials can publicly testify in favor of Big Labor’s bills or appear with Congressmen in public settings?
Simply put, we have no evidence so far that Blago made headway with the Obama transition team. But we certainly know he got the ball rolling with the SEIU. And that’s a big problem for Democrats who have become dependent on the financial and organizational muscle of Big Labor. There’s a reason why the head of the RNC went after the SEIU– like Willie Sutton said of banks, “It’s where the money is.”
” … elections in 2010, which — if all the damage isn’t done by then — may afford the public an opportunity to weigh in on the most radical redesign of government …”
depends on how much of the 2009 money goes to ACORN.
If McCain were Pres and the Repubs controlled congress,what would be going on? I think it would be a stalemate between those Repubs who wanted to interfere with the “free market” in some way,and those who supported the invisible hand. Good Luck in 2010.
Obama’s Presidential Approval Index is back at +16 and climbing, according to Rasmussen.
He clearly holds the center of the country. Meanwhile, your GOP representatives stand against Obama’s fixes for the economy — ostensibly because of their newfound fiscal conservatism — while accounting for 40% of the porcine earmarks in the new budget.
Is it any wonder American holds you in contempt?
RCAR, what, if anything, do you base your “i think” on? Why would it be a stalemate? There is no evidence to conclude that Republicans are not able to pass legislation when they control the House and Presidency.
It is such a simple way out. Nothing wrong here, the Republicans are just as bad. Well, its not going to cut it anymore. Those who predicted a return of Carter have a lot of evidence after only one month. The focus is this – does big government work? Care to provide actual examples? or just go with the usual smoke and mirrors of partisan blame.
LeftyTroll, you have a mind, use it to further discussion of policy and philosophy of government. Your “polls equals mob rule equals contempt for those who disagree” is so old and tired.
You can do more with your life than answer the question, “you and what army”
What is the difference between Obamaism and capitalism?
Capitalism is the system by which capital uses the Nation for its own purposes. Obamaism is the system by which the Nation uses capital for its own purposes. Private enterprise is allowed and encouraged so long as it coincides with the national interest. Private enterprise may serve but not exploit. –apologies to Oswald Mosley.
Everything I need to know about Obama I learned in kindergarten.
1. children who play by the rules should not lose their milk money to those who do not
2. you can learn a lot about a person from the friends they keep
3. there are a lot of promises made before recess, remember the people who kept what they said, and those who did the opposite
4. when the teacher tells us who to share with and when to share, that is not sharing.
5. someone who says they are friends with everyone, wants something
6. If the teacher needs 5 more assistant teachers, maybe he/she is not a good teacher
I hope the leaders of the Republican party are coordinating with one another in order to develop a clear message and a coherent strategy for 2010, since that may be our last best hope to arrest Obama’s march toward a semi-socialistic America. Remember when we thought Obama, with some of his early appointments, might actually govern more toward the center? That was our hope. This is rapidly turning into a nightmare. Obama is the most radical liberal we have had in the Oval Office in a long time, and he may drive this economy into the ground. The only thing that’s saving our economy right now is that the rest of the world is also in an awful state; if Japan were flourishing, for instance, we’d see a sea change of private capital flowing out of the United States and into the east.
This makes it incredibly important for Republicans to run a tight ship between now and then. No scandals, no food fights, just a clear and united message. They cannot expect any help from the media, of course; the media have sacrificed too much for Obama, so they need him to succeed. Perhaps Republicans should buy a 30-minute segment on prime-time and have Mitt Romney explain why this is the wrong policy, what it will lead to, and what Republicans would do instead. We need to get some serious air time. Without something of this nature, we face two problems.
First, the only pieces of the Republican message that will make it through the filter of the liberal media are isolated soundbites, quickly “rebutted” by White House spokesmen, and Sunday talk shows that nobody watches. Second, if we don’t define our message for the public, Obama will define it for us. If one listens to Obama, Republicans refuse to recognize that we are in the midst of a crisis and advocate either “doing nothing” or “the same old failed policies of tax cuts for the rich.” The public *has* to know that this is not the conservative message. If they don’t, we have no chance to recapture lost ground in the midterms.
#4,”It is such a simple way out. Nothing wrong here, the Republicans are just as bad. Well, its not going to cut it anymore. Those who predicted a return of Carter have a lot of evidence after only one month. The focus is this – does big government work? Care to provide actual examples? or just go with the usual smoke and mirrors of partisan blame.
Does Big Government work—Nope
And What would McCain and the Repubs be doing if they were in charge? Making Government smaller? LOL They’d be s——g in their pants just like this group is,and they’d be begging China for more loans just like you’d be doing if you were in charge.
#8
Same Question,What would McCain and the Repubs be doing if they were in charge?
has anybody seen those guys who used to say that Obama is a centrist??
5
You focus on a poll number, which I realize presents an uncomfortable window on reality, but you can’t seem to comprehend the substance, which was focused squarely on policy.
Republicans account for 40% of the 9,000 earmarks in the omnibus spending bill. What have you learned from your losses in 2006 and 2008? Certainly no lessons about fiscal responsibility. I’ve got news for you, no one believes that you are the party of small government. No Republican has ever cut government. Given your party’s hypocrisy, and rock bottom approval ratings, what makes you think attempting to block the policies of a popular president is going to get you any traction?
Maybe the Commentariat should focus less on Obama and focus more on cleaning house. The losses of the last two elections suggest that it is overdue, and yet, you keep kicking the can down the road.
Henninger is right. You need a radically new message and a radically new party. You need to pay attention to polls, and the reality they reflect, not run screaming from them. You reject the polls that tell you you are losing, then you lose, and still, you learn nothing.
But I am the one who needs to use my mind more.
RCAR #9 – thought you would take the easy way out. So, what I gather is that you fully know this present state of the world, as well as the alternative reality if McCain were elected. You also know exactly what I would do if I were in office, all from my post on this blog. Sure. Why do you even ask the question again in post #10, you already know the answer, great omniscient one.
11
Obama is a centrist. You are a radical rightwinger who cannot discern the political middle of America.
I could prove my point, but it would involve poll numbers, and I get the sense that neocons are very sensitive about polls and facts and science and such.
Lefty Troll, I
I focus on the poll numbers? that is a good laugh. As usual, you entire post is based on, drum roll please. polls! Govern by popular opinion, watch the approval ratings, see what the masses are doing, and use language to cover up your real intentions. That is your advice, and the core of liberal governance. C
However, conservatives run on principles that have actual successful results. Liberals do not, unless you consider Jimmy Carter a success, which you might.
and party hypocrisy is the issue you are so concerned with? No pet projects? You got me laughing this morning.
#13
I know you well enough to quote you,”every economic downturn will become the great depression”. This is from your McCain moment when the fundamentals were still sound.
FORMS of GOVERNMENT — in the 20th century two non-capitalist systems were experimented with — socialism where the means of capitalism are state owned and state capitalism where government sets policy for the private sector. I don’t think our direction is truly the former but rather the latter. State capitalism or corporatism is frankly, equally scary. When government runs the economic show we may still own property but the constraints on its use becomes highly limited. I avoid using the 20th century term for this form of government (used in 1920′s and 30′s Italy and 1930′s Germany) due to its perjorative connotations. However a government that controls the economy will quickly shut down inconvenient dissent ‘in the public interest’.
Rick – absolutely there is a whiff of fascism about the Cult of O. Just a whiff, but we can’t say we weren’t warned.
Do the poll numbers say we have strong economy? I hope so, because I guess poll numbers serve us as reality now.
Of course, we can throw around poll numbers all day along. We’ll see what the voters have to say next year, if the stock market is still at 7000, or down to 6000–or 5000.
I would argue that government intervention in the free markets is what created the economic mess we have today. The intimidation and cajoling of Wall Street into backing risky subprime mortgages (see ACORN, Community Reinvestment Act, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, etc.) created an unsustainable credit bubble. This recession is a direct result of left-wing activists and their government allies interfering in the free market.
The GOP must reject any radical transformation of the free market since that is the only mechanism that can create wealth; socialism only redistributes it and ultimately discourages its creation. The GOP must stand primarily for the creation of wealth and encourage equal access to economic opportunity. Destroying the private sector, which the Democrats are in the process of doing, will create equal misery and subservience to the State. The GOP must stand for the basic principles of liberty and prosperity and perhaps to many in this country that is radical. It was in 1776; if it is today, so be it.
@ #18 -
If you don’t mind, could you provide an example of the “whiff” of fascism coming from Obama? I don’t see it, so I would appreciate some enlightenment.
What I do see with a large segment of the politically active American electorate is a constant association with both parties to the negative “isms” of the 20th century. i.e. Republicans = Nazism/Fascism and Democrats = Communism/Socialism.
I personally find these comparisons to be rediculous which leads to unnecessary stereotyping of the opposition and I plan on writing an essay about these absurd beliefs. Not enough space to post my thoughts on this on this blog.
But I would appreciate knowing your thoughts and perspective regarding this whiff. Thanks.
As far as what McCain would do, it’s irrelevant since no one knows. We know he was and still is against earmarks, so the only guess I could make is that he would veto any legislation that contained thousands of them – like the “stimulus” bill.
Otherwise a course he may have taken would be to address the regulations (or lack of) in the mortgage industry. This recession is a direct result of little oversight in the way Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were doing business. It would be a great place to start and was something the GOP tried to address for years.
RCAR, thank you for quoting me. In that quote I was referring to liberals using an economic downturn to change the fundamentals of our American capitalist system, which are sound. Do you actually read anything with a critical mind, or just follow and quote polls? Maybe I know the answer, even without being omniscient like yourself.
#12 is correct. Until the right has sorted itself out, has a coherent alternative, and has purged itself of the opportunistic trough-wallowers who brought it to its present pass, it should be grateful it isn’t in power, digging itself deeper into the muck.
In opposition, it is important that the GOP not revert to its “Five and dime New Deal” ways, letting Obama set the agenda while Republicans play cheapskate naysayer, trading covering votes for a few buck pared off here and there. Better no opposition at all than an opposition that ratifies the program and merely haggles over amounts.
This is a time for the right to be bold, indeed; the only power it has is the power of ideas. Obama represents a reactionary business model–tired, old, top-down diktats from monopoly government, parsing out goodies to the favored constituencies, without regard to effciency. Capital’s no longer a prisoner of geography, though, and it will go where it’s left alone. The future is yet to be addressed by either party, and current success has made it nigh impossible for the Democrats to even acknowledge its claims. This is a time for the GOP to be still, and think.
#20 I would argue that government intervention in the free markets is what created the economic mess we have today.
The greatest power we gave the government was control of our currency which has resulted in the “the economic mess” Where did the Japan Carry Trade originate:they were flush with our $s that were generated as M3 broke new records year after year. The Fed cancelled the M3 a few years ago;it was an embarrassment. All the conservative economists,agree that the creation of fiat money is the root of boom-bust cycles.
It’s a mistake to assume that the same people who like the current president also like his policies. Rasmussen also has polled that a majority (and climbing) do not like the “stimulus” bill, do not like the auto bailouts and do not like the president’s mortgage plan. The president may have a disarming smile but the results of his policies (which are not popular and destructive) will ultimately cut into superficial charm.
RCAR. You are quite right about both the likely standoff on ploicy within the GOP if McCain had won and even more right about the state of their unerwear! But, what is much more significant than what McCain would be doing is what he would not be doing. And the stock market would be way, way higher right now, because of that.
#23,”— the fundamentals of our American capitalist system, which are sound.
They aren’t sound,and haven’t been for a long time. The exponential growth of the money supply has distorted our system for decades. This is why I curse conservatives and liberals;neither want to deal with fundamental error;they both want a continuation of the big bubble,before it pops. Ask any competent,classical economist what is the inevitable result of a government being in charge of the nation’s fiat currency. Always a boom-bust cycle.
Actually I believe we are in the last death throws of liberalism, as evidence by the desperate way in which Obama and the Democrats are pushing this agenda. There is no regard for the facts of the market or history. They are in uncharted territory with this and insist on going deeper with more spending and taxation. It will all unravel with stagflation, corruption, and government waste the likes we have never seen. I am just amazed that Obama has turned out to be as doctrinnaire as he is and is so willing to put everything into this liberal reordering of our economy and foriegn policy. He is a true believer. He actually believes the New Deal got the U.S. out of the depression and not prolonged it, he actually believes the Great Society failed not because of its perversed incentives, but because of perhaps poor implementation. It is amazing that he believes that merely his words and intentions count more than reality and the results of all this spending. But the American people wanting to rid themselves of George Bush, don’t suffer fools to long and in 2012 he is going to have to answer for all of the aforementioned results of this monstrous government he has created.
Henninger: “”This isn’t socialism …..” its just a “reordered economic system” in which the government is the driving force of the economy. Oh, thanks for clearing that up. The Euros, who at least have the integrity to embrace their socialism, would laugh at this sophistry.
‘Denial’ is not just a river, it remains a frame of reference for many Americans. But as the fog lifts, some are bringing themselves to utter the taboo “S” word. See Paul Ryan’s speech at CPAC today.
Hopenchange=socialism. Its Morning in Socialist America.
#27,” And the stock market would be way, way higher right now, because of that”
Yes it would,but it would be a reblown bubble,until the fundamentals are addressed;the main deal,as I’m saying till I’m blue in the face,is our unstable currency is awash in a world of unstable currencies,all playing off each other. The backbone of Capitalism is a dependable.predictable currency;we don’t have that.
28, ok, now we are on substance. I will look up your theory and get back to you. good point.
Whiff = threats during campaign to prosecute dissenters in St.Louis, intimidation of Jewish anti-Iran rally organizers in NY, mob-calling of conservative radio host in Chicago, off-and-on threats to revive “fairness doctrine,” Obama salutes and kiddie videos, repressed homosexual wanker media thrills up legs (apologies to Hitchens)…. Smells pretty ripe to me.
#33 -
Well… those are really tiny whiffs that really force one to use every bit of olfactory power to discern. I think these things that you mentioned are overly alarmist and inconsequential. Radicals on the left cite similar whiffs of pertaining to the republican agenda to validate their claims that Republicanism is really a goose-stepping march to fascism/socialism.
Of everything that you mentioned, only the fairness doctrine has any real validity. This doctrine by the way won’t be executed into law. It’s just talk for some members of the democratic House and fodder for the left-leaning blogosphere. Obama is smart enough to know that enacting this measure into law is akin to smaking a hornets nest with a broom. It won’t happen.
15
“unless you consider Jimmy Carter a success” — Jonas Menchik
Sure, I can make that argument.
The US National Debt as a percentage of GDP was just over 30% at the end of Jimmy Carter’s term. By the end of the Reagan/Bush terms, debt had more than doubled as a percentage of GDP, to almost 70%. It was an unprecedented and still unrivaled peacetime increase, caused by cutting taxes and increasing spending at the same time, which badly damaged the country’s longer term GDP growth potential. Did it feel good at the time? Sure people felt great. They were living off their children’s credit cards. But by this measure, debt to GOP, Jimmy Carter was far more conservative a president than Reagan, and Carter left the country in much better shape than the Republicans who followed did. It took another Democrat, Bill Clinton, to clean up the mess left by Reagan and Bush. Now history repeats itself. George W leaves a complete disaster. Obama has to clean it up.
#25
It’s an interesting point you make.
The Right continually rants about preserving the free market and fighting centralized decision making.
But these are largely fantasies.
Our economy is governed by an autocratic Federal Reserve. This central power decides when money will flow into stocks and when it will flow into real estate, when it is flowing too fast and when it is flowing too slow. The Fed doesn’t answer to the people or the market. In this respect, a handful of technocrats already direct our capitalism.
RCAR, I know what you think regarding government control of fiat currency, and if you are correct, then McCain would be only a slight improvement over Obama. I don’t entirely agree with your view on the currency, as we’ve discussed before. (Although, if you’re willing to point to a place where the argument is put especially well and briefly, I’d be happy to look into it further.) So to my way of thinking, the differences between McCain/Republicans and Obama/Democrats is quite dramatic.
It’s true that many Republicans in Congress still eat from the trough of pork. I wish they would not. It would establish a starker comparison between Democrats and Republicans. I think, on a local level, when the other guys are getting the goods for their constituents, one worries that if one does not deliver the same goods, one will be voted out next year. My view is that “pork” or requested federal expenditures on a local level should only be requested by Governors and more local leaders. Let’s get Congress out of the pork business. Unfortunately we have a system right now where the pressure to bring home the bacon is immense; we need to change the system, and that’s where McCain might have been able to make a difference.
McCain is strong on nothing if he is not strong on anti-pork. His anti-pork record is second to none. And I think he understood that pork, even though it represents only a small amount of federal expenditures, exposes the heart of the problem: the relationship between national politics and the delivery of financial benefits to local constituencies. I think McCain is also strong on his opposition to government waste. Obama talks about it, but he’s all talk; obviously he’s supporting the most wasteful spending measures imaginable.
It’s true that McCain is not completely conservative on economic issues. Still, I think he would be much more mindful of restraining government growth, tightening the government’s belt, and stimulating private sector growth through reducing taxes on small businesses and such. His first instincts would be for cutting spending and reducing the burden of the tax structure on the economy–not raising spending to astronomic levels and further taxing an already ailing private sector.
If you’re right, and fiat currency is the problem, then these measures could only have a limited and temporary benefit. Still, that would be better than plunging the economy into an immediate nosedive in the way Obama is doing. At least it would give us more time to get our currency under control, and would chart a more responsible course for government expenditures and taxes.
Of course the Rasmussen daily survey is where it’s at. He’s been the most accurate pollster for the past two years.
He notes in today’s survey that 59% (the Reagan coalition number) still thinks government is the problem and not the solution. People are scared. Obama’s approval number of 60% represents voters who say they “at least somewhat approve of the President’s performance.”
People aren’t going to abandon a newly elected President. But his poll numbers speak to the weakness of his support. He’s in the unenviable position of HAVING to go into campaign mode two days after he’s announced whatever he announced. Americans want him to succeed, but deep in the pit of their stomach they know a boy stands where a man is now needed.
If Republicans hope to thwart the loopier parts of Obama’s transformational presidency they need to avoid combating platitudes and gossamer with platitudes and gossamer.
As one poster (Maynard, I think) wrote; this is a time for Republicans to remain still and think.
“37, (Although, if you’re willing to point to a place where the argument is put especially well and briefly, I’d be happy to look into it further.)
Check out the chapter in Human Action by Von Mises on the dangers of Fiat Money;I believe it’s chapter 31.
This quote is from another source,
“Understanding global trade in the Floating Currency system is vital. The vital necessity of this is hyper-important to the US, above all others. The US is entirely and 100% at fault for creating this system which is now destroying us relentlessly.— Because the entire planet is dependent upon the US consuming while not competing, no one is ready to stop this Floating Currency game. Least of all, the US itself. We are addicted to easy credit/easy import economic systems.”
Universal Truism,all authoritarian-totalitarian systems control their nation’s money supply via a fiat system & a government monopoly on currency.
Who knew that by electing Obama we would be getting the old liberal playbook? Actually anyone who bothered to pay attention. What’s striking is that despite the emphasis on New Democrats during the Clinton adminstration and recognition of the lessons learned by a series of electoral defeats, core ideas (or the lack of them) are virtually indestructible and in a pinch people fall back on them. So now we are getting a very stale old is new response. Hope its more successful this time around.
LeftyTroll – did you write on a public blog that Carter was more conservative than Reagan? ok, good luck to you and your alternate universe.
RCAR still holds to the theory that money must be pegged to precious metals, i.e. the gold standard. So as a government you must find a metal which has been arbitrarily determined to hold some value based upon its perceived scarcity. The level of gold you possess then determines your wealth. But the problem is that this distinction is arbitrary as well. Money is just a marker and utilized as a means to convert units of work into units of tradable value for things you need or want. Why gold? Because. So despite your efforts and productivity, your wealth is determined by how much gold your country holds to support its currency. And this is a logical way to value it? Currency today is a daily assessment of the value of your country’s productivity and economic prospects. Can it be manipulated? Sure. Just as gold hoarders and thieves could do that before.
The problem now is that we are seeing that policy related to the money supply and its vlaue have been held hostage to memebers of both parties who want to spend, spend, spend, in order to have power, power, power.
Unfortunately, perhaps RCAR is correct and we are not smart enough or evolved enough to graduate behind the elementary notion of needing a precious, pretty much useless ornament to assign a value to a tool – that is all currency is – a tool to transfer productivity.
#42
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123440593696275773.html
I’ve been studying this issue for a while;check out Judy Shelton’s article above. by the way, she predicted the fall of the USSR well before 1989. She was the one who really embarrassed the CIA,who was planning for another decade of cold war. Legend has it that the CIA interrogated her to find out her “inside” sources;she said she had gone to the public library and looked at Soviet statistics and trends,then she wrote her book,”The Coming Soviet Crash”published in 1988 I believe.
It’s not socialism, it’s fascism. See Jonah Goldberg’s book. Private enterprise and civil society are “allowed” as long they serve the purposes of the leadership class, which sets the rules but feels no obligation to live by them itself. Cf: Daschle, Tom and any number of others. Whenever people start capitalizing the word “Nation” they are well down Mussolini Road. What are liberty and prosperity compared to the aggrandizement of the media/academic/regulatory elite?
#42,”—–that is all currency is – a tool to transfer productivity.
Not all,it is also a commodity,reacting to the same laws of value as any other commodity. If you produce too much wheat,the value of a bag of flour goes down(except short term, in a rigged market),if you print too many dollars, the value of a bill goes down(except short term in a rigged market)eventually commodities yield to laws of supply and demand,but in a rigged market, (rigged by farm subsidies¤cy trading i.e.(pieces of worthless paper trading against other worthless paper to determine the value of our currency,and the value is only “relative” to other currencies. It’s a scam not unlike a ponzi scheme.
Oh yes, and lets not forget the Gallup poll where his approval gap keeps on shrinking. Lets face it folks we can find poll after poll to try and back our arguments. Here is the fact that at least can be held as a current of truth through all the polling data.
Obama lost his cross over voters pretty quick.
Obama is generally liked and people hope he succeeds.
They don’t like his stimulus, his auto bailout, and his bank bailouts.
His backers who thought he would be more centrist are crying foul or mea culpas right now.
The investment class is not happy with him at all (DOW drop)
There. Thats it in a nutshell. Oh sure, he may rise and fall with the day’s polls based upon this soundbite or that, a speech here or there. We will track his falling popularity and see how it compares over time with every other president.
The real question? They like Obama, but not necessarily what he wants to do. They want the government to help, but when they evaluate what it is doing, they don’t like it. They love his soaring rhetoric, but are disappointed he says one thing and does another. How this plays over time will be key. The two big landmines for him – the DOW and what its fall means for him and his economic team – and how fast his disapproval numbers rise, which right now are increasing faster than historically expected.
This country is at a crossroads, the notion of a quaint republican form of government is no longer held by most politicians, whether GOP or Democrat – although what remains of it is in the GOP. So the real question is do a majority of the voters want a european socialist style of progressive kinda capitalism (which they sometimes seem to like because it seems safe) or do they want a harder more robust true capitalist system with a modern version of limited government (which when directly told would socialism is they seem to like). The people who settled this land are gone, their spirit lives in some, but many are just worried about being safe and having someone take care of them. Remember the guy who asked the question in the debates a few years ago about consider us as your children…. Would any of your grandparents said such a thing?
I think Franklin said its your republic if you can keep it. History has shown keeping it is pretty damn hard, let alone getting it started in the first place. A significant minority of the democratic party are the fascists we are warned about, because they want to tell you how to live and how to spend and have the government enforce it. They of course are above all that, as the tax troubles of various nominees for Obama’s cabinet demonstrate. So remember, the socialist rulers will get the perks, and the “rulers” of the government approved businesses will join them. The rest of us will get scraps and like it. Is it sustainable, nope, but they don’t care.
Personally, I think a majority of the population is kicking the tires to see if they want to take the jump, and once they do, no turning back. The GOP needs to give them a reason not to jump.
RCAR #45 – there isn’t much there to disagree with. Because yes, currency is a commodity, it is the trade of a nation’s productivity, and to the extent we manipulate in the manner you described its value can certainly be impacted. In fact it was that very manipulation that I had in mind in noting that we need to see if we are educated enough to utilize that type of system, and maybe we aren’t. Maybe we need a fixed object against which to value our currency because we cannot be trusted to not toy with the productivity measure.
This post has been linked for the HOT5 Daily 2/27/2009, at The Unreligious Right