1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Krauthammer - The Great Divide

Discussion in 'Politics, Elections & Legislation' started by mrskeet410, Jul 29, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. mrskeet410

    mrskeet410 TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,064
    In part (full article at link) -

    "WASHINGTON -- We're in the midst of a great four-year national debate on the size and reach of government, the future of the welfare state, indeed, the nature of the social contract between citizen and state. The distinctive visions of the two parties -- social-democratic versus limited-government -- have underlain every debate on every issue since Barack Obama's inauguration: the stimulus, the auto bailouts, health care reform, financial regulation, deficit spending. Everything. The debt ceiling is but the latest focus of this fundamental divide...

    We're only at the midpoint. Obama won a great victory in 2008 that he took as a mandate to transform America toward European-style social democracy. The subsequent counterrevolution delivered to that project a staggering rebuke in November 2010. Under our incremental system, however, a rebuke delivered is not a mandate conferred. That awaits definitive resolution, the rubber match of November 2012.

    I have every sympathy with the conservative counterrevolutionaries. Their containment of the Obama experiment has been remarkable. But reversal -- rollback, in Cold War? parlance -- is simply not achievable until conservatives receive a mandate to govern from the White House...

    Given this reality, trying to force the issue -- turn a blocking minority into a governing authority -- is not just counter-constitutional in spirit but self-destructive in practice..."
     
  2. birdogs

    birdogs TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,775
    Nonesense. Principle and reality should rule. That reality is that America is actually bankrupt at this very moment. It must borrow in order to pay it's bills. The principle involved is that Americaq can still be saved IF we act RESPONIBLY NOW! That is the crux of the debate. All else is a smokescreen designed to re-elect those who either put us in this mess or follow in the footsteps of those who did.

    Compromise is an illusion. How can you compromise when such a "deal" will only accelerate your demise? That is NOT abiding by the principles on which this country was founded nor the principles on which responsible politicians ran for office. In any deal with the devil, guess who wins?
     
  3. stokinpls

    stokinpls Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    6,482
    As expected, you left out the best parts. Maybe you could get a job with CNN, you'd fit right in.

    "Lincoln is reputed to have said: I hope to have God on my side, but I must have Kentucky. I don't know whether conservatives have God on their side (I keep getting sent to His voice mail), but I do know that they don't have Kentucky -- they don't have the Senate, they don't have the White House. And under our constitutional system, you cannot govern from one house alone. Today's resurgent conservatism, with its fidelity to constitutionalism, should be particularly attuned to this constraint, imposed as it is by a system of deliberately separated -- and mutually limiting -- powers.

    Given this reality, trying to force the issue -- turn a blocking minority into a governing authority -- is not just counter-constitutional in spirit but self-destructive in practice.


    Consider the Boehner Plan for debt reduction. The Heritage Foundation's advocacy arm calls it "regrettably insufficient." Of course it is. That's what happens when you control only half a branch. But the plan's achievements are significant. It is all cuts, no taxes. It establishes the precedent that debt-ceiling increases must be accompanied by equal spending cuts. And it provides half a year to both negotiate more fundamental reform (tax and entitlement) and keep the issue of debt reduction constantly in the public eye.

    I am somewhat biased about the Boehner Plan because for weeks I've been arguing (in this column and elsewhere) for precisely such a solution: a two-stage debt-ceiling hike consisting of a half-year extension with dollar-for-dollar spending cuts, followed by intensive negotiations on entitlement and tax reform. It's clean. It's understandable. It's veto proof. (Obama won't dare.) The Republican House should have passed it weeks ago.

    After all, what is the alternative? The Reid Plan with its purported $2 trillion of debt reduction? More than half of that comes from not continuing surge-level spending in Iraq and Afghanistan for the next 10 years. Ten years? We're out of Iraq in 150 days. It's all a preposterous "saving" from an entirely fictional expenditure.

    The Congressional Budget Office has found that Harry Reid's other discretionary savings were overestimated by $400 billion. Not to worry, I am told. Reid has completely plugged that gap. There will be no invasion of Canada next year, no bicentennial this-time-we-really-mean-it 1812 do-over. Huge savings. Huge.

    The Obama plan? There is no Obama plan. And the McConnell plan, a final resort that punts the debt issue to Election Day, would likely yield no cuts at all.

    Obama faces two massive problems -- jobs and debt. They're both the result of his spectacularly failed Keynesian gamble: massive spending that left us a stagnant economy with high and chronic unemployment -- and a staggering debt burden. Obama is desperate to share ownership of this failure. Economic dislocation from a debt-ceiling crisis precisely serves that purpose -- if the Republicans play along. The perfect out: Those crazy tea partyers ruined the recovery!

    Why would any conservative collaborate with that ploy? November 2012 constitutes the new conservatism's one chance to restructure government and change the ideological course of the country. Why risk forfeiting that outcome by offering to share ownership of Obama's wreckage? "
     
  4. sliverbulletexpress

    sliverbulletexpress TS Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,645
    Krauthammmer is the smartest guy on tv, shame on you mrskeet for missrepresnting his article. Read the whole thing. I'll just paste the whole thing with credit to Charles Krauthammer at humanevents.com.

    WASHINGTON -- We're in the midst of a great four-year national debate on the size and reach of government, the future of the welfare state, indeed, the nature of the social contract between citizen and state. The distinctive visions of the two parties -- social-democratic versus limited-government -- have underlain every debate on every issue since Barack Obama's inauguration: the stimulus, the auto bailouts, health care reform, financial regulation, deficit spending. Everything. The debt ceiling is but the latest focus of this fundamental divide.

    The sausage-making may be unsightly, but the problem is not that Washington is broken, that ridiculous ubiquitous cliche. The problem is that these two visions are in competition, and the definitive popular verdict has not yet been rendered.

    We're only at the midpoint. Obama won a great victory in 2008 that he took as a mandate to transform America toward European-style social democracy. The subsequent counterrevolution delivered to that project a staggering rebuke in November 2010. Under our incremental system, however, a rebuke delivered is not a mandate conferred. That awaits definitive resolution, the rubber match of November 2012.

    I have every sympathy with the conservative counterrevolutionaries. Their containment of the Obama experiment has been remarkable. But reversal -- rollback, in Cold War parlance -- is simply not achievable until conservatives receive a mandate to govern from the White House.

    Lincoln is reputed to have said: I hope to have God on my side, but I must have Kentucky. I don't know whether conservatives have God on their side (I keep getting sent to His voice mail), but I do know that they don't have Kentucky -- they don't have the Senate, they don't have the White House. And under our constitutional system, you cannot govern from one house alone. Today's resurgent conservatism, with its fidelity to constitutionalism, should be particularly attuned to this constraint, imposed as it is by a system of deliberately separated -- and mutually limiting -- powers.

    Given this reality, trying to force the issue -- turn a blocking minority into a governing authority -- is not just counter-constitutional in spirit but self-destructive in practice.

    Consider the Boehner Plan for debt reduction. The Heritage Foundation's advocacy arm calls it "regrettably insufficient." Of course it is. That's what happens when you control only half a branch. But the plan's achievements are significant. It is all cuts, no taxes. It establishes the precedent that debt-ceiling increases must be accompanied by equal spending cuts. And it provides half a year to both negotiate more fundamental reform (tax and entitlement) and keep the issue of debt reduction constantly in the public eye.

    I am somewhat biased about the Boehner Plan because for weeks I've been arguing (in this column and elsewhere) for precisely such a solution: a two-stage debt-ceiling hike consisting of a half-year extension with dollar-for-dollar spending cuts, followed by intensive negotiations on entitlement and tax reform. It's clean. It's understandable. It's veto proof. (Obama won't dare.) The Republican House should have passed it weeks ago.

    After all, what is the alternative? The Reid Plan with its purported $2 trillion of debt reduction? More than half of that comes from not continuing surge-level spending in Iraq and Afghanistan for the next 10 years. Ten years? We're out of Iraq in 150 days. It's all a preposterous "saving" from an entirely fictional expenditure.

    The Congressional Budget Office has found that Harry Reid's other discretionary savings were overestimated by $400 billion. Not to worry, I am told. Reid has completely plugged that gap. There will be no invasion of Canada next year, no bicentennial this-time-we-really-mean-it 1812 do-over. Huge savings. Huge.

    The Obama plan? There is no Obama plan. And the McConnell plan, a final resort that punts the debt issue to Election Day, would likely yield no cuts at all.

    Obama faces two massive problems -- jobs and debt. They're both the result of his spectacularly failed Keynesian gamble: massive spending that left us a stagnant economy with high and chronic unemployment -- and a staggering debt burden. Obama is desperate to share ownership of this failure. Economic dislocation from a debt-ceiling crisis precisely serves that purpose -- if the Republicans play along. The perfect out: Those crazy tea partyers ruined the recovery!

    Why would any conservative collaborate with that ploy? November 2012 constitutes the new conservatism's one chance to restructure government and change the ideological course of the country. Why risk forfeiting that outcome by offering to share ownership of Obama's wreckage?
     
  5. mrskeet410

    mrskeet410 TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,064
    Silverbullet - It wasn't misrepresented. I presented a preview to stimulate interest. It was clearly marked "in part", and those interested were invited to click the link and read the whole article. What I included presented an accurate summary of the article. But you knew that.
     
  6. Hal1225

    Hal1225 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    Messages:
    442
    Only God can solve this problem. That's why it says "In God We Trust" on the money. This is all BS. We have to follow the Constitution more carefully.
    Since this is the twenty first century some modification to our general economic system might need to take place. We could change the color of money like Europe did with the Euro's. America needs to be more careful about giving away it's resources and allowing it's laws to be flaunted. Don't make show laws to make it look like the Congress is working hard for the people. Don't make anymore of them, we have enough to circle the globe 10 times! Shit can the IRS and the blood sucking Federal Reserve Bank. Put the FBI to work on the theft of this countries money. Cut the unbreakable bond with Israel so no more Billions upon Billions leave our country.

    Harry Lyga
     
  7. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    All we have accomplished is putting financial collapse off a little bit longer. Zero the Clown hopes long enough to get him reelected.
     
  8. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    skeet, notice you haven't posted back on your John Birch thread since you got your ass handed to you.
     
  9. trap72

    trap72 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2006
    Messages:
    207
    Location:
    Southern Califorina
    THE ACTION OF THE TEA PARTY CONGRESSMEN IS CALLED A DICTATORSHIP, NOT A DEMOCRACY. IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT THERE PLAN IS TO TAKE THE THIS COUNTRY BACK TO BEFORE ROOSEVELT. IF THE DEMS DO NOT STAND UP TO THESE BULLYS, THEY WILL ELIMINATE SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICARE, UNEMPLOYMENT, MEDICAL CARE, FUNDS FOR HIGHWAYS, ELIMINATE THE RIGHT TO VOTE, ELIMINATE UNIONS, GUT FUNDS FOR COLLEGE EDUCATION AND ELIMINATE THE EPA. THEY JUST WANT TO GUT EVERYTHING. BUT THEY THEY INSIST ON GIVING SUBSIDIZES TO BIG BUSINESSES. BUSINESSES WILL LOVE IT, BUT MAIN STREET WILL SUFFER. THE REPUBLICANS HATE THIS PRESIDENT SO MUCH THEY ARE WILLING TO BLOW THIS COUNTRY UP AND THEN BLAME IT ON PRESIDENT OBAMA.
     
  10. mrskeet410

    mrskeet410 TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,064
    Brian - I just wanted to find the John Birchers on the site. I did.
     
  11. TOOLMAKER 251

    TOOLMAKER 251 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,398
    You found out who John Birch was, not who follows the society on this forum. We found out who the jack off is on that thread.
     
  12. Rick Barker

    Rick Barker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    14,343
    Musket, so you are saying anyone who made a comment on your JB thread, including you, is a member of the JBS???????


    I'm not surprised I guess, typical liberal progressive BS thought process, just like JB (joe Biden), calling Americans exercising their rights, " terrorists."



    Do your part to eliminate mental illness. Stamp out Liberalism.
     
  13. sliverbulletexpress

    sliverbulletexpress TS Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,645
    trap72 you forgot to call the Tea Party members terrorists.
     
  14. halfmile

    halfmile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    15,639
    Location:
    Green Bay Wisconsin
    trap72 is looking for the caps lock key on mom's computer.

    HM
     
  15. pufftarget

    pufftarget Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    453
    The auto bailout is constantly alluded to, but little is said about the bailout of the financial institutions, many times the size of the auto bailout.

    Chuck
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.