Skip to main content

The Truth About The Democrats' Bushian Crisis-Mode Stimulus Steamroll

The more the truth comes out about the massive one-party pork pie, aka the (Economic) Patriot Act of 2009, the more people oppose it, especially independents (e.g. unaffiliateds).

Public Support for Economic Recovery Plan Slips to 42%

"Public support for the economic recovery plan crafted by President Obama and congressional Democrats has slipped a bit over the past week. At the same time, expectations that the plan will quickly become law have increased.

Forty-two percent (42%) of the nation’s likely voters now support the president’s plan, roughly one-third of which is tax cuts with the rest new government spending. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 39% are opposed to it and 19% are undecided. Liberal voters overwhelmingly support the plan while conservatives are strongly opposed.

Last week, support for the President’s plan was at 45% and opposition at 34%.

As they consider the size and scope of the $800-billion-plus economic recovery plan, 46% are worried that the government will end up doing too much while 42% worry that it will do too little (see trends)."



This is why the screaching and squealing is at a fever pitch from those who demagogue and demonize anyone who dares oppose their disaster socialism and pork-barrel opportunism.

It is positively Bushian how stimulus proponents are trying to jam this astronomically-inconceivable amount of excess government piggery down the country's throat without real debate or scrutiny, save partisan sniping and retributive nastiness.

Their window of opportunism is closing fast, and they know it. The more people learn of this deficit-exploding fiscal nightmare, the more support slips away....not that it ever had anything close to convincing support of any majority of Americans except the Democrat Congressional majority and our newly-minted Chief Executive Stimulator.

This is nothing of the "change" that so many independent and swing voters thought they were buying with Obama. Had Obama been honest during the 2008 campaign that dizzying federal "stimulus" spending would be his primary agenda I suspect he would have lost significant support from so many whom he bamboozled into thinking he would truly be different.

Turns out Obama is only different in being perhaps the slickest ever salesman for the same old leviathan master government snake oil that brought us to this present brink.

The Democrat hyper-partisans learned the lessons of Bush alright. They learned just how to fear-monger and bully aside anyone in their way on the (2005 Bush) phony pretext of having "political capital" to spend (code for : raw power exercised however the hell we want).

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...