Robert Meyer
Conservatives not recommitting to failed policies
By Robert Meyer
As of this writing, the election is only a few weeks away. At this point it doesn't pay to make any outrageous projection for the 2010 mid term elections. I'll simply ditto the safe predictions, and say that the Republicans will probably regain the House, with an additional gain of 8 to 10 seats in the Senate. Anything more than that would be gravy in my opinion.
What makes more sense is to deflect some of the false assertions regarding what this election is really about. The vilification of Tea Party supporters is old news, as well as claims of discrimination and religious bigotry attached to the respective issues of illegal immigration and protest of the Ground Zero "community center." Liberals haven't gotten much traction with these predictably preposterous defamation gambits.
The talking point du jour is that we shouldn't rehire cohorts of the party who got us in the current economic mess to begin with. This line of thought takes several assumptions for granted. First, it seems to assume that all voters are Independent, most of whom voted for Obama in 2008, but have since become disgruntled by the protracted economic woes. For my part, I was never hypnotized by the simplistic Obama nursery rhymes and induced simpleton mindset.
Secondly, we have to assume that Republican policies in isolation are actually responsible for the meltdowns that occurred abruptly in the fall of 2008. Next, we must presume that the policy responses by Democrats are optimum and appropriate concerning the economic situation of the country. Yet another assumption is that everyone voting for a conservative political reclamation of America is motivated merely by economic distress, rather than concerns over unconstitutional government mandates or the relentless encroachment of government over personal freedoms. We have heard the desperate contention that Tea Party supporters are merely the useful idiots of the wealthy Koch brothers.
Lastly, I might add that conservatives on the ballot are not ideologically the same as those defeated in 2006 and 2008. There is an anti-incumbency wave, as well as a crackdown movement by constituents within the Republican party to purge RINO's and establishment candidates from their ranks in the primaries. This was essentially Congressman Paul Ryan's vision after the 2008 Republican defeat. At that time the Tea Party was merely a historical event associated with the Boston Harbor.
If we claim certain policies caused this deep recession, let's identify them and explain how they caused the problems. What we get is innuendos and a prefabricated template that always defaults to a "blame the Republicans" scenario.
Along with this syndrome comes another symptom. The "give Obama a chance" slogan, has quickly given way to a resignation among Obama apologists, who have retreated to the safe harbors, in declaring that Obama can't turn the country around in just one term. Hypothetically, as I pointed out earlier this year, were Obama to be re-elected, the astute observation five years from now, will be that Omaba can't reverse 20 years of the Reagan-Bush-Bush complex in only two terms in office.
So, what is this election really about? It is about a government that has done nothing much about illegal immigration. In fact, they stopped a state that was actually trying to enforce the policy provisions mandated by federal law. It is a government that made pie-in-the-sky promises about health care legislation and bashed it down the throats of a skeptical and defiant public. It is about an administration that used considerable debt to jump-start an economy that remains dead in the water, with little to show for such a costly investment. It is about a congress that has adjourned without giving people a clear indication of what their tax burdens will be next year. Congress, along with the president, has decided that if Republicans will not give up on blocking tax increases on Americans making over $250,000, then everyone must be punished with increasing tax rates. Using euphemisms to disguise a tax hike, doesn't change the certain reality that barring new legislation, myself, a middle class citizen, will pay more taxes on the same income next year.
Last, but not least, it is about a continued emphasis on the ability and moral obligation of big government to solve all social and economic problems. I am glad to see that some people are resisting the temptation to eat of that fruit.
© Robert Meyer
October 13, 2010
As of this writing, the election is only a few weeks away. At this point it doesn't pay to make any outrageous projection for the 2010 mid term elections. I'll simply ditto the safe predictions, and say that the Republicans will probably regain the House, with an additional gain of 8 to 10 seats in the Senate. Anything more than that would be gravy in my opinion.
What makes more sense is to deflect some of the false assertions regarding what this election is really about. The vilification of Tea Party supporters is old news, as well as claims of discrimination and religious bigotry attached to the respective issues of illegal immigration and protest of the Ground Zero "community center." Liberals haven't gotten much traction with these predictably preposterous defamation gambits.
The talking point du jour is that we shouldn't rehire cohorts of the party who got us in the current economic mess to begin with. This line of thought takes several assumptions for granted. First, it seems to assume that all voters are Independent, most of whom voted for Obama in 2008, but have since become disgruntled by the protracted economic woes. For my part, I was never hypnotized by the simplistic Obama nursery rhymes and induced simpleton mindset.
Secondly, we have to assume that Republican policies in isolation are actually responsible for the meltdowns that occurred abruptly in the fall of 2008. Next, we must presume that the policy responses by Democrats are optimum and appropriate concerning the economic situation of the country. Yet another assumption is that everyone voting for a conservative political reclamation of America is motivated merely by economic distress, rather than concerns over unconstitutional government mandates or the relentless encroachment of government over personal freedoms. We have heard the desperate contention that Tea Party supporters are merely the useful idiots of the wealthy Koch brothers.
Lastly, I might add that conservatives on the ballot are not ideologically the same as those defeated in 2006 and 2008. There is an anti-incumbency wave, as well as a crackdown movement by constituents within the Republican party to purge RINO's and establishment candidates from their ranks in the primaries. This was essentially Congressman Paul Ryan's vision after the 2008 Republican defeat. At that time the Tea Party was merely a historical event associated with the Boston Harbor.
If we claim certain policies caused this deep recession, let's identify them and explain how they caused the problems. What we get is innuendos and a prefabricated template that always defaults to a "blame the Republicans" scenario.
Along with this syndrome comes another symptom. The "give Obama a chance" slogan, has quickly given way to a resignation among Obama apologists, who have retreated to the safe harbors, in declaring that Obama can't turn the country around in just one term. Hypothetically, as I pointed out earlier this year, were Obama to be re-elected, the astute observation five years from now, will be that Omaba can't reverse 20 years of the Reagan-Bush-Bush complex in only two terms in office.
So, what is this election really about? It is about a government that has done nothing much about illegal immigration. In fact, they stopped a state that was actually trying to enforce the policy provisions mandated by federal law. It is a government that made pie-in-the-sky promises about health care legislation and bashed it down the throats of a skeptical and defiant public. It is about an administration that used considerable debt to jump-start an economy that remains dead in the water, with little to show for such a costly investment. It is about a congress that has adjourned without giving people a clear indication of what their tax burdens will be next year. Congress, along with the president, has decided that if Republicans will not give up on blocking tax increases on Americans making over $250,000, then everyone must be punished with increasing tax rates. Using euphemisms to disguise a tax hike, doesn't change the certain reality that barring new legislation, myself, a middle class citizen, will pay more taxes on the same income next year.
Last, but not least, it is about a continued emphasis on the ability and moral obligation of big government to solve all social and economic problems. I am glad to see that some people are resisting the temptation to eat of that fruit.
© Robert Meyer
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
