Posted on 01/19/2009 9:28:52 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Faced with 24/7 Obamamania on the media, the 60 million Americans who did not vote for Barack Obama are wondering where we go from here. Will events turn out like 1993, when another liberal president was inaugurated with the support of big majorities in both the House of Representatives and the Senate?
Under the direction of the activist first lady, the liberals attempted a government takeover of the massive health care industry, in addition to passing new regulations and tax hikes. Bill Clinton rewarded the feminists by passing Joe Biden's nearly-billion-dollar-a-year Violence Against Women Act.
But then came the midterm elections in 1994, and liberals were abruptly reminded how conservative America really is. In a tsunami we hadn't seen since 1946, Republicans won both Houses of Congress by wide margins.
The Speaker of the House, Tom Foley, was defeated for re-election, something that hadn't happened in over a century. President Bill Clinton held onto his power because he was not yet up for re-election, and he quickly changed his stripes to govern more middle-of-the-road.
The new Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) by big majorities, and Clinton signed it into law. DOMA protects states and the federal government against having to recognize same-sex marriages that are performed in other states.
The new Congress passed Welfare Reform to end some of the worst abuses of the system started by Lyndon Johnson's Great Society in the 1960s. After much grumbling, Clinton signed it.
The liberals never forgave Bill Clinton for signing those laws, and conservatives were never fooled by his newfound political religion. Bill signing those laws even hurt Hillary Clinton in the 2008 Democratic primary over a decade later.
People who gave Obama up to $750 million to bring about "change" surely expect something in return. But will Obama and the Democrats fulfill Obama's very expensive promises and risk what happened in the 1994 elections?
Obama's push for imposing an additional trillion dollars in debt will benefit special interests at the expense of working Americans. That translates to many thousands of dollars in new costs for the average worker at a time when we can least afford it.
Less than half of Americans support this proposal according to polls, and many view it as yet another bailout like the unpopular one for bankers last fall. Just as New Deal spending programs did nothing to lift the United States out of the Great Depression, Obama's proposed "stimulus" package will simply dig us into a deeper hole.
Obama's proposed stimulus promises to create 3 million new jobs, but even if it reached that implausible goal, the price tag would be over $300,000 per job. And would they be short-term government jobs or jobs with a future?
The proposed stimulus is not even enough for some Obama supporters, perhaps because so little of it will reach average Americans. It "falls far short" in the words of Terence O'Sullivan, general president of the Laborers' International Union.
Of course, it falls short because government spending only bleeds the taxpayers to pay for government jobs, and what we need is private industry jobs. We need the government to stop its overtaxation and micromanagement of the U.S. economy, and to stop the unfair trade agreements and foreign-government policies that invite corporations to move their manufacturing overseas.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, whose approval rating has sunk to 38 percent, may meet the same fate as the speaker of the house 16 years ago. Ramming through anti-business feminist legislation like the Lilly Ledbetter Act, which invites lawsuits against large and small companies, will hurt instead of helping job creation.
Even moderate Republicans are risking the wrath of voters. Sen. Arlen Specter is already hearing the footsteps of a primary challenge from the right.
Nearly 50 House Democrats hold seats that were Republican in 2002, and perhaps another dozen seats long held by Democrats have been trending Republican. Nearly all those Democrats have just opened themselves up to challenge by voting to expose companies to new job-ruining lawsuits.
There is only one path to economic and social prosperity: less and limited government and enforcing a level playing field for international trade. If Obama and the liberals controlling Congress repeat the Democrats' mistake of 1993, it may be, as Yogi Berra famously said, deja vu all over again.
They have been warned over and over and over and just don’t give a damn.
I disagree. Conservatives have jobs in some cases more than one, and many other pressures that vie for their time and effort, like family, church, morality, principles, etc, etc,
Government should be something one can trust to remain in the background doing what government is mandated to do by the Constitution of the United States of America, and not the intrusive power grabbing entity it has become that requires all the time and effort of conservative man to keep it in check. In short, government is the problem and those seeking to enlarge it, at the expense of the freedom we once enjoyed, are part of the problem.
The solution is not pretty, any more than the first American Revolution.
......Conservatives have jobs in some cases more than one, and many other pressures that vie for their time and effort, like family, church, morality, principles, etc, etc,.....
That can be described as the conservative rut. It is known and comfortable. There is no desire to get out of the rut even to save one’s life.
Absolutely correct!
That can be described as the conservative rut.
Responsibility is not a rut. If politics and party become the all consuming monster you make it out to be, and that it has become, something is out of whack and needs a major adjustment to put it back in it’s place.
Individual responsibility for things as basic as the foundation of our society, the family, must assume their rightful place in the hierarchy of time consumers. Seeking money in the pursuit of governmental power, is not high on the list of a lot of folks I know who are classed as entrepreneurs. Dems on the other hand seem to adore long service in the industry of self aggrandizement called government.
I know what you are preaching, but disagree with the doctrine. Since we have migrated away from strict constructionism, government has been out of control IMHO, and throwing unproductive time at it, is not IMHO going to solve the problem. I see collapse of the problem as the first step to a reasonable solution.
“I really wish our side would stop referring to hardcore marxists as “liberals”
Call them socialists every day, all day long.”
If they are hardcore marxists, and I believe them to be, why not call them marxists, all day long?
CNBC is pushing the worse than FDR ecconomy (thought that was a depression) crisis.
CNBC left with SOCIALIST guests and “I got mine” NYC deziens are pushing the tax INCREASES are good for the ecconomy meme.
Today Janaury 20, 2009 is all about the big lie.
BY THE WAY
oil is at around 34 dollars a barrel.
on this historic day, democrats on TV are pushing gas tax INCREASES!
The problem is, this isn’t 1993. The NEA has had 16 years to crank out tens of millions of new flying monkeys and many of our warriors have gone on to greater glory.
and we have two years to deprogram them.
the 2010 congressional election starts today.
take notes people, the left exposes they lunacy today.
What's most striking is that Jefferson predicted this very dynamic over 200 years ago. Essentially, Jefferson thought that the simplicity (not used as a pejorative) and hard working ethic of the rural communities would act as a tether for the rest of the country to the foundational principles of the Constitution. He knew that if or when their came a time when the large population centers became so powerful as to overwhelm rural America, it would essentially mark the beginning of the end of the Republic.
Jefferson and the other FF's studied this effect in Europe and knew the corrosive and damaging force it had on that continent.
As to comments on the concept of the “Red State Union”, if Freepers think it might have some merit, I would be happy to spend some time on this, and develop a more comprehensive plan- Once done, perhaps some of the more credible Freepers might start a thread- and get more input on a final concept. Jim Robinson had proposed a meeting of FR yesterday, where ideas could be exchanged for the purpose of advancing the conservative cause. Perhaps, this might be one that could be considered.
Red State Union-
Red State Union would be a formal political alliance led by the governors. It wold be a small conservative confederacy within statist America. Each member state would pledge to collective economic and political cooperation in demonstrating how conservative, limited government outperforms statist government— (e.g. Alaska, Okla- versus NY , CA )
If we want conservative government, proving that it’s more effective would be the best evidence. The Red State Union would cooperate to that effect.
Most Important- It can only, at first, be an Economic message. Since, my starting point is that unless power is ripped from Moscow Leviathan on the Potomac, and power returned to 50 sovereign states bound by a Constitution- there will be no chance of advancing a comprehensive conservative agenda. But, if we can unite on one goal–to get power back to the states- and if that goal is accomplished in whole or in significant part– then, we have a fighting chance in each state for social change. The Red State Union would be the foundation.
As I indicated, I would be happy to develop a comprehensive draft “Red State Union Proposal”–then possibly someone can start a thread—get more ideas— refine it- and perhaps put it in a form that Jim Robinson might consider advancing as a FR proposal to the powers that be.
Please PM me—if anyone is in support and thinks I should go forward. Thanks. Humbly submitted, just trying to help. -:)
Jefferson and the other FF’s studied this effect in Europe and knew the corrosive and damaging force it had on that continent.
I see the results right here in red state america. That might be why we have a blue dog congresswoman, and at one time two count em two leftist senators. You have to be so blatantly blue and off the reservation so to speak before you get voted out of office here, but wait, now he’s back in office as a member of the cabinet. Yea, I’m talking about Tommy two tongues daschle.
Anyway, the eastern part of the state is heavily populated and heavily dem, leftist, socialist lib and swing I would guess pretty much any election they want too. Sioux Falls is a magnet for business and population at well over 100,000
which is a significant percentage of the entire state population.
Somewhat the same scenario in WY with Cheyenne, Jackson, Lander and a few other left leaning cities/towns narrowly overcome by the energy industry that runs a few more towns so far. The demographics of nest-o-viper move ins, is a tough nut to crack.
Hey Mabel were moving to where the damn government ain’t so intrusive, hows Wyoming sound, and wouldn’t you know it, they can’t seem to throw off those gimme ideas that produced the intrusive government in the state they recently vacated.
Most Important- It can only, at first, be an Economic message.
On that note, today’s DJA and the beginning of the Reign of O will begin the statistical notes on the other form of Government that we seem to have acquired by public vote instead of amendment. I’m all for the states rights ideas, but it seems stand on the balls of the various governors who will have them mostly castrated by the power of the blackmailing fed. I person has to start someplace and hopefully it isn’t like a drunk hitting bottom before the course of life maybe changes.
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.