Republican Traitors Declare War on the American People

[Dot Com]

So what..they are just people with an oponion..are we suppose to bow to them over it or what?

as a matter of fact, yes.

Oh neat , rinata took her monkey paws off the triple cheeseburger just long enough to start another whacked out thread........

 

[Dot Com]

I guess this guy is a 'progressive' too, huh Monica?

Alan Simpson Slams Fellow Republicans For Unwillingness To Compromise

Former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-Wyo.) lashed out at members of his party on Sunday, slamming them for their unwillingness to compromise on proposed tax increases.

In his characteristically colorful style, Simpson told CNN's Fareed Zakaria that Republicans' rigid opposition to new tax revenues has hampered productivity and diminished the chances of reaching an agreement with Democrats on debt reduction.

"You can’t cut spending your way out of this hole," Simpson, who was appointed as co-chair of President Obama's Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform in 2010, said. "You can’t grow your way out of this hole, and you can’t tax your way out of this hole. So put that in your pipe and smoke it, we tell these people. This is madness."

Simpson continued: "If you want to be a purist, go somewhere on a mountaintop and praise the east or something. But if you want to be in politics, you learn to compromise. And you learn to compromise on the issue without compromising yourself. Show me a guy who won’t compromise and I’ll show you a guy with rock for brains."

The former senator, along with debt commission co-chair Erskine Bowles, developed a plan in 2010 for bringing down the top tax rate and lowering the deficit by repealing a number of tax cuts and credits. The initial plan, commonly known as Simpson-Bowles, was mostly ignored by lawmakers. A bipartisan budget modeled after their report was rejected by the House earlier this year.

During the interview Sunday, he expressed frustration with his party's focus on social issues, as well as the ability of outspoken figures like Americans for Tax Reform head Grover Norquist to drive the conversation.

"I guess I'm known as a RINO now, which means a Republican in name only, because, I guess, of social views, perhaps, or common sense would be another one, which seems to escape members of our party," Simpson said. "For heaven’s sake, you have Grover Norquist wandering the earth in his white robes saying that if you raise taxes one penny, he’ll defeat you. He can’t murder you. He can’t burn your house. The only thing he can do to you, as an elected official, is defeat you for reelection. And if that means more to you than your country when we need patriots to come out in a situation when we’re in extremity, you shouldn’t even be in Congress."

Alan Simpson? Another friggin RINO that should have caucused with the democrats.

Ah, the typical right wing response. If a moderate conservative doesn't parrot the right wing propaganda Norquist and Frank Luntz script for Republicans, they are RINO's, or in the case of former Reagan adviser Bruce Bartlett and former GW Bush speechwriter David Frum, they are FIRED by right wing think tanks that don't ALLOW any opinion not blessed by your handlers.

David Frum and the Closing of the Conservative Mind

by Bruce Bartlett

As some readers of this blog may know, I was fired by a right wing think tank called the National Center for Policy Analysis in 2005 for writing a book critical of George W. Bush's policies, especially his support for Medicare Part D. In the years since, I have lost a great many friends and been shunned by conservative society in Washington, DC.

Now the same thing has happened to David Frum, who has been fired by the American Enterprise Institute. I don't know all the details, but I presume that his Waterloo post on Sunday condemning Republicans for failing to work with Democrats on healthcare reform was the final straw.

Since, he is no longer affiliated with AEI, I feel free to say publicly something he told me in private a few months ago. He asked if I had noticed any comments by AEI "scholars" on the subject of health care reform. I said no and he said that was because they had been ordered not to speak to the media because they agreed with too much of what Obama was trying to do.

It saddened me to hear this. I have always hoped that my experience was unique. But now I see that I was just the first to suffer from a closing of the conservative mind. Rigid conformity is being enforced, no dissent is allowed, and the conservative brain will slowly shrivel into dementia if it hasn't already.

Sadly, there is no place for David and me to go. The donor community is only interested in financing organizations that parrot the party line, such as the one recently established by McCain economic adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin.

I will have more to say on this topic later. But I wanted to say that this is a black day for what passes for a conservative movement, scholarship, and the once-respected AEI.

Thats why they're traitors They care more about their lousy, and i do mean lousy, party than they do the country.

 

[Stephanie]

So what..they are just people with an oponion..are we suppose to bow to them over it or what?

as a matter of fact, yes.

Oh neat , rinata took her monkey paws off the triple cheeseburger just long enough to start another whacked out thread........

well miss dottie, you go right ahead.

 

[Liability]

Oh neat , rinata took her monkey paws off the triple cheeseburger just long enough to start another whacked out thread........

 

[The T]

Oh neat , rinata took her monkey paws off the triple cheeseburger just long enough to start another whacked out thread........

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bo9riZYUpTw]Peter Gabriel - Shock the Monkey (HQ music video) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Londoner]

The biggest war happened a long time ago.

Big business approached Reagan and said they were sick of American labor costs. They wanted ultra-cheap labor from dictator-run, freedom hating nations where workers are so oppressed that they make pennies a day and live in sewage.

Reagan accelerated the movement of capital to the world's cheapest labor markets.

He was supposedly fighting communism, but ...

Where do you think the GOP's largest retail contributor - Walmart - gets 100% of its manufacturing?Answer: freedom-hating Communist China.

The GOP uses patriotism, religion, tradition, and family values to get less educated voters to support their policies, which largely benefit a collection of special interests that orbits around concentrated capital. But if you look between the lines... those same collection of interests has been shipping jobs to freedom-hating nations for decades.

Study Neoliberalism if you want to understand the GOP. They hate America. Capital has no allegiance to borders, language, Culture. It has decimated the US Labor market.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Alan Simpson? Another friggin RINO that should have caucused with the democrats.

Ah, the typical right wing response. If a moderate conservative doesn't parrot the right wing propaganda Norquist and Frank Luntz script for Republicans, they are RINO's, or in the case of former Reagan adviser Bruce Bartlett and former GW Bush speechwriter David Frum, they are FIRED by right wing think tanks that don't ALLOW any opinion not blessed by your handlers.

David Frum and the Closing of the Conservative Mind

by Bruce Bartlett

As some readers of this blog may know, I was fired by a right wing think tank called the National Center for Policy Analysis in 2005 for writing a book critical of George W. Bush's policies, especially his support for Medicare Part D. In the years since, I have lost a great many friends and been shunned by conservative society in Washington, DC.

Now the same thing has happened to David Frum, who has been fired by the American Enterprise Institute. I don't know all the details, but I presume that his Waterloo post on Sunday condemning Republicans for failing to work with Democrats on healthcare reform was the final straw.

Since, he is no longer affiliated with AEI, I feel free to say publicly something he told me in private a few months ago. He asked if I had noticed any comments by AEI "scholars" on the subject of health care reform. I said no and he said that was because they had been ordered not to speak to the media because they agreed with too much of what Obama was trying to do.

It saddened me to hear this. I have always hoped that my experience was unique. But now I see that I was just the first to suffer from a closing of the conservative mind. Rigid conformity is being enforced, no dissent is allowed, and the conservative brain will slowly shrivel into dementia if it hasn't already.

Sadly, there is no place for David and me to go. The donor community is only interested in financing organizations that parrot the party line, such as the one recently established by McCain economic adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin.

I will have more to say on this topic later. But I wanted to say that this is a black day for what passes for a conservative movement, scholarship, and the once-respected AEI.

Thats why they're traitors They care more about their lousy, and i do mean lousy, party than they do the country.

Oh please. Tell that to the Obama administration. Don't bring that nonsense here.
If you think politicians of any stripe are not more interested in money and power than the people they represent, you're kidding yourself.
Democrats cannot claim a scintilla of innocence.
Stow it.

 

[SFC Ollie]

The biggest war happened a long time ago.

Big business approached Reagan and said they were sick of American labor costs. They wanted ultra-cheap labor from dictator-run, freedom hating nations where workers are so oppressed that they make pennies a day and live in sewage.

Reagan accelerated the movement of capital to the world's cheapest labor markets.

He was supposedly fighting communism, but ...

Where do you think the GOP's largest retail contributor - Walmart - gets 100% of its manufacturing?Answer: freedom-hating Communist China.

The GOP uses patriotism, religion, tradition, and family values to get less educated voters to support their policies, which largely benefit a collection of special interests that orbits around concentrated capital. But if you look between the lines... those same collection of interests has been shipping jobs to freedom-hating nations for decades.

Study Neoliberalism if you want to understand the GOP. They hate America. Capital has no allegiance to borders, language, Culture. It has decimated the US Labor market.

Why do you morons insist on lying about walmart? It's quite easily disproved by simply visiting one of their stores.....

 

[Charles_Main]

Ah, the typical right wing response. If a moderate conservative doesn't parrot the right wing propaganda Norquist and Frank Luntz script for Republicans, they are RINO's, or in the case of former Reagan adviser Bruce Bartlett and former GW Bush speechwriter David Frum, they are FIRED by right wing think tanks that don't ALLOW any opinion not blessed by your handlers.

David Frum and the Closing of the Conservative Mind

by Bruce Bartlett

As some readers of this blog may know, I was fired by a right wing think tank called the National Center for Policy Analysis in 2005 for writing a book critical of George W. Bush's policies, especially his support for Medicare Part D. In the years since, I have lost a great many friends and been shunned by conservative society in Washington, DC.

Now the same thing has happened to David Frum, who has been fired by the American Enterprise Institute. I don't know all the details, but I presume that his Waterloo post on Sunday condemning Republicans for failing to work with Democrats on healthcare reform was the final straw.

Since, he is no longer affiliated with AEI, I feel free to say publicly something he told me in private a few months ago. He asked if I had noticed any comments by AEI "scholars" on the subject of health care reform. I said no and he said that was because they had been ordered not to speak to the media because they agreed with too much of what Obama was trying to do.

It saddened me to hear this. I have always hoped that my experience was unique. But now I see that I was just the first to suffer from a closing of the conservative mind. Rigid conformity is being enforced, no dissent is allowed, and the conservative brain will slowly shrivel into dementia if it hasn't already.

Sadly, there is no place for David and me to go. The donor community is only interested in financing organizations that parrot the party line, such as the one recently established by McCain economic adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin.

I will have more to say on this topic later. But I wanted to say that this is a black day for what passes for a conservative movement, scholarship, and the once-respected AEI.

Thats why they're traitors They care more about their lousy, and i do mean lousy, party than they do the country.

Man you people are like little babies. WTF do you think the Democrats do? Did you actually Diluted yourself into thinking they care Any more about this Country than their Party and Power, than the Republicans?

Jesus dude how old are you? I Have Been watching the DC dog and pony show for almost 5 Decades my friend. There are no saints there. The Democrats are just as Petty, Power Hungry, and Fucking Ignorant as the Republicans.

Barrack Obama ran promising to be Something different. Instead it turns out he is the Personification of all that is bad with American Politics. Corrupt, Dishonest, Divisive, and utterly ineffective.

 

[The T]

The biggest war happened a long time ago.

Big business approached Reagan and said they were sick of American labor costs. They wanted ultra-cheap labor from dictator-run, freedom hating nations where workers are so oppressed that they make pennies a day and live in sewage.

Reagan accelerated the movement of capital to the world's cheapest labor markets.

He was supposedly fighting communism, but ...

Where do you think the GOP's largest retail contributor - Walmart - gets 100% of its manufacturing?Answer: freedom-hating Communist China.

The GOP uses patriotism, religion, tradition, and family values to get less educated voters to support their policies, which largely benefit a collection of special interests that orbits around concentrated capital. But if you look between the lines... those same collection of interests has been shipping jobs to freedom-hating nations for decades.

Study Neoliberalism if you want to understand the GOP. They hate America. Capital has no allegiance to borders, language, Culture. It has decimated the US Labor market.

Why do you morons insist on lying about walmart? It's quite easily disproved by simply visiting one of their stores.....

Is 'WallyWorld' allowed in Great Britain?

 

[buckeye45_73]

Alan Simpson? Another friggin RINO that should have caucused with the democrats.

Ah, the typical right wing response. If a moderate conservative doesn't parrot the right wing propaganda Norquist and Frank Luntz script for Republicans, they are RINO's, or in the case of former Reagan adviser Bruce Bartlett and former GW Bush speechwriter David Frum, they are FIRED by right wing think tanks that don't ALLOW any opinion not blessed by your handlers.

David Frum and the Closing of the Conservative Mind

by Bruce Bartlett

As some readers of this blog may know, I was fired by a right wing think tank called the National Center for Policy Analysis in 2005 for writing a book critical of George W. Bush's policies, especially his support for Medicare Part D. In the years since, I have lost a great many friends and been shunned by conservative society in Washington, DC.

Now the same thing has happened to David Frum, who has been fired by the American Enterprise Institute. I don't know all the details, but I presume that his Waterloo post on Sunday condemning Republicans for failing to work with Democrats on healthcare reform was the final straw.

Since, he is no longer affiliated with AEI, I feel free to say publicly something he told me in private a few months ago. He asked if I had noticed any comments by AEI "scholars" on the subject of health care reform. I said no and he said that was because they had been ordered not to speak to the media because they agreed with too much of what Obama was trying to do.

It saddened me to hear this. I have always hoped that my experience was unique. But now I see that I was just the first to suffer from a closing of the conservative mind. Rigid conformity is being enforced, no dissent is allowed, and the conservative brain will slowly shrivel into dementia if it hasn't already.

Sadly, there is no place for David and me to go. The donor community is only interested in financing organizations that parrot the party line, such as the one recently established by McCain economic adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin.

I will have more to say on this topic later. But I wanted to say that this is a black day for what passes for a conservative movement, scholarship, and the once-respected AEI.

Thats why they're traitors They care more about their lousy, and i do mean lousy, party than they do the country.

Hey look at that, projection everyone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So democrats care so much about the people they fight propositions voted for BY the american people (usually in California, yea it's still in america, I know) in court.

Then they run out of a state being voted on by representavies elected by the people and when that doesnt work they protest and try to intimidate the governor. Then when that doesnt work, they try recall elections and when that doesnt work.........what next?

So stop with the traitors, Jane Fonda point a gun at american troops and we celebrated by you liberals, those are traitors, not someone who doesn't support democratic party policies.

 

[Bfgrn]

Alan Simpson? Another friggin RINO that should have caucused with the democrats.

Ah, the typical right wing response. If a moderate conservative doesn't parrot the right wing propaganda Norquist and Frank Luntz script for Republicans, they are RINO's, or in the case of former Reagan adviser Bruce Bartlett and former GW Bush speechwriter David Frum, they are FIRED by right wing think tanks that don't ALLOW any opinion not blessed by your handlers.

David Frum and the Closing of the Conservative Mind

by Bruce Bartlett

As some readers of this blog may know, I was fired by a right wing think tank called the National Center for Policy Analysis in 2005 for writing a book critical of George W. Bush's policies, especially his support for Medicare Part D. In the years since, I have lost a great many friends and been shunned by conservative society in Washington, DC.

Now the same thing has happened to David Frum, who has been fired by the American Enterprise Institute. I don't know all the details, but I presume that his Waterloo post on Sunday condemning Republicans for failing to work with Democrats on healthcare reform was the final straw.

Since, he is no longer affiliated with AEI, I feel free to say publicly something he told me in private a few months ago. He asked if I had noticed any comments by AEI "scholars" on the subject of health care reform. I said no and he said that was because they had been ordered not to speak to the media because they agreed with too much of what Obama was trying to do.

It saddened me to hear this. I have always hoped that my experience was unique. But now I see that I was just the first to suffer from a closing of the conservative mind. Rigid conformity is being enforced, no dissent is allowed, and the conservative brain will slowly shrivel into dementia if it hasn't already.

Sadly, there is no place for David and me to go. The donor community is only interested in financing organizations that parrot the party line, such as the one recently established by McCain economic adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin.

I will have more to say on this topic later. But I wanted to say that this is a black day for what passes for a conservative movement, scholarship, and the once-respected AEI.

Meanwhile back in the reality zone...Don't you lecture me about partisanship.
Libs reject and exclude all who do not march in lockstep with their agenda.
The fact is sweet tits, is that the party affiliation does not matter to us. We look at ideology. So if a politician holds him/herself out as a conservative then crosses over or seeks compromise at every turn) Olympia Snow(barely R ME) Scott Brown( Slightly R, MA may as well caucus with the democrats)...Are not welcome. We want conservatives. Not wishy washy consensus building wimps who cave at the very hint of opposition from democrat liberals.
Parroting? Please. It's called having core beliefs. It's called making a statement based on one's point of view. It's called sticking to your guns. It's NOT called sticking one's finger in the air to see which way the winds of popularity blow.
Moderates....There is no such thing as a moderate. A moderate is a person who is liberal but is fearful of being discovered having liberal ideas.

WOW, thank you for admitting the truth.

There is also another truth that you won't want to hear; the extremes of either philosophy are MUCH closer to each other than they are poles apart. It is not plotted on a straight lines, it is plotted on a circle. So the extreme right and the extreme left are almost identical and moderates from both sides are a far from the extremes as you can get.

Marxism is an extreme unbending religion, so is Marketism.

"Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the Republican party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them."
Barry Goldwater (R) – Late Senator & Father of the Conservative movement

 

[Peach]

Are you kidding? Clinton abused a women young enough to be his daughter in the freaking Oval Office and had his wife and supporters ruin the lives of any other woman who came forward with testimony of Bubba Bill's abuses. Clinton was diddling Monica with a cigar while the 9-11 terrorists were going to flight school. Democrats authorized boots on the Ground in Iraq and then engaged in treason while they called the US Military commander "betray-us" and sat back and pretended to be bystanders while they undermined the Military mission. Maybe it's a lack of proper education or Michael Savage was right that liberalism is a mental illness.

ABUSED? Why invent fairy tales? The adult woman involved was more than willing, and the constant fabrications about the events add nothing to the reality of Clinton's sickening, obnoxious behavior.

 

[JoeB131]

The biggest war happened a long time ago.

Big business approached Reagan and said they were sick of American labor costs. They wanted ultra-cheap labor from dictator-run, freedom hating nations where workers are so oppressed that they make pennies a day and live in sewage.

Reagan accelerated the movement of capital to the world's cheapest labor markets.

He was supposedly fighting communism, but ...

Where do you think the GOP's largest retail contributor - Walmart - gets 100% of its manufacturing?Answer: freedom-hating Communist China.

The GOP uses patriotism, religion, tradition, and family values to get less educated voters to support their policies, which largely benefit a collection of special interests that orbits around concentrated capital. But if you look between the lines... those same collection of interests has been shipping jobs to freedom-hating nations for decades.

Study Neoliberalism if you want to understand the GOP. They hate America. Capital has no allegiance to borders, language, Culture. It has decimated the US Labor market.

Why do you morons insist on lying about walmart? It's quite easily disproved by simply visiting one of their stores.....

Again, that depends. If you include food and chemical products, yup, those are actually mostly made here.

But durable goods, not so much.

80% of non-perishables sold at Wal mart are made in China.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The biggest war happened a long time ago.

Big business approached Reagan and said they were sick of American labor costs. They wanted ultra-cheap labor from dictator-run, freedom hating nations where workers are so oppressed that they make pennies a day and live in sewage.

Reagan accelerated the movement of capital to the world's cheapest labor markets.

He was supposedly fighting communism, but ...

Where do you think the GOP's largest retail contributor - Walmart - gets 100% of its manufacturing?Answer: freedom-hating Communist China.

The GOP uses patriotism, religion, tradition, and family values to get less educated voters to support their policies, which largely benefit a collection of special interests that orbits around concentrated capital. But if you look between the lines... those same collection of interests has been shipping jobs to freedom-hating nations for decades.

Study Neoliberalism if you want to understand the GOP. They hate America. Capital has no allegiance to borders, language, Culture. It has decimated the US Labor market.

Oh shut it.

 

[Bfgrn]

The closest twin we have in America today to the communists and Marxists in Russia are the 'Marketists'; conservatives, libertarians and 'free marketeers' who have turned government nonintervention and 'laissez faire' into a religion. It has created 'malaise faire'

Blind Faith

For a country that has prided itself on its resourcefulness, the inability to address our problems suggests something deeper at work. There is something, powerful but insidious, that blinds us to the causes of these problems and undermines our ability to respond. That something is a set of beliefs, comparable to religious beliefs in earlier ages, about the nature of economies and societies. These beliefs imply the impropriety of government intervention either in social contexts (libertarianism) or in economic affairs (laissez faire).

The faithful unquestioningly embrace the credo that the doctrine of nonintervention has generated our most venerated institutions: our democracy, the best possible political system; and our free market economy, the best possible economic system. But despite our devotion to the dogmas that libertarianism and free market economics are the foundation of all that we cherish most deeply, they have failed us and are responsible for our present malaise.

The pieties of libertarianism and free markets sound pretty, but they cannot withstand even a cursory inspection. Libertarianism does not support democracy; taken to an extreme, it entails the law of the jungle. If government never interferes, we could all get away with murder. Alternatively, if the libertarian position is not to be taken to an extreme, where should it stop? What is the difference between no government and minimal government? Attempts to justify libertarianism, even a less than extreme position, have failed. Laissez faire, or free market economics, characterized by minimal or no government intervention, has a history that is long but undistinguished. Just as the negative effects of a high fever do not certify the health benefits of the opposite extreme, hypothermia, the dismal failure of communism, seeking complete government control of the economy, does not certify the economic benefits of the opposite extreme, total economic non-intervention.

It may seem odd, given the parabolic arc of our financial markets and the swelling chorus of paeans to free market economics, but despite the important role of the market, purer free market economies have consistently underperformed well-focused mixed economies. In the latter part of the nineteenth century the mixed economies of Meiji Japan and Bismarck’s Germany clearly outperformed the free market economies of Britain and France. Our own economy grew faster when we abandoned the laissez faire of the 1920s and early 1930s for the proto-socialist policies of Franklin D. Roosevelt. It has become increasingly sluggish as we have moved back to a purer free market. Data of the past few decades show that our GNP and productivity growth have lagged those of our trading partners, who have mixed economies characterized by moderate government intervention.

The persistently mediocre track record of laissez faire casts doubt on the claim that an economy free from government interference invariably maximizes the wealth of society. In fact, there are sound reasons the pure free market must underperform well-focused mixed economies.

But despite laissez faire’s mediocre track record and despite powerful arguments that it cannot possibly provide what it promises, the notion of the unqualified benefit of the free market has become deeply embedded in our mythology. Apologists have exulted in claims that glorify free market mythology at the expense of reality, and also at the expense of society. Free market principles, even though they have failed in economics, have been eagerly applied to sectors ranging from politics to education, where they have contributed to societal dysfunction.

One politically popular myth, that free market economics and government non-intervention provide the basis for true democracy, flies in the face of history.

As we moved toward an ideology driven 'free market' ONLY belief economically, and away from a mixed economy, the results have been disastrous.

Over the past half-century we have seen lower tax rates and less government interference. We have come a long way toward free enterprise from the proto-socialist policies of Franklin D. Roosevelt. Since the Kennedy Administration we have reduced the marginal tax rate on our highest incomes from the 91% that remained in effect from the 1940s into the mid-1960s (and a brief peak of 94% during World War II) to 28% in the 1986 tax code. Yet our economic growth has slowed.

Decade/Average Real GNP/per Capita GNP Growth
1960-1969 4.18% 2.79%
1970-1979 3.18% 2.09%
1980-1989 2.75% 1.81%
1990-1994 1.95% 0.79%
(Maddison, Monitoring the World Economy 1820-1992 p. .183, 197)

Despite our adoption of the most enlightened free market policies, our performance resembles that of a declining Great Britain in the late nineteenth century.

Free market apologists contend the closer we come to pure laissez faire, the better. But there is little evidence for even this position. The U.S. has come closer to laissez faire than most other countries, especially since the Reagan Administration. If free market policies are the best economic policies then we should have experienced the most robust growth in the world during this period. But this has not happened. We have been outstripped by our trading partners.

Myths Of The Free Market

The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived and dishonest – but the myth – persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.
President John F. Kennedy

 

[thereisnospoon]

The closest twin we have in America today to the communists and Marxists in Russia are the 'Marketists'; conservatives, libertarians and 'free marketeers' who have turned government nonintervention and 'laissez faire' into a religion. It has created 'malaise faire'

Blind Faith

For a country that has prided itself on its resourcefulness, the inability to address our problems suggests something deeper at work. There is something, powerful but insidious, that blinds us to the causes of these problems and undermines our ability to respond. That something is a set of beliefs, comparable to religious beliefs in earlier ages, about the nature of economies and societies. These beliefs imply the impropriety of government intervention either in social contexts (libertarianism) or in economic affairs (laissez faire).

The faithful unquestioningly embrace the credo that the doctrine of nonintervention has generated our most venerated institutions: our democracy, the best possible political system; and our free market economy, the best possible economic system. But despite our devotion to the dogmas that libertarianism and free market economics are the foundation of all that we cherish most deeply, they have failed us and are responsible for our present malaise.

The pieties of libertarianism and free markets sound pretty, but they cannot withstand even a cursory inspection. Libertarianism does not support democracy; taken to an extreme, it entails the law of the jungle. If government never interferes, we could all get away with murder. Alternatively, if the libertarian position is not to be taken to an extreme, where should it stop? What is the difference between no government and minimal government? Attempts to justify libertarianism, even a less than extreme position, have failed. Laissez faire, or free market economics, characterized by minimal or no government intervention, has a history that is long but undistinguished. Just as the negative effects of a high fever do not certify the health benefits of the opposite extreme, hypothermia, the dismal failure of communism, seeking complete government control of the economy, does not certify the economic benefits of the opposite extreme, total economic non-intervention.

It may seem odd, given the parabolic arc of our financial markets and the swelling chorus of paeans to free market economics, but despite the important role of the market, purer free market economies have consistently underperformed well-focused mixed economies. In the latter part of the nineteenth century the mixed economies of Meiji Japan and Bismarck’s Germany clearly outperformed the free market economies of Britain and France. Our own economy grew faster when we abandoned the laissez faire of the 1920s and early 1930s for the proto-socialist policies of Franklin D. Roosevelt. It has become increasingly sluggish as we have moved back to a purer free market. Data of the past few decades show that our GNP and productivity growth have lagged those of our trading partners, who have mixed economies characterized by moderate government intervention.

The persistently mediocre track record of laissez faire casts doubt on the claim that an economy free from government interference invariably maximizes the wealth of society. In fact, there are sound reasons the pure free market must underperform well-focused mixed economies.

But despite laissez faire’s mediocre track record and despite powerful arguments that it cannot possibly provide what it promises, the notion of the unqualified benefit of the free market has become deeply embedded in our mythology. Apologists have exulted in claims that glorify free market mythology at the expense of reality, and also at the expense of society. Free market principles, even though they have failed in economics, have been eagerly applied to sectors ranging from politics to education, where they have contributed to societal dysfunction.

One politically popular myth, that free market economics and government non-intervention provide the basis for true democracy, flies in the face of history.

As we moved toward an ideology driven 'free market' ONLY belief economically, and away from a mixed economy, the results have been disastrous.

Over the past half-century we have seen lower tax rates and less government interference. We have come a long way toward free enterprise from the proto-socialist policies of Franklin D. Roosevelt. Since the Kennedy Administration we have reduced the marginal tax rate on our highest incomes from the 91% that remained in effect from the 1940s into the mid-1960s (and a brief peak of 94% during World War II) to 28% in the 1986 tax code. Yet our economic growth has slowed.

Decade/Average Real GNP/per Capita GNP Growth
1960-1969 4.18% 2.79%
1970-1979 3.18% 2.09%
1980-1989 2.75% 1.81%
1990-1994 1.95% 0.79%
(Maddison, Monitoring the World Economy 1820-1992 p. .183, 197)

Despite our adoption of the most enlightened free market policies, our performance resembles that of a declining Great Britain in the late nineteenth century.

Free market apologists contend the closer we come to pure laissez faire, the better. But there is little evidence for even this position. The U.S. has come closer to laissez faire than most other countries, especially since the Reagan Administration. If free market policies are the best economic policies then we should have experienced the most robust growth in the world during this period. But this has not happened. We have been outstripped by our trading partners.

Myths Of The Free Market

The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived and dishonest – but the myth – persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.
President John F. Kennedy

Yer kidding with this, right?

 

[teapartysamurai]

I guess this guy is a 'progressive' too, huh Monica?

Alan Simpson Slams Fellow Republicans For Unwillingness To Compromise

Former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-Wyo.) lashed out at members of his party on Sunday, slamming them for their unwillingness to compromise on proposed tax increases.

In his characteristically colorful style, Simpson told CNN's Fareed Zakaria that Republicans' rigid opposition to new tax revenues has hampered productivity and diminished the chances of reaching an agreement with Democrats on debt reduction.

"You can’t cut spending your way out of this hole," Simpson, who was appointed as co-chair of President Obama's Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform in 2010, said. "You can’t grow your way out of this hole, and you can’t tax your way out of this hole. So put that in your pipe and smoke it, we tell these people. This is madness."

Simpson continued: "If you want to be a purist, go somewhere on a mountaintop and praise the east or something. But if you want to be in politics, you learn to compromise. And you learn to compromise on the issue without compromising yourself. Show me a guy who won’t compromise and I’ll show you a guy with rock for brains."

The former senator, along with debt commission co-chair Erskine Bowles, developed a plan in 2010 for bringing down the top tax rate and lowering the deficit by repealing a number of tax cuts and credits. The initial plan, commonly known as Simpson-Bowles, was mostly ignored by lawmakers. A bipartisan budget modeled after their report was rejected by the House earlier this year.

During the interview Sunday, he expressed frustration with his party's focus on social issues, as well as the ability of outspoken figures like Americans for Tax Reform head Grover Norquist to drive the conversation.

"I guess I'm known as a RINO now, which means a Republican in name only, because, I guess, of social views, perhaps, or common sense would be another one, which seems to escape members of our party," Simpson said. "For heaven’s sake, you have Grover Norquist wandering the earth in his white robes saying that if you raise taxes one penny, he’ll defeat you. He can’t murder you. He can’t burn your house. The only thing he can do to you, as an elected official, is defeat you for reelection. And if that means more to you than your country when we need patriots to come out in a situation when we’re in extremity, you shouldn’t even be in Congress."

Alan Simpson? Another friggin RINO that should have caucused with the democrats.

Ah, the typical right wing response.

Laughing at liberal bullshit? You bet!

I'm going to laugh even more after election day when I here the cadre of liberal excuses as to why Obama lost.

American voters are racist.

Republicans intimidated minority voters

The Butterfly ballot was too confusing

Voters voted against their "best interests."

We didn't get our message out (it never occurs to libs that the reason they lost is because they DID get their message out and the American voter rejected that message)

And on and on and on.

 

[daveman]

Oh neat , rinata took her monkey paws off the triple cheeseburger just long enough to start another whacked out thread........

 

[daveman]

The closest twin we have in America today to the communists and Marxists in Russia are the 'Marketists'; conservatives, libertarians and 'free marketeers' who have turned government nonintervention and 'laissez faire' into a religion. It has created 'malaise faire'

Blind Faith

For a country that has prided itself on its resourcefulness, the inability to address our problems suggests something deeper at work. There is something, powerful but insidious, that blinds us to the causes of these problems and undermines our ability to respond. That something is a set of beliefs, comparable to religious beliefs in earlier ages, about the nature of economies and societies. These beliefs imply the impropriety of government intervention either in social contexts (libertarianism) or in economic affairs (laissez faire).

The faithful unquestioningly embrace the credo that the doctrine of nonintervention has generated our most venerated institutions: our democracy, the best possible political system; and our free market economy, the best possible economic system. But despite our devotion to the dogmas that libertarianism and free market economics are the foundation of all that we cherish most deeply, they have failed us and are responsible for our present malaise.

The pieties of libertarianism and free markets sound pretty, but they cannot withstand even a cursory inspection. Libertarianism does not support democracy; taken to an extreme, it entails the law of the jungle. If government never interferes, we could all get away with murder. Alternatively, if the libertarian position is not to be taken to an extreme, where should it stop? What is the difference between no government and minimal government? Attempts to justify libertarianism, even a less than extreme position, have failed. Laissez faire, or free market economics, characterized by minimal or no government intervention, has a history that is long but undistinguished. Just as the negative effects of a high fever do not certify the health benefits of the opposite extreme, hypothermia, the dismal failure of communism, seeking complete government control of the economy, does not certify the economic benefits of the opposite extreme, total economic non-intervention.

It may seem odd, given the parabolic arc of our financial markets and the swelling chorus of paeans to free market economics, but despite the important role of the market, purer free market economies have consistently underperformed well-focused mixed economies. In the latter part of the nineteenth century the mixed economies of Meiji Japan and Bismarck’s Germany clearly outperformed the free market economies of Britain and France. Our own economy grew faster when we abandoned the laissez faire of the 1920s and early 1930s for the proto-socialist policies of Franklin D. Roosevelt. It has become increasingly sluggish as we have moved back to a purer free market. Data of the past few decades show that our GNP and productivity growth have lagged those of our trading partners, who have mixed economies characterized by moderate government intervention.

The persistently mediocre track record of laissez faire casts doubt on the claim that an economy free from government interference invariably maximizes the wealth of society. In fact, there are sound reasons the pure free market must underperform well-focused mixed economies.

But despite laissez faire’s mediocre track record and despite powerful arguments that it cannot possibly provide what it promises, the notion of the unqualified benefit of the free market has become deeply embedded in our mythology. Apologists have exulted in claims that glorify free market mythology at the expense of reality, and also at the expense of society. Free market principles, even though they have failed in economics, have been eagerly applied to sectors ranging from politics to education, where they have contributed to societal dysfunction.

One politically popular myth, that free market economics and government non-intervention provide the basis for true democracy, flies in the face of history.

As we moved toward an ideology driven 'free market' ONLY belief economically, and away from a mixed economy, the results have been disastrous.

Over the past half-century we have seen lower tax rates and less government interference. We have come a long way toward free enterprise from the proto-socialist policies of Franklin D. Roosevelt. Since the Kennedy Administration we have reduced the marginal tax rate on our highest incomes from the 91% that remained in effect from the 1940s into the mid-1960s (and a brief peak of 94% during World War II) to 28% in the 1986 tax code. Yet our economic growth has slowed.

Decade/Average Real GNP/per Capita GNP Growth
1960-1969 4.18% 2.79%
1970-1979 3.18% 2.09%
1980-1989 2.75% 1.81%
1990-1994 1.95% 0.79%
(Maddison, Monitoring the World Economy 1820-1992 p. .183, 197)

Despite our adoption of the most enlightened free market policies, our performance resembles that of a declining Great Britain in the late nineteenth century.

Free market apologists contend the closer we come to pure laissez faire, the better. But there is little evidence for even this position. The U.S. has come closer to laissez faire than most other countries, especially since the Reagan Administration. If free market policies are the best economic policies then we should have experienced the most robust growth in the world during this period. But this has not happened. We have been outstripped by our trading partners.

Myths Of The Free Market

The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived and dishonest – but the myth – persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.
President John F. Kennedy

Yer kidding with this, right?

I've seen horseshit like this before from other mindless twits: Claiming a leftist phenomena belongs to the right.

It's never credible, and always ludicrous.