Arkansas Times

Arkansas Blog

« NLR freebies -- UPDATE | Main | Highway program? »

The Republican revolution

A shrunken efficient government? Hah. Paul Krugman writes about the failed promises of Armey, Gingrich, etc. today.

In the end, Republicans didn’t shrink the government. But they did degrade it. Baghdad and New Orleans are the arrival destinations of a movement based on deep contempt for governance.

Is that the end for the radical right? Probably not. As a long-suffering civil servant once told me, bad policy ideas are like cockroaches: you can flush them down the toilet, but they keep coming back. Many of the ideas that failed in the Bush years had previously failed in the Reagan years. So there’s no reason to assume they’re gone for good.

Indeed, it appears that loss of power and the ensuing lack of accountability is liberating right-wingers to lie yet again: since last month’s election, I’ve noticed a number of Social Security privatizers propounding the same free-lunch falsehoods that the Bush administration had to abandon in the fac

Comments

One way to put the nails in the Republican coffin for good would be to take the entire year of 2007 and investigate the bejesus out of everything. America is middle age, we have the time to slow down and look back at our public screwing in slow motion.

It's the only way to ferret out the guilty and make sure they receive the punishment they so richly deserve. Working in or for the government is no longer about working for the people. That was wiped out in the 70s and 80s and 1994. Winning election is like winning the lottery these days.

The voter stands at the door knocking and knocking while our elected officials hide inside making deals with big business and the very rich. Our current government, state and local is of the business, by the business, for the business. While Democrats share in the gravy train, it is the Republicans who are driving the bus.

The Republican Revolution revolutionized they own bank accounts upwards, while emptying the bank accounts of the average family. Cutting the government sounds like something we'd all love to see, but Newt & Co., are shooting for government to be lifted off the backs of the rich while continually controlling our lives and sticking us with the bill.

That we are gleefully waving goodbye to thousands of US jobs daily in order that the rich white owners might make even larger profits proves the fix is in. When America is divided into 2 groups, the small one at the top that owns everything and the giant pool of slaves fighting to work at Wal-Mart, the Republican victory will be complete.

While those in the top group have orgies with Nancy Kissinger type hookers and teenage pages, we'll be mopping up piss on isle 7 at Wal-Mart, hoping our death coincides with our last day on the job, since Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and retirement benefits will have become a thing of the past.

The only way to stop our march towards a dim future is to take the time next year to clean the maggots out of our cupboard. Instead of monitoring Brittany Spears next move, we need to kick Senator Pat Roberts (R-Kansas) out of the way and invigorate all the investigations he's stalled for years.

Simply finding out why we went to war and who has profited from the war would be a damn good way to lose a lot of bad guys fast.

Getting the oil crooks out of the White House and the defense contractor lobbyists out of Congress is possible next year too. If our children must die needlessly in Iraq, the least we can do is be busy at home jailing those profiting from their senseless sacrifices.

Once the Republican Party has gone the way of its predecessor, the Whigs, we might see an improvement in our daily lives, we might have a future after all. Our children will not have to die for Cheney and Exxon. It's time for the People's Revolution!

"America is middle age, we
have the time to slow down
and look back at our public
screwing in slow motion.
Posted by: Deathbyinches"

I wonder if anybody has any economic statistics on whether a country lives better as a superpower or as a retired former superpower. DBI mentioning America being in middle age made me think of England. They used to be the world's superpower, with an empire spanning the whole world. Now, in retirement, they reap benefits of their world-wide contacts but don't have the expense of trying to maintain the world's largest navy. As a mature country, all their roads are built, all their infrastructure in place, and they can sit back and live the good life.

When does America get to do that? Except for finishing US 67 to northeast Arkansas, most of America's infrastructure is built and just needs maintenance. We don't have an enemy that requires us to maintain a huge air force and navy. When do we get to rest on our laurels and enjoy our golden years?

The answer, I guess, is never. China and the EU are nipping at our heals. We can't out-produce anybody anymore, either in quality, quantity, or price. We're on the verge of retirement from our world leadership role and we don't even know it. We should be saving up for retirement and instead we're still trying to act like it's 1850 and Manifest Destiny has just been proclaimed so we can spread our own form of democracy and freedom.

Yes, we needed a shrunken, efficient government from the Republicans. Instead, they gave us Vietnam, Chapter II.

click on handle for full article

"President Bush worked nearly three hours at his Texas ranch on Thursday to design a new U.S. policy in Iraq, then emerged to say that he and his advisers need more time . . . Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stood by Bush as he made his three-minute statement on a dirt road lined with cactus, then turned away, ignoring a reporter's question about the pending execution. . . .

'. . . I think the debate is really coming down to: Surge large.
Surge small. Surge short. Surge longer,' said Tom Donnelly, a defense and security expert at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. 'I think the smart money would say that the range of options is fairly narrow and driven by the situation on the ground in Iraq.' . . ."

Here's a 2006 and 2007 prediction. Bush will continue to stall as long as possible and then send in more troops.

Bush XLIII will stubbornly continue to do exactly what he wants and ignore the public, his generals and the statesmen who have tried to give him advice. He believes anyone who opposes him is stupid, incompetent, a weakling and worse, a traitor. After all, he is the president(United States) and can't afford to admit mistakes. It would make him (the US) appear weak.

He has already put sufficient pressure on Casey and Abizaid to reverse their position that surging troops to Iraq is an error (Remember "I will listen to my commanders in Iraq?"). He will continue his stubborn, "stay the course" (but not call it that) tactics until he is removed from office by time or impeachment. The result will be the same "successes" we have seen from his administration for the past six years.

He wants to see himself as Harry S. Truman, Democrat, but there is a severe problem with that delusion. Famously, Harry Truman, stopped the buck at the president's desk. Bush XLlII always passes the buck to somebody else. Who's next?

I pray I am wrong, but our country and our brave service people deployed and recuperating will have to pay the butcher's bill for Bush's stubbornness and continuing inadequacies and the bloated inefficiencies of Bush XLIII's political patronage stuffed government will continue to be ignored.

PS Don't ya think it might be a good idea to have Bob Woodward or Mike Wallace ask Saddam a few questions about his many many years of being on the US government's tit before they off him?

We build a 500 million dollar court house to try him in (our tax money) don't you think our bang for the buck should be a little information out of the guy before they hang him? Always be suspicious when the government wants someone dead real quick.

"Surge large.
Surge small. Surge short. Surge longer,"

SURGE OUT !

Bush ain't going to change a damn thing. It's stay the course all the way over the cliff. It's entertaining, however, to watch the Cable news gang try to explain how Bush is STILL working hard on deciding but nothing has been decided. I'll bet that three hours of hard work blew monkeyboy's feeble circuits.

Kudos to Cindy Sheehan for 'staying the course'!

Five years after the Sept. 11 attacks, Osama bin Laden is still at large -- but that's not a failure of White House policy, says Frances Fragos Townsend. As she explained to CNN's White House correspondent Ed Henry December 28, 2006:

". . . HENRY: But now as 2006 ends, Osama bin Laden is still at large. Heading into 2007, how confident are you that he can be brought to justice this coming year?

TOWNSEND: Well, there's no question in my mind that he'll be brought to justice. The real question is whether or not it's going to be this year. I will tell you that I feel increasingly confident, you know, it was interesting. There's a recent poll and the American people said 71 percent of them were optimistic that we can protect the country.

And I think they've got reason to be optimistic. We've made a lot of progress. They see the progress we've made. We've disrupted plots. We've made reforms in our system, in our security system. So on bin Laden, do I think we are going to get him? I absolutely know we're going to get him.

The question is will it be this year. And I will tell you I think there's increased activity both the part of the CIA, JSOC and our partners, the Pakistanis.

HENRY: You know, going back to September 2001, the president said, dead or alive, we're going to get him. Still don't have him. I know you are saying there's successes on the war on terror, and there have been. That's a failure.

TOWNSEND: Well, I'm not sure -- it's a success that hasn't occurred yet. I don't know that I view that as a failure. . . ."

It's not his (Bush XLIII's) fault, after five years it just hasn't happened yet.

Had enough yet? Evidentally not.

BUSH MORE POPULAR THAN BIN LADEN, SADDAM, AHMADINEJAD, KIM JONG IL, RUMSFELD AND SATAN

Sorry about so many posts, but couldn't resist this. Click on handle for URL

"A new poll from The Associated Press and AOL News has discovered that Americans are torn in terms of their perception of President George W. Bush and his performance in 2006. When asked to name the past year's biggest villain, Bush was far and away the #1 choice, commanding 25% of the vote, distantly trailed by Osama Bin Laden (8%), Saddam Hussein (6%), President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran (5%), North Korean leader Kim Jong II (2%) and Donald Rumsfeld (2%). Satan only took in 1% of the vote, as did Hugo Chavez, Tom Cruise, Dick Cheney, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and Rosie O'Donnell . . ."

"One way to put the nails in the Republican coffin for good would be to take the entire year of 2007 and investigate the bejesus out of everything." Deathbyinches

To hell with investigating their lying ass crap!
Gitmotize them, send Bushco & his friends to where they have assured us that the enemies of freedom deserve to go. Disappear the lot of them, let SnowJob Tony explain to the Egyptian tortures how America doesn't condone torture. Playing by the rules against avowed liars & cheats is a good way to lose your country. Nixon said he wasn't a crook. Reagan said he knew in his heart. Why would Bushco think that there would ever be a price for his behavior?

"The teaching of politics is that the Government, which was set for protection and comfort of all good citizens, becomes the principal obstruction and nuisance with which we have to contend. The cheat and bully and malefactor we meet everywhere is the Government." Ralph Waldo Emerson

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Schools continue drug testing
Date: 10/16/2008
By: Gerard Matthews

Clarksville High School will spend $7,000 this year on random drug tests of students. The school is one of more than 100 in Arkansas that adminis-ters such tests. /more/

Rocky start
Date: 10/16/2008
By: Arkansas Times Staff

Mark Leverett, a candidate for Little Rock district court, is off to a slightly rocky start on his campaign for the bench. He's apparently already run afoul of the Code of Judicial Conduct, which prohibits judges or judicial candidates from making a contribution to or endorsing a political party or candidate. /more/


Time for change
Date: 10/16/2008
By: Arkansas Times Staff

?Early voting in the Nov. 4 general election begins next week and no contest is more important than the race for president. It's 1992 again. /more/

Home / Blogs / This Week / Entertainment / Real Estate / Classifieds / Subscribe / Contact