"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened."
– Norman Thomas, American socialist
With tonight's passage of the $819 billion pork barrel bill, America is well on its way to the socialist nation Norman Thomas spoke of so many years ago. If the Senate and Congress reconcile on this bill this will result in the largest transfer of wealth the world has ever seen. Every Republican member of Congress that voted for this bill and any Republican Senator that will vote for this bill needs to be targeted and ousted when they come up for re-election. Obama has demonstrated in his first eight days that he plans to live up to his "most liberal Senator" tag that he earned while in the U.S. Senate.
____________________________
UPDATE: No Republicans voted for this bill and eleven Democrats voted against it as well. Here is a list of the Democrats that should be lauded: Here's a list of the House Democrats who voted against the economic stimulus. The bill passed on a 244-188 vote.
Allen Boyd (FL), Bobby Bright (Ala.) Jim Cooper (Tenn), Brad Ellsworth (Ind.) Parker Griffith (Ala.) Paul Kanjorski (Pa) Frank Kratovil (Md) Walt Minnick (Idaho) Collin Peterson (Minn.)
Heath Shuler (N.C.) Gene Taylor (Miss,)
Sphere: Related Content
Posts
I'm not American so I'm neither here nor there as far as this bill is concerned. But I was watching Fox News last night and one thing O'Reilly said about it struck me as being particularly unfair...
ReplyDeleteHe basically said that if this spending package fails to completely fix the economy within 2 years, then Obama's presidency will be a certified failure. What on earth does O'Reilly base that on? (Did he give Bush's economic stimuli packages similar deadlines?)
This is a global - not just US - recession, and here in the UK everyone is expecting the downturn to last well into 2010, after which time the first signs of a recovery will only slowly emerge. Any economist will tell you that setting a two-year deadline is totally meaningless.
PS I hope the US manages to stave off socialism. It hasn't exactly done South America any favours has it...
Martin, O'Reilly tends to blow things out of proportion at times. I think what he was trying to say is that Obama came in with such high expectations from the voters and if he doesn't perform miracles he is toast.
ReplyDeleteAmericans as you may know are very impatient and expect things to happen very quickly. With the amount of money Obama-Pelosi-Reid are trying to spend and if there are minuscule results, there will be political hell to pay at the 2010 midterm elections.
This is why Obama wants some Republicans to vote for this pork bill, because if things go badly they will contend that it was a bipartisan effort and blame should not fall on the Democrats alone.
It's amazing to me that the American Dream has shifted from the idea that one could, through hard work and perseverance, get ahead and make a better life for himself or his family to we should get everything for free, and everyone should get an equal share. How dumb can Americans be really? Socialism can't work; it never has, it never will, and we are much further down that path than any thinking American would like to admit. http://orneryconservative.blogspot.com
ReplyDeleteThe Oakeys, Funny you should mention the American dream-It is the liberals that dictated to banks and other loaning institutions to lend money to people that had no credit history, bad credit or no means to pay back said loan. Those policies were the genesis of this financial morass that the world finds itself. God help us!
ReplyDeleteThe days when people work their ass off to obtain a home are gone-Now are the days where people are owed something. If the balance of power does not change in 2010, the country as a whole is toast!
Casey: it wasn't liberals instructing the banks to issue bad loans. That was an apolitical phenomenon: corrupt mortgage lenders issued the loans because they knew the debt would be re-packaged in complex global investment portfolios and sold on to investment banks. In other words, the only losers were the investors and the homeowners - the mortgage lenders themselves stood to lose nothing when their customers began defaulting (because the debt had been resold, and the risk transferred).
ReplyDeleteThe sub-prime crash wasn't ushered in by politics; however, it will be solved by politics :) Which is where it gets really complicated...