Monday, August 08, 2011

When the Argument Loses Me

Flowing from the argument over raising the debt ceiling to the argument over downgrading the country's credit rating, it's reaching the stage that is not about losing the argument, but where the argument is losing me.
The DOW crashes today about 635 points. So Obama goes on TV, supposedly to calm everyone down and says ... nothing. All he had to say was, let's see:
S&P was just wrong.
It's the Tea Party's fault.
We still need the rich to chip in more to save us.
Nothing new. Nothing specific. So the DOW plummeted even faster with his silly talking points.
I try to be fair whenever there's an argument, and at least try to understand the other side of the argument. OK, on the debt ceiling, the other side said everything the government is spending is necessary - there is nothing to cut, in fact they think the government should be spending more. As far as the debt problem, they just deny it exists and say fix it by raising taxes on rich folks.
OK, that I can understand. I think they're terribly and obviously wrong, but I also know that party consists mainly of government employees and government dependents, and understand they won't stand for any attempted solution that involves cutting or eliminating their salary (or benefit checks).
But with the new, seemingly obvious consequence of the failure of the government to do anything serious to solve the problem, the other side seems to be just burying their head in the sand and pointing at the Tea Party.
It has been so bizarre to watch how Democrats have united together to brand the Tea Party as the enemy. Interestingly, they're never specific about what's exactly wrong with the Tea Party, because if they actually tell the truth about them, more people would probably flock to Tea Party rallies.
The only common goals of the Tea Party are focused on helping elect candidates who will shrink the size of the Federal government, get spending and debt under control, keep taxes low, and return to founding Constitutional principles. What's so sinister about that? If you don't agree with those principles, then exactly what principles would you proposed to replace them?
Where can we find a single lawmaker or even candidate who has put forward a proposal that even starts to roll back the excesses of this era? Ryan's budget was no more than a down-payment, and he was attacked viciously and unfairly by even some in his own party. Boehner sold the plan that Obama signed to trigger the downgrade which had only pretend spending cuts. Did Boehner, Reid, Obama, and Biden actually believe they could trick the country into believing they even tried to solve the problem? If so, every citizen who realizes the whole thing was a trick should express their frustration at the polls to turn them all out (too bad it's another 6 years before Nevada gets a chance to turn out Reid).
I experienced Jimmy Carter. Until the last few months, I was noticing that, policy-wise, Barack Obama is the second coming of Jimmy Carter. Now it seems that Obama has succeeded in leaving his pal from Plains, GA in the dust as the most hopelessly inept and destructive president of the last 50 years, perhaps even in the country's history.
The only hope is for the second coming of Ronald Reagan to win through in November 2012. Nobody seems fit to wear that mantle among the current crop of candidates, but perhaps one will step forward in time.

No comments: