No, the GOP is not trying to sabotage the economy. And the surgically precise, “there’s only one way to interpret it” parsing of Mitch McConnell’s statement is already tiresome, and (to me) a sure sign that the poster has no argument.
“Yes, if given the mutually exclusive choice between destroying an asteroid that would hit NYC and kill 8 million people, or keeping Obama from getting re-elected, the GOP would choose the latter. What else are we to infer from an off-the-cuff statement from a politician? It could not possibly be an awkwardly worded belief that a second term for Obama would be disastrous for the country. Nope. Read his words. Regardless of what else happens, if Obama is a one-termer, the GOP wants it. Bring on the bubonic plague, destroy the economy. It’s all in play. Try to find a statement from a Dem saying they’d be okay with bubonic plague destroying America. Go ahead, I defy you. Right. You got nothing.”
Seriously, do people actually believe that McConnell stupidly revealed the GOP evil plan, cooked up in their Bond villain lair, in a moment of weakness? Do you parse Democrats’ statements so pedantically?
I think they are projecting. Those who would do or say almost literally anything to prevent a GOP victory are that much more willing to believe the same about the other side.
Another factor is magical thinking. Liberal ideas, and liberal politicians, are correct by definition and are always better for any situation. When those ideas are implemented, and they don’t work, it cannot be because the ideas or the politicians are flawed. It must be because Evil Forces are at work, thwarting all that is decent and right (which always coincides with all that is liberal and Democratic). Anyone who voted against that which is decent and right must therefore be in cahoots with the Evil Forces.
No, I think he did it deliberately, with the certainty that conservative values were the only way to save the country from the socialist destruction represented by Obama. McConnell, et al, are true believers that seriously believe the USA will cease to exist if Democrats are not thwarted, and any collateral damage is acceptable when the utter annihilation of freedom is the alternative.
I take McConnell at his word: “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.” If any pedantic parsing is taking place, it is by those who want to minimize responsibility for the destruction caused by Republican single-mindedness. The debt limit debacle last summer, and the threat to repeat it again this year is exhibit A.
I’m with you, brother. I have come to believe. The true believers would accept anything–and I mean anything–if Obama’s defeat is the result.
Spoken like an unbiased, non-zealot speaker of truth. You want to make an argument that the GOP is sabotaging the economy? Have a go at it. But if your argument’s foundation is McConnell’s statement, it’s just more lazy, partisan, echo chamber talking points. The endless introduction of McConnell’s statement into these threads is so lazy and intellectually dishonest, that was my point. Your post is simultaneously a non sequitur and confirmation of my original point.
Yes in that they would love for the economy to tank so that Romney gets the win in November.
No in that they policies that they advocate, with an exception below, are the ones that they would institute if they were able to do so, like the Ryan budget cuts. Things that help the middle class would go. Social security would be “privatized” so that the idiots on Wall Street could “invest” it and base their bonuses on those investments.
The exception is that they would drop all pretense of cutting the deficit, as they did during the Reagan and Bushes years and start spending wildly on stuff their constituents (the Koch brothers and their ilk) wanted.
I would be fine with the latter as an explanation… if only, as the article points out, Republicans were not voting against things they formerly embraced. Obama, for all his faults, has hardly been some dictator who ignores those on the other side of the aisle and the concerns had by those Americans who vote for them. He listens and he compromises - to a fault, says this Liberal-leaning dude.
But even when he employs traditionally Republican ideas and traditionally Republican solutions and typically Republican policies, the Republicans in Congress raise a stink over it, sometimes having to be forced into complying due to public pressure.
And things that were never an issue - raising the debt ceiling is a perfect example - they fabricate outrage and use that outrage to get something else they want. How can one be called “principled” if they abandon their principles for trinkets or applause?
How anyone can see this and not see obstructionism is beyond me. But it takes a lot of cognitive dissonance to be a Republican these days… I see it in the real world and on this board.
In re OP: Yes, absolutely: I think the GOP on the whole does not care what damage is done to the American economy while they go all out for the Presidency in 2012. After all, most of them are already wealthy and established, and as such, they are the best equipped of all Americans to ride out any temporary economic upheaval in the country. In their minds, they can pick up the pieces afterwards with great potential profit because everyone knows that there are bargain basement opportunities to buy anything worth having after an economic crash - if you have the cash to do it with. These folks have most of the cash as it is.
In re: “Democrat” vs “Democratic” Party, this IMO is a tried and true GOP trolling tactic, designed to disrespect their political opponents while pretending that they are being polite and not calling the Democrats the names they think Democrats really deserve, like “Commie”, “Fascist”, “Socialist”, etc. It is part of the Kabuki Theater of American politics which has evolved since Rove and Gingrich got their hands on the GOP steering wheel and began to deliberately crank up the divisive and uncivil behavior by their Republican peers towards any who dare oppose them.
Are you sure the one-time spending in 2009 was even a part of the proposed 2009 budget? I’m not so sure it was, but I’m willing to be proven wrong. I’ve never heard that TARP or the stimulus was part of any budget but were special spending bills passed by congress… kind of like the funding for the SW Asia wars.
No, it was not part of the proposed 2009 budget. The stimulus increased spending in virtually all parts of the federal government. The point is not whether the spending was formally part of a budget but that total spending increased due to these one-time expenditures. Since then we have been spending at the same level or higher. So, the budget plus all the one-time expenditures is the new baseline. When we spend at the same level or only slightly higher it appears that government growth is slowing when, in reality, all of that one-time spending has been folded into a new baseline.
Did this baseline change when we went off to war in Iraq, and put it all on the credit card? IIRC, the Bushiviks bent over backwards to keep the Iraq War expenditures off the actual “budget”, but went ahead and spent the money anyway.
Which explains the multitude of Republican ideas that Obama has incorporated. Ezra Klein goes so far as to call Obama a Republican:
Although I happen to think that the dramatic shift right from the GOP is more relevant in Klein’s piece, the fact is that Obama is fine with compromising on a great many things (and it’s one of the reasons real lefties are also not as enamored with him) and does incorporate Republican ideas into what he espouses. So your “Liberal” boogieman doesn’t really hold water.
I’ve stated this before. I was someone who voted Republican in the past…more than 50-50 in fact.
I will never vote Republican again until I see firm evidence of change and an apology. Their behavior last year was atrocious and, in my opinion, treasonous. If it isn’t technically treason, it should be.
I imagine this year will be the same.
So, to answer the OP…hell yes! and this from someone tending toward Republican in the past.
No. The Republican behavior last year was so reprehensible that every Republican with and honor should have left the party. I am not being ‘dramatic’…I firmly believe this. If a Republican still identifies with a party that engaged in such behavior, they are just as guilty. I will not ‘cherrypick’ Republicans to vote for…they are all scum after last year.
Ok, they would’t have to leave the party…but they should have came out and strongly condemned this behavior. They didn’t.