"Systemic Pessimism" (Read the Links Long)

Hugh Hewitt.com ^ | August 16, 2010 | Clark Judge

[Hojczyk]

By Clark S. Judge, White House Writers Group (www.whwg.com ) and chair, Pacific Research Institute (www.pri.org )

When Shakespeare’s Richard the Third decried the “winter of our discontent”, he meant that unhappiness had gone into hibernation. He intended to awaken it. No need for R-III-R in Washington these days. With all problems diagnosed as “systemic”, systemic pessimism is everywhere.

Two weeks ago, in her weekly Wall Street Journal column ( http://tiny.cc/4gkz6 ), Peggy Noonan pointed to reports of Americans giving up their citizenship. She worried that popular gloom over economic decline and powerlessness to change an out-of-touch leadership could lead to civil unrest and national decline.

[Frantzie]

Hugh Hewitt is an anti-birther which means he is a Saudi stooge.

[updatedscreenname]

‘Systemic Pessimism’ is the new Malaise?
Is 0 going to give the July 15, 1979 speech?

[Tailback]

I disagree, Hewitt is a country club elitest republican. He is a socially conservative fiscally pro big government insider. More than once on his show he has said deficits didn’t bother him because the economy would grow and make them irrelevant. To his credit, a month or so ago he changed his tune and said something like “The size of the deficit and debt has become problematic”.

I like his show because he has some fantastic guests. He is a typical Orange County CA republican though. I bet he had a Mexican nanny, chauffer, housekeeper, and gardener.

[happygrl]

The problem I have with Hugh Hewitt is that, because of the sponsorship of his program by the Mortgage Minute Guy, he is anti-Fair Tax, and responsible for encouraging the malfeasance of second mortgages, resulting in homeowners being upside down in their mortgages.

[Prospero]

You know... this isn't rocket science. Anyone can look at the "structural deficit" and realize even extending the, so-called, "Bush tax cuts" just isn't going to cut it.

There is only one solution. Cut taxes and roll back per capital federal, state and local government spending to pre-2005 levels, in accord with our real economic capacity.

The more ironic thing to me, at least, is the result would be skyrocketing federal revenue. The liberals would have all the money they need to expand guv'ment, unless someone stops them, that is, as was not done in after 1983.

So why don't they do that? Because (1.) they actually listened to their egghead college profs, and / or (2.) they have another agenda, altogether.

If the GOP does well in November, they will sink us all in a nightmare that will make the Argentina experience look like a brief recession - unless real cuts in taxes are pushed all the way through past January 2013.