Big Government Republicans
In labeling Democrats as the “party of big government,” Republicans may have pulled off the most audacious public relations coup since Austria persuaded the world that Hitler was a German.
When President Bush took office, the government was running a budget surplus and was on its way to paying off the national debt. Tax cuts, war in Iraq, the biggest new health program since the 1960s, a Wall Street bailout and a raft of spending increases wiped away the surpluses, creating a $400 billion deficit by Bush’s last year in office.
Yet Republicans, adopting a Who, me? approach, have managed to convince an increasingly angry populist uprising that it was Democrats who got us here.
President Obama’s policies certainly deserve scrutiny. The Heritage Foundation’s Brian Riedl figures Obama’s stimulus program, proposed health legislation, and other initiatives would add trillions more to the public debt.
But if the Tea Party movement believes the GOP is the champion of fiscal restraint, it is ignoring the history of the last decade.
In retrospect, it is clear that the Sept. 29, 2008 House vote rejecting the $700 billion bailout of Wall Street marked a political turning point — a new grassroots politics — that culminated in last week’s stunning upset of the Democratic candidate in Massachusetts Senate race.
Republicans have brilliantly succeeded in hanging the bailout albatross around the neck of Obama. What has largely been forgotten is that a third of House Republicans and virtually all the party leadership favored the bailout and fought for a second vote that would, finally, approve the controversial $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).
It was Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson who (literally) got down on his knees at the White House and begged House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to try again.
Paulson was backed by Minority Leader John Boehner, who said on the House floor: “If I didn’t think we were on the brink of an economic disaster, it would be the easiest thing to say no to this.”
Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.), top Republican on the House Financial Services Committee, put it even more bluntly: “There are no other choices. No alternatives.”
Republican support for TARP was in tune with eight years of profligate GOP spending.
Earmarks for home-state projects exploded. War and the expansion of the American military might into Eastern Europe and the Middle East doubled the Pentagon’s budget.
Bush-era Republicans scrapped “paygo,” a budget device adopted earlier with strong Democratic support, that required new spending to be offset either by spending cuts elsewhere or with new taxes. That enabled the GOP to push through a new Medicare prescription benefit for 41 million Americans without one nickel of the costs being offset elsewhere in the budget.
By contrast, Republicans have hounded Democrats for the cost of health care legislation that would, at least on paper, be paid for with spending trims and new revenues.
(Democrats restored paygo after taking back the House and Senate in the 2006 mid-term elections, forcing a measure of fiscal restraint on themselves.)
That is all largely forgotten now. Republicans have skillfully exploited populist rage while Democrats have reaped the political whirlwind. After sweeping to power the Obama administration forgot all about the stunning Sept. 29, 2008, House vote, the first harbinger of the coming populist wave.
Instead of making reform of Wall Street his signature issue — a move that might have given him cover with independents who are now in firm control of U.S. elections — Obama turned to health care.
Democrats should not be surprised by the political turn of events. American voters have short memory spans.
Regards,
Dan Morgan
January 29, 2010
ShareThis
Progressives are Progressives regardless of party affiliation. The Republican congress went along with their President and passed all of those stupid measures their conservative constituents did not want. So come 2006, their constituents let them be run out of office. Now it is 2010, and the ones left mostly know what side the bread is buttered on. Compromising with Progressives is a lose lose situation. Just say No.
This is the problem Dan. Its not us in the Tea Party that think Republicans are the party for small goverment,but in the past they were FAR MORE than the Democrats. When the neocons took over the party after Reagan,they were lefties with some watered down conservative values,and all war hawk.
What we need today are TRUE conservatives who understand the constitution and the rule of law as it should be in this land. When neocons came to a Tea Party not long ago to speak,they were booed off stage. The American Conservative Party was formed to be a sort of antiviral program for the Republican Party.
We will not be neoconned again!
Only true in theory, but did Bill Clinton really set us on the path to pay down the debt, well do the math, 12 trillion deficit plus another $153 Trillion in bond obligations, right??? I love media math, its so obvious when someone tries to blame one party and expect us to take them seriously! No offense Dan but both parties are the party of NO, when it comes to DEBT. Like Dubya, Clinton and his presidential predecessors managed to count the money 2 different ways, one figure they”d prefer not to talk about too often, the other they never talk about………..its the hush hush number. Imagine if the opened the Fed Res. books and disclosed everything plus the meeting notes.
Clinton may have left us with a so called surplus, but that’s only because of the way they could BOND obligations to foreign powers. Tricky Dick accountants plus Wall street plus the Fed Bank plus politicians, lobbyists and the entitlement society equal a far bigger problem than just the Republicans. Just to take a swipe at Bill Clinton, I’ll remind you all Clinton repealed the Glass-Steagall Act which allowed brokerages, banks and insurance companies to merge into mega corps that bastardized the system and they continued raping the wealth just as they’ve done since 1776. At least back then, they were accountable to the people and had ideals added up.
But with respect to future debt; would it not be wise and just for that nation to declare in the constitution they are forming that neither the legislature, nor the nation itself can validly contract more debt, than they may pay within their own age, or within the term of 19 years. -Thomas Jefferson
God observations, Dan, is suppose… What is your recommendation? Vote more democrats into office because the repubs are guilty too? Decapitation cures the hiccups, but the side effects are fatal.
The only thing that can save us now is severe national / financial pain, just like near-death causes people to find religion.
You are just making observations above, not offering solutions or suggestions for that matter. What the heck is your point?
The problem is that both parties are full of sh*t. It is a shell game to keep the proletariat distracted whilst the politicians and their cronies steal as much as they can and as fast as they can…the two party system needs to be demolished in this country. That is a suggestion Mike. Then who knows, hopefully some new leaders will emerge who cant be bought and actually represent the people. Although I seriously doubt that it will ever happen since most people are too busy watching crap on tv and are too drugged up on beer, wine and illegal intoxicants to actually take a stand and use some critical thinking skills.
The biggest majority of the blame goes to the DEMOCRAPS. The DEMOCRAPS blackmailed GWB by refusing to fight the war on terror unless they were able to expand theie Socialist agenda.
I fail to see the point of your article and I find it a waste os space.
Excellent article. I agree with the Tea Party commenter. I would add Barry Goldwater’s observation in 1964: There is not a dimes worth of difference between the 2 major parties. Ron Paul defended his Republican label in the 2008 presidential debates by appealing to Robert Taft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Taft) as a true conservative statesman. THIS is what a TRUE Republican looks like. So… since the Republican party has been overrun by neocons, WE the People are left without a choice. We get to vote for Communist A or Communist B. The “populist” movement is simply a growing understanding by the citizens at how thoroughly we are being raped. It’s time for another revolution.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Ron Simon, caermon, paul morris, Agora Financial, Whiskey Gunpowder and others. Whiskey Gunpowder said: Big Government Republicans: In labeling Democrats as the “party of big government,” Republicans may have pulled of… http://bit.ly/cdgPqx [...]
[...] Read it here. [...]
There hasn’t been a republican worthy of the name since Eisenhower. And by the way,
“In retrospect, it is clear that the Sept. 29, 2008 House vote rejecting the $700 billion bailout of Wall Street marked a political turning point — a new grassroots politics — that culminated in last week’s stunning upset of the Democratic candidate in Massachusetts Senate race”
Now, that was bi-partisan, there was nothing inherently “republican” when the public jammed the phone lines in protest.
Newsflash: Pot Calls Kettle Black! 90% of both parties are irredeemably corrupt, so we can’t keep doing this lesser of two evils stuff. D & R’s just have different beneficiary groups and are owned by different sponsors (except for both parties being owned by banking, and that both parties with their buddies in big business (or big labor) have been victimizing the middle class for the benefit of their favored beneficiaries and for themselves for at least 30 years.) I have voted both Democrat and Republican. I went from voting mostly Democrat to voting mostly Republican, as the Democrats increasingly became the home of loud lunatic fringe element wacko’s and incessant pandering with giveaways to every imaginable group. All the while fostering an increasingly bloated and parasitic government (federal, state, local). Now we have about 1/3 more government than we need or can support. That must change very soon, as it is far too expensive for the arguable benefits it provides. Democrats back in John Kennedy’s era are not the same Democrats as today. For that matter, the typical “moderate” Republican today is far left of John Kennedy.
I guess that is why the term “Progressive” is increasingly used (and likely to soon have the pejorative quality of “Socialist” and “Liberal”). The membership and social vision of today’s Democratic party has much more in common with Hugo Chavez or Saul Alinsky than it does with most Kennedy-era Democrats. So, that leaves only the Republicans; the redundant lesser of two evils middle America has vacillated between for decades. Historically, at least, the Republicans generally have demonstrated more fiscal restraint than Democrats and if you recall Bush 2 campaigned on the futility of nation-building attempts (a shot at Clinton policies). However, Bush 2 engaged in nation building just like (or more so) than Clinton.
The withering fire for the war(s) directed at Bush by the left and their lapdog media lackeys seems to have largely faded away as the now Democrat President expands the Afghan war. Bush 2 spent just like a Democrat and shocked a lot of drunken sailors doing so. You are not telling anyone anything they don’t know with that. So, the rationale is that his successor is logically going to triple-down on that? Well, Bush 2′s spending is in large part what undermined the support by his base, as well as his marginal oratory. So, come 2008, apparently both parties have incurable spending addictions and everyone is ready for a change (Democrats increasingly becoming the lesser of two evils). So, now here we are in 2010 with a President with great oratory capabilities (and no substance) and the Democrats have blown away Bush 2′s profligate spending records in every conceivable way imaginable, and have made utterly idiotic decisions with respect to Guantanamo and terrorist trials. I forgot, they are no longer terrorists because we can’t use that word any more? What a bunch of idiots! If health care “reform” actually was good for the public (or was it good only for people with incomes less than middle class level?), they certainly did not get that message out. It just looks like an additional giveaway, the cost burden to again be dropped on the middle class. At this point, my preference would be to vote for a third party because generally speaking, both D & R’s are not worth the powder to blow them to hell. This business of the two parties accusing each other of being even worse and exchanging volleys of humiliating (and often true) revelations is just some kind of stupid game they play to keep us fighting amongst themselves. Washington is a complete cesspool and for the most part attracts the absolute worst among us – or turns them into that once they settle in. Get rid of them all in 2010 and get term limits legislation enacted now! You could probably salvage Elizabeth Warren(D), Ron Paul(L) – yes I know(R)…, and perhaps Michelle Bachmann(R). You may not agree with all the perspectives of any one of these people, but it has gotten to the point that “not being a crook” actually is a significant differentiating characteristic. So, it is a waste of ink to argue about which major party is worse. they are both too bad to deal with any more. Let’s get rid of them both and not just keep swapping for the lesser of two perceived evils, while they both run the country off a cliff. Do it for your kids and grandkids, if not for yourselves. Get out there and take it back!
Wow. Even in the face of a well written factual essay on how we got here, the wing nuts and Libertarians still cannot face the truth. The Republican party is primarily responsible for this mess. Moderates that I know have been screaming that Reaganomics ( It did not trickle down! They kept it!) were destructive for all these years and when the SHTF in 2008, it is suddenly the Democrats fault.
Create a Republican party that is truly fiscally conservative, out of the bed of the Christian Right, that desires smaller government (military included) and does not worship at the feet of corporate interest and I assure you most of the country (me too) will happily support them.
From 2001 until 2007 the Republican Party controlled the entire Federal government (SCOUS too) and NEVER mentioned government spending. Deficits did not matter.
Tony T,
So redistribution then? Is that really the only option? I think Mike’s article, post #11 is far closer to the factual truth than yours. Read it again, with your mind open.