I ABSOLUTELY think genuine fiscal conservatives are entitled to their beefs, but when it gets into the “Obama is a socialist” realm (which it did with lightning quick speed), I simply turned off. Because it was an extension of a cowardly campaign tactic to paint Obama as some type of hidden communist dictator in sheep’s clothing. It was a pathetic tactic then and it’s even more pathetic now.

Yeah, I’d like to announce my formation of a moderate group committed to fiscal responsibility. We will be calling ourselves the ADM, the anti-douche meanies The ADM believes that the true core of fiscal conservatism is really spending responsibly. Within the scope of available resources. IOW.

The main purpose of forming this group is to free our perspective from being dismissed simply because some whackjobs on the far right are obsessed with whether or not any given gov’t program constitutes socialism.

I cold not be less interested in keeping score on that partisan game. As our first order of business, I move that we postpone any and all discussions about whether a program constitutes socialism until AFTER the discussion of whether we can AFFORD the new program.

The only people that will be allowed into our group will be those who cheerfully agree that if we decide the government can’t afford a given program, then discussion of its merits is 100% moot. All members wishing to argue that a given new program will “pay for itself” are required to bring genuine data that has not been produced by an advocacy group with a self-interest conflict related to the formation of the proposed new program.

BTW, it’s been pretty quiet down here at the ADM so far. :-)

Exactly. A trillion dollars off-budget for Iraq and not a word from the teabaggers. Trillions of dollars in obligations for the prescription drug plan and just a few low grumbles. Now we actually need to spend money to fix the mess we’re in and they start whining.

And the GOP wonders why it’s at 24%

The GOP has overseen the biggest deficit spending in history and now, when someone needs to be spending money to keep the economy moving, now they get religion on fiscal responsibility?

I’m perfectly willing to listen to fiscal conservatives–I just cannot find any anymore.

I ABSOLUTELY think genuine fiscal conservatives are entitled to their beefs, but when it gets into the “Obama is a socialist” realm (which it did with lightning quick speed), I simply turned off. Because it was an extension of a cowardly campaign tactic to paint Obama as some type of hidden communist dictator in sheep’s clothing. It was a pathetic tactic then and it’s even more pathetic now.

Also, my beef back to fiscal conservatives is when everything was going down the tubes last fall, they were calling for us to just let everything fail…which clearly wasn’t a viable option. Where are the ideas on the other side? Cutting taxes by 11% for the wealthiest earners? Come on…

And let’s talk about social safety nets. Republicans aren’t offering realistic options on those programs either. They want to pretend like we can ignore the deficits we’re running and it’s just not realistic. These programs need retooling and yet all I hear from the right wing about this is, again, “Socialism!”

Another note, I freely concede that all of this spending could very well be Obama’s Iraq and that it may not work. But I also know that if we keep ignoring these problems (healthcare and energy specifically), it’ll eventually impact millions of Americans in a very real way. And isn’t that the argument that Bush made for invading Iraq? That we can’t wait until they strike over here? Well, this time we’re talking about things we KNOW will happen. Medicare is only getting more expensive and our reliance on foreign oil is only growing. So how to turn that around? It’s going to take some bold action, and the programs I’ve seen put forth so far appear to address them in common sense ways. Also, let’s not forget that on top of all of that Obama has to deal with the bank insolvency problem, the housing foreclosure mess and unemployment we haven’t seen in over 70 years.

So yes, put all that together and I think fiscal conservatives can have their beefs, but they had their shot for the past 30 years. Now it’s time to try some new ideas.

And agreed kranky. It’s not a nice thing to say. Dems were very sore losers back in 2001, but I’d argue that had a pretty decent beef. 2005 was because they picked a candidate for the charisma of a bowling ball. So the sore loserism at that point was lame and one of the reasons I started the blog.

Still, my point remains that this insulation doesn’t help them. It’s not as if Obama busted out because of Democratic resentment of Bush. No, nearly EVERYBODY resented Bush and Obama took full advantage to ride that populist wave into the White House. Good for him. And if he gets crushed under a similar wave created by these folks, so be it, but this seems like much less of a political tsunami and more like those weak tide pools at a water park.

Obviously it’s not a very nice thing to say. At all. But the fact is that the GOP did lose badly in November, and a substantial portion of their base has reacted in a sullen and resentful fashion.

When it comes to partisan reactions to the quadrennial election outcomes, you can pretty much set your watch by the arrival of the sullen resentful losers from the party of whoever lost. Don’t anyone try to tell me that the democrats were lacking in sullen resentful losers circa spring 2001 or spring 2005.

Centrists might even want to go so far as to agree to stipulate that for a minimum of 6 months after each presidential election outcome, any description of the losing party as including sullen resentful losers is not an insult, but rather an objective description of reality. :-)

I was talking politics without reference to individual. You turned it into an excuse to attack and insult me.

Nevertheless, I hope Justin won’t feel the need to discipline you. I enjoy the free exchange of views.

I don’t suggest that you (or they) “be banned from commenting here.” That isn’t my place. I do suggest, however, that the offer of “a respectful, honest forum” free of “bomb-throwing” and “partisan hackery” cannot be reconciled with blithe tolerence for many of the comments I see here, of which, to be quite frank, yours are merely the most predictably and tritely disrespectful and dishonest bomb-throwing partisan hackery. I think that’s unfortunate, because the blog described by Donklephant’s “about us” statement would be a nice place to visit.

Republican David Frum on Rush Limbaugh: “Should conservatives be trying to provoke or persuade? To narrow our coalition or enlarge it? To enflame or govern? And finally (and above all): to profit—or to serve?”

This, after he referred to LImbaugh as a drug addict, sarcastic, cutting . . . Calling him a walking billboard for self-indulgence.

So, Simon, that’s two mainstream Republicans on PBS and in Newsweek using language that mirrors mine in tone, and in content. Theirs, however, was more personal. Mine was more general.

So maybe you could explain for all our benefits why I’m out of line, but Brooks and Frum are not. Or alternately explain why they, too, should be banned from commenting here.

Maintaining a garden requires some weeding, Justin.

One aspect of this that I find interesting is that one contingent of the GOP regularly complains that progressives are exaggerating the actual extent of Obama’s victory. When it comes to numbers of votes and the electoral results, I largely agree. The outcome on nov 4 (was it the 4th) was really NOT a landslide based on the election data. Comparatively speaking, it was a solid victory against a lackluster opponent who enjoyed at best lukewarm support from the party base.

However, I don’t think that conservatives who gravitate to this consoling interpretation of events are taking into proper account the domestic socioeconomic events that occurred during the same timeframe, from last september up until the present time.

My sense is that when the election occurred, the GOP’s favored philosophy was still fading and the progressive viewpoint gaining favor. At the present time, I think the 2008 election results underrepresent the disfavor into which the GOP has fallen. Wall St is, let’s face it, in disgrace, and the GOP is the team getting the blame for facilitating the excesses that most folks believe let to the current economic collapse. That’s unlikely to be explained away in a single cycle. And not without substantially revised talking points, ones which the base is likely to fight.

With moderate conservative leaders laying low, the louder angrier folks are reinforcing the simple mantras that will need revision/rebranding if the GOP is to recapture a majority of American voters. I think many conservatives are still in denial about this. They think their product is perfect just as it is, and that consumers are just wrong not to want it. And they think repeating the same mantras will convince folks this time.

As mentioned above the more political figures move to either extreme, the more power centrist have because they become the gatekeepers on legislation.

The only people in the GOP with any real power are Arlen Specter and the two Senators from Maine. And this is just how the Right likes it. They prefer to be completely untethered to reality. It allows them to move all the way into Crazy Town.