AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

@McGentrix,

The only issue is whether Americans existed prior to 1789 not if it existed as such 400 years before that. Americans existed from the moment the continent was named America. Some of the natives may note have called it that, but it doesn't change it for those that did refer to it as America.

I earlier pointed out that Thomas Paine referred to "Americans" in 1776.

1 Reply

Sampling of political cartoons this week:

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/gm09080420090805120036.jpg

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/cb0806awj20090806035252.jpg

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/lb0806cd20090805125456.jpg

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/aria09080620090805101041.jpg

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/090804beelertoon_c20090804013214.jpg

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/sbr080509dAPR20090805021039.jpg

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/mrz080609dAPR20090806025441.jpg

1 Reply

"You still got phone number for Miss Lewinsky?" ROFL

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Quote:

Until that was accomplished, we were an English territory,

That would be terrorism then, would it not, Foxy?

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

cyclo wrote:

To be fair, members of his economic team predicted this, not Obama. Here's what they say about it now:

Quote:
In January, the incoming administration predicted in a white paper study that without a huge stimulus package, unemployment would reach just over 8%, and would be contained at under 8% with a stimulus package.

(When asked about this discrepancy, one of the authors of the study " Jared Bernstein, the top economic adviser to Vice President Biden " recently said that “when we made our initial estimates, that was before we had fourth-quarter results on GDP, which we later found out was contracting at an annual rate of 6 percent, far worse than we expected at that time.” The bottom line, Bernstein said, is that without the stimulus the unemployment rate “would have been between 1.5 and 2 points higher than it otherwise will be.”)

I guess you can call that economists covering their asses if ya like.

I would hope that Obama would be big enough to accept responsibility for the errors of his staff, especially if he repeatedly made the same assertion and eventually signed off the resultant bill. Of course, Obama could very well throw them under the bus as he's done others that have failed or embarrassed him.

cyclo wrote:

As for whether the stim bill has 'failed' or not, I think it's a little early to make claims that it has. I think you will agree however that Obama has no responsibility to restore jobs lost since 2007, before he took office.

I agree that its too early, but he advertised fixing the economy, which certainly isn't leaving it at the bottom of the trough in terms of jobs. However, I'm gracious and sufficiently confident that I will consider the stimulus bill as a success if by Feb 17, 2011, the BLS data shows 145,248,000 (Feb 09 figures plus 3.5M) employed. Therefore, from today the economy must simply improve by a little more than 5M jobs. I presume you are similarly confident in your position that you will admit the bill is a failure if we are not there. Deal?

3 Replies

@joefromchicago,

I think that there is an excellent parallel here between many of the thoughts expressed by conservatives/Republicans and the thoughts of those people who support prescription.

Before I make my point, let me say that not all conservative/Republican thought is silly or nonsensical.

But the stuff that is, is much the same as those who unthinkingly repeat and hold to prescriptions on language. Both groups are flat-earthers. [isn't there a peeve about, a prescription against double is's? I digress.]

And why do they do this? By its very nature 'conservative' demands this of those who hold to such beliefs. Facts and common sense are not issues that can stand in the way of a conservative wanting to conserve.

So, of course it's not discriminating against gays and lesbians to deny them the same rights as anyone else. They just provide two water fountains and tell us how fair they are, how they simply want to, say, keep the same dictionary meaning for 'marriage'.

Great argument that. I wonder what entries we might find in old dictionaries for Negroes, nigger, kike, spic, chink, ... . Let's hew to the conservative mindset and preserve those, not just in print, but in daily life.

0 Replies

@slkshock7,

I don't have a crystal ball, but I believe 5m more jobs by Feb 2011 is a bit too optimistic considering the fact that we're still losing jobs. A slow-down in job loss is one thing, but to replace all those lost jobs is another scenario all together. One good sign seems to be that manufacturing is showing a little improvement, but the service industry is still negative.

It's going to be a struggle for the next 5 to 6 years before we will see real signs of job growth IMHO.

0 Replies

@slkshock7,

Quote:

I agree that its too early, but he advertised fixing the economy, which certainly isn't leaving it at the bottom of the trough in terms of jobs. However, I'm gracious and sufficiently confident that I will consider the stimulus bill as a success if by Feb 17, 2011, the BLS data shows 145,248,000 (Feb 09 figures plus 3.5M) employed. Therefore, from today the economy must simply improve by a little more than 5M jobs. I presume you are similarly confident in your position that you will admit the bill is a failure if we are not there. Deal?

Well, they have already admitted that their initial projections were wrong, so we are not going to have 5M job improvement by that date. Nevertheless, I am not willing to count this as a failure; a failure would be no improvement at all or extremely little improvement. If we see modest improvement, I would call the program at least partially successful.

Now, unless you are willing to admit that the Iraq war and Afghanistan were both failures, I'm sure you will agree with me that success is fungible and initial projections should not be used as hard-and-fast measures of success in complicated issues. Correct?

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Yes. Only people like okie has determined that all of Obama's initiatives are failures. His crystal ball has not been reliable at all, but he continues to use it - somewhat identical to the one GW Bush used.

0 Replies

@slkshock7,

slkshock7 wrote:

I agree that its too early, but he advertised fixing the economy, which certainly isn't leaving it at the bottom of the trough in terms of jobs. However, I'm gracious and sufficiently confident that I will consider the stimulus bill as a success if by Feb 17, 2011, the BLS data shows 145,248,000 (Feb 09 figures plus 3.5M) employed. Therefore, from today the economy must simply improve by a little more than 5M jobs. I presume you are similarly confident in your position that you will admit the bill is a failure if we are not there. Deal?

These days, I think there is little chance to hope for objectivity or intellectual honesty re anything this administration does. The Left denies. The Right exaggerates. The mainstream media remains clueless or intentionally unethical or doesn't give a damn.

If the economy stays the same, it is George Bush's fault and he did a much worse job than even Obama realized.

If the economy worsens, it will be Republicans and organized mobs and/or Hannity and Limbaugh who caused it and if they had not lied or if they had not tried to block or sidetrack everything, we would have Utopia by now.

Nothing bad that happens will be Obama's fault.

If the economy improves just a little, Obama's policies will get all the credit and he will be a huge success.

If the economy improves a lot, Obama will be named God.

Admittedly there are a few rightwingers on the flip side who are just as irrational, but I think most of us can look at the track record of previous economic policies and have a fairly good idea about what works and what doesn't.

But, based on the track record so far, I am not depending on this Administration or the Republicans or the mainstream media to give an honest accounting about much of anything.

All we can do is to continue to voice what we don't want and hope somebody who cares is listening.

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

The only issue is whether Americans existed prior to 1789

Wrong again, parados.

The first issue is: whether or not any USA federal governments existed prior to March 4, 1789.

Answer: The USA did not exist prior to March 4, 1789, and therefore no USA federal governments existed prior to March 4, 1789.

Ths second issue is: whether or not any USA federal governments were responsible for the enslaving and killing slaves prior to March 4, 1789.

Answer: No USA federal governments were responsible for enslaving and killing slaves prior to March 4, 1789.

The third issue is: Whether or not a USA federal government made slavery and killing slaves illegal after March 4, 1789.

Answer: A USA federal government per the 13th Amendment to the USA Constitution made slavery and the killing of slaves illegal after December 6, 1865--which is after March 4, 1789.

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Sampling of political cartoons this week:

thanks for pointing out that yet again, president george walker bush did absolutely nothing. about anything. as usual.

and probably a good thing. if ol' numbnuts had gone over there, the entire southwest would be nothing but a big radiated ball of chi-com blow 'em up.

the russians would have taken care of good ol' dixie.

3 Replies

@DontTreadOnMe,

That would have been a real kness slapper - especially shown side by side with this one. LOL

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

So Obama lied to the American public about the effectiveness of his plan in order to get his stimulus bill thru Congress...eh? Sorry, when you drew the analogy to the Iraq war, I couldn't resist taking a jab at all those folks who claimed Bush was lying when he took us to war in Iraq based on errant CIA assessments of Saddam's nuke capabilities.

The difference I see between Obama's claims on the stimulus bill and Bush's on the war, was that Bush smartly never laid out a time frame for when the war would be won. In fact he always claimed it would be a "long war". Of course you do have that pesky faux pas where he proudly stood in front of a "Mission Accomplished" banner and yes, he was wrong about that.

I don't think it's reasonable to assess the stimulus bill to be successful simply because at some undetermined time in the future the economy recovers. Under that reasoning, the only chance for failure is if the economy never recovers. I mean I could apply that same measure of success and say the economy recovered, not based on Obama's stimulus plan, but rather based on Bush's even-slower working stimulus plan or even Bush's tax cuts back in 2003. Even you Dems admitted that the economy would eventually heal of itself, given time. They just argued that recovery would be much quicker if we indentured our children. And "quicker" was always 2 years.

You're can't change the measures of success in mid-stream. You sound like the kid that starts the game saying "best out of three" then when he loses, says "best out of five"...then "best out of seven", etc.

3 Replies

@ican711nm,

ican....
Americans live on the continent of America. Whether or not the USA existed doesn't matter.

They were referred to as such prior to the constitution and prior to the revolution.

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Fox,
Not sure I agree...the public is waking up and recognizing that Obama has pulled a "bait and switch". Public opinion of Obama is souring very quickly and if the economy doesn't recover to near 2007 levels by the end of his first term, he's done.

As long as he continues to pull to the extreme left, Obama will be the best thing that has happened to Republicans since Jimmy Carter.

2 Replies

@slkshock7,

Quote:

In fact he always claimed it would be a "long war". Of course you do have that pesky faux pas where he proudly stood in front of a "Mission Accomplished" banner and yes, he was wrong about that.

You must have missed the testimony to Congress by members of his administration slk. Not only would it be short but the Iraqi oil would pay for the reconstruction.

2 Replies

@parados,

...and they would welcome us as liberators.

0 Replies

@DontTreadOnMe,

Oh come on DTOM. Do you see President George W. Bush behind every tree? Under every rock? Hiding in every corner? It was actually Bill Clinton who gave Kim five years to 'dismantle his nuclear capabilities' with no requirement for oversight or verification. George W. Bush didn't do anything about it either, but what was he supposed to do? What should Clinton have done for that matter?

And what does any of that have to do with negotiations to get two Americans unfairly arrrested, charged, and convicted released from custody? It isn't like they were taken into custody during the Bush administration. What was Bush supposed to have done about it? And is it possible Kim would not have arrested them if Bush had been in office? We don't know do we.

1 Reply

@slkshock7,

slkshock7 wrote:

Fox,
Not sure I agree...the public is waking up and recognizing that Obama has pulled a "bait and switch". Public opinion of Obama is souring very quickly and if the economy doesn't recover to near 2007 levels by the end of his first term, he's done.

As long as he continues to pull to the extreme left, Obama will be the best thing that has happened to Republicans since Jimmy Carter.

i really love it when "the wrap themselves in the flag and jump off the cliff brigade" is so excited at the prospect of more harm coming to the country and it's citizens.

Q - what kind of person want's his own country to fail ?

A- a traitor.

1 Reply

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know