Obama is a far better speaker than Ryan. Ryan seemed to be a mousy type reading a laundry list of right wing propaganda. He did nothing to step on the national stage. Repubs are still in a hunt to find a front runner. All they ever seem to do when given the chance is fumble it. He was definitely not presidential yesterday.
Bachmann wants to get on the national stage but she is way too stupid to be a threat . She can scramble the Republican race though. She seems to be after Palin’s spot as head of the far right wing. I doubt she can even qualify for that.
Of course she’s qualified. Who’s crazier? Nobody.
Yes, I think Palin might be a little bit of a fraud when it comes to the crazy. She talks a big talk, but I suspect she wouln’t really be willing to go all out when push comes to shove. I think Bachmann would be willing to kill a man or eat a live rat on TV. Whatever it takes.
Still, Ryan did better than Bobby Jindal did a couple years ago in his response, doing an impression of Mr. Rogers on a lithium drip.
Mr. Rogers on a lithium drip would have done better than Bobby Jindal did.
The word on K street is that many large businesses no longer wants to reduce the corporate tax rate if it means losing all their other tax breaks. We tax at a marginal rate of 35% and then give them enough tax breaks to bring that down to between 0% and 25% depending on who your lobbyist is.
He wasn’t as Howdy Doody as Jindal was (I think that one incident permanently ended Jindal’s buzz as a potential challenger to Obama), but Ryan still came off as pretty stiff and phony. His delivery was stilted and unnatural. He had that patronizing tone that politicians sometimes get like they’re talking down to children.
I think it’s just hard for the Republicans to find anyone who can follow Obama, though, even after Obama gives a fairly mediocre performance as the one he gave last night. I think it’s clear they’re trying to find their own “star,” but the only ones with any energy in the party are the freakshows.
Here’s the thing. Republicans can’t introduce earmarks otherwise they look really bad. This leave the President with almost total discretion to do whatever he wants with the budget. Individual legislators have to come to him to get funding for their pet projects. I don’t think that a President could hope for a better situation.
No no no no NOOOO.
I concede that, if your numbers are correct (and I have no reason to believe that they aren’t, I just don’t have time right now to check), that the GOP led Congress (and administration) did 2x as many earmarks as the Dem-led Congress and administration. So the new guys were only half as reckless as the old guys. So what.
GOP does NOT necessarily = fiscal conservative. Unless you’re in the strawman business (like *so *many lefties here…) you need to learn this. In fact, I’d argue that’s the main reason the tea party had a chance in hell of rising to its influential position.
Two more quick thoughts:
It’s by no means a given that the earmark comment was his olive branch. I’d argue it’s his attempt to try to deflect and divert some of the tea party/fiscal conservatism-movement’s strengths, which will only grow with today’s revelation of a record $1.5T deficit… and saying one thing and doing another is SOP for this guy (gitmo is exh A but there are many examples).
You say (foolishly, IMHO) that I don’t give him credit for anything. You couldn’t be more wrong. As a moderate, I’m ready to give him lots of credit for things like freezing federal wages, pinning the non-DOD discretionary budget to current levels, his backtrack on trying terrorists here, and his shutting down of needless weapon systems, built more for doing battle in the forests of East Germany than against middle-eastern based terror groups. I like what DHS has done, killing SBInet (a welfare program for Boeing, and one that didn’t work), standing up to the criticism of TSA processes, his commitment to CBP and ICE, etc.
I’m one of those disillussioned folks that voted for him. I stayed home last November. I was gonna stay home in 2012. But between what he got done at the end of the last session and the direction he wants to take going forward…I’m gonna give him a second chance.
Republicans better get with the program and start putting their country ahead of their party.
That is true. It is also true that the GOP purports to give fiscal conservatism a high priority, which runs all through its candidates’ campaign rhetoric, and, therefore, calling the GOP on its failures to live up to that ideal is not strawmanning.
We would likely import more foodstuff from South America and export less
It seemed a bit stiff but it wasn’t as bad as Jindal last year.
I think Ryan’s problem is that anything that he said that made sense had already been said by obama. Greece? really dude?
I sort of agree with you, although you are far more willing to paint with a broader brush than I am, possibly to make your point. I won’t say all of the GOP gives fiscal conservatism a high priority, certainly there are those who are more strong-defense types, even some isolationist types (think: Pat Buchanan), and some who are more concerned with social conservatism (think: old-style Newt, Pat Robertson/Jerry Falwell/W).
But they are trying to rebrand as a new, responsible GOP… we’ll see how long that lasts. And certainly the Tea Party movement wasn’t around to fail to live up to that ideal.
Haven’t Republicans pledged not to use earmarks in this new Congress? While it’s a BS issue in general, it’s one the Tea Party was adamant about. If Republicans start introducing earmarked bills, they’ll get lambasted by the Tea Party. Their charge that Obama also broke his promise wouldn’t hurt him with the general electorate.
There are a few things that we can do to affect how much we export. More free trade agreements will invariably increase exports (they may increase imports even more but exports will increase) over what they would otherwise have been.
I agree, the Democrats are far more fiscally conservative than the Republicans.
There is a discipline that is imposed by taxing and sepding that does not exist with borrowing and spending.
The “fiscal conservativism” of the teabaggers is just repackaged “fiscal conservativism” by the GOP.
I’m not strawmanning, I accusing the tea party of being an attempt to rebrand the GOP. For example, Michelle Bachmann:Former Representative Michele Bachmann (R-Minnesota, 6th) Earmarks Requested - LegiStorm
Or is Bachmann not scottish enough for ya?
I don’t think you’re using the word moderate correctly.
Again with this? You’re not a moderate. You’re not even close.
No, the Democrats evidently had less earmarks than the Republicans. While that’s a symptom of fiscal conservatism, it’s hardly the whole story.
But then again, you knew that. 
And as for moderate, yes, I’m one of the few on this board, unfortunately. But that’s OK - much like Cecil, my mission in life is to stamp out ignorance, one thread at a time…
Please. I can name half a dozen Democratic positions I agree with.
Can you name 3 GOP ones?
Now, maybe I’m not a moderate by the standards of this board, which swings uber lefty. Which is fine, it’s a free country. But by the standards of America (which has twice as many conservatives as liberals)? Um, yeah.