Posted on 11/04/2009 6:10:34 PM PST by markomalley
Conservatives who are excited about Republican victories in last night's elections should read this article in the Politico and remember that the GOP has a long way to go before it has any credibility as a small government party. The piece takes a close look at the House select committee on earmark reform, which Republican leaders created among much fanfare after the Nov. 2008 election to combat pork barrel spending projects. Yet the committee still hasn't delivered a report on earmark spending that was supposed to be completed in February, and more tellingly, eight out of the 10 members of the committee have requested earmarks themselves this year. This is a great example of the futility of Republicans when it comes to reining in government -- they talk a big game about cutting spending, take symbolic measures like creating a committee, but don't deliver anything tangible.
Commenting on the article, David Hogberg asks three questions:
(snip)
I would add a fourth: if Republicans can't kick their spending habit when they have absolutely no power, than how can we expect them to control themselves should they return to power?
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Obama’s wild spending spree is making W look like a skinflint penny-pincher. While pushing the GOP to a higher standard, realize that being more responsible than the ‘rats is a pretty easy threshold to cross.
The good old pork loving republicans can aways be counted on to sell their souls to K street and to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
The good old pork loving republicans can aways be counted on to sell their souls to K street and to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
The spending won’t stop because the American people want it to continue. Walter Williams has been urged to run for political office, and he always asks how far anyone thinks he would get, since he would flatly refuse to spend any money on pork or entitlements.
Almost everyone in this country is getting some of their neighbor’s money in the form of government assistance- whether it is welfare, food stamps, tariffs on foreign goods, price supports, ag subsidies, government loans, special goodies for their congressional district brought to them by their congressman, etc. The spending will not end until the US is bankrupt. It’s sad, but that’s the way it is. Two supposedly conservative Republicans from KS were crowing about some new Homeland Security facility they had secured for their state and how many lucrative federal jobs that would mean for KS. It’s all a racket!
As for Bush, he is responsible for that horribly expensive Medicare drug bill. Republicans talk a good game, but it’s just to fool us. Politicians in both parties view the voters as being useful idiots, and to the extent that we continue to fall for their empty promises, we are.
I don’t blame lobbyists at all. If government didn’t have so much power, there would be no lobbyists. Most of them are there to pay protection money to the government mafia, so that congress won’t target their industry. Hillary is a pro at this. At one time she was making speeches about evil big pharma, and when they started donating money to her, she suddenly shut up. It is all a giant con game, and we are the patsies.
It will take a major shift in the ethos of the nation before it starts to give up its profligate spending; and I don’t see such a change coming from any quarter in the foreseeable future. I don’t even know what the trigger would be to bring about such a shift. No simple recession will do the trick. This last recession I might have imagined would have woken people up to the hazards of a nation living beyond its means - but the opposite occurred; everyone retreated deeper into their pre-existing mantras. Both parties got together and decided escalating the debt to record levels was the best thing to do - Republicans only deviated from that prescription by adding their typical nostrum about cutting taxes as well.
McCain boasted that he would “take a hatchet” to spending - but couldn’t name anything in particular he would cut beyond a few relatively insignificant earmarks. Palin’s prescription for cutting spending was to find and correct “inefficiencies” - as if any number of minor tweaks to the process would drastically alter the bottom line. If government is to cut spending it has to do less, whole department need to cease to exist and be replaced by nothing. I don’t know why people have trouble understanding that.
You sir are correct.
Until the idiot voters of this country learn that spending less means doing without certain things, even nice things, we'll continue on the way we are. Total lack of any sense.
It's our culture. Childish consumerism, instant gratification. People need to go back and read Poor Richard's Almanack. Fat chance of that happening though. We're a weak, petty, foolish people.
That reminds a little of what happened last year in California. We we’re facing the biggest budget shortfall of not only our state’s history, but any states’ history. On the ballot where 5 new bond measures - 3 of them passed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.