Re: Sally Ride Endorses Barack Obama

On Mon, 3 Nov 2008 10:24:56 -0500, in a place far, far away, "Jeff
Findley" <jeff.findley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:


"Brian Thorn" <bthorn64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:jf0qg4hfsvsm7and9rsoovhddth7ieu49c@xxxxxxxxxx
I disagree that Obama is fundamentally Marxist. Very far-left,
certainly. Maybe we need that to remind the populace exactly what
Republicans were supposed to be about, back before the Party was
overrun by Evangelicals.

And by a president who woudn't know fiscal conservatism if it bit him on the
@$$.

What's your point? McCain is not George Bush. His biggest concern
with the Bush tax rate cuts was that there were no corresponding
budget cuts. McCain is a budget cutter, and has a long record of it
in the Senate.

And it isn't as though we've gone from fair weather to a light rain,
we're about to be hit by a tornado, and McCain can't find the key to
the storm cellar (as we saw with his flailing about the week the Stock
Market tanked.)

I think that a lot of Americans are ticked off that the Federal Government
is all of a sudden bailing out Wall Street while Main Street has been
hurting for years.

Again, read the history of the Depression, if you think that the
Democrats plans are going to make things better (I'd recommend
Schlaes' "The Forgotten Man").

A good comment from my blog:

http://www.transterrestrial.com/archives/2008/10/glad_he_explain.html#comment-129768

"Last time I checked, the unemployment rate was still quite low (maybe
6%, which is almost as low as it ever gets), inflation hotted up in
the summer with gas, but will be crashing down this fall with gas
going down, and, while wages may be flat for a while, there's no
obvious sign they're plummeting.

I mean, seriously. Don't you have parents or grandparents who lived
through the Great Depression? Don't you remember the recession of
1982, with 12% unemployment? Or the stagflation of the late 1970s,
with the prime rate and hence mortgages up around 15%, inflation
running near 20%?

So far what we've seen is that a lot of fools on Wall Street are going
to lose their jobs and get their Porsches repossessed and have to sell
the Matisse. Well, boo hoo. Live on wild speculation, die on wild
speculation, huh? They knew the score when they took the job. Next
time, become a plumber, for a nice steady (but not spectacular)
income.

Then, there are all the people who are upside down on the mortgage and
going to lose the house. Sucks, to be sure -- but whose fault is it?
If you buy more house than you can realistically afford, and then the
zooming price you'd counted on to flip the house doesn't
materialize...? Well, again, I'm having a hard time sympathizing.
Furthermore, while plummeting real estate prices sucks for homeowners
and sellers, it's great for homebuyers. I thought we liked the idea of
every man owning his own home? Lots more lower-income prudent people
are going to be able to afford these newly-cheaper homes.

Hmm, well, you might say, all very true, but this uncertainty in the
credit markets, whatever its source, is going to make companies pull
their horns in, have people work overtime instead of hiring new
people. So jobs might start to get a little scarce, and boy does that
suck.

And you'd be right. So what's the solution? Jobs. The government
should do whatever it is that makes new jobs more plentiful, whatever
increases the salaries offered to new hires, whatever makes people
running companies (or about to start companies) decide to take on more
people and pay out more salaries.

And what do you suppose is the exact opposite of that policy? You
guessed it, raising taxes, particularly raising taxes on higher income
people (those with capital to invest in paying salaries) or on
businesses (duh). We've known this since FDR fucked up the economy and
prolonged the Depression by (modern economists estimate) nearly seven
long years.

Obama and his party are not stupid, of course. They know this very
well. So why go down that path? Because they're not interested in a
recovered economy. They're not interested in a booming private sector,
with lots of great high-paying jobs. That doesn't help Democrats keep
power, does it? That doesn't make people want to vote the Federal
government more and more control over the economy, let the Democrat
civil servants hire more and more assistants for a bigger and bigger
"helping" bureaucracy, does it? What brings Democrats to power, and
keeps them in power, is an anemic economy, despair everywhere, no
jobs, and people so desperate they'll swallow their pride and take a
government hand-out to survive. So that's what they'd like to see.
They're not economic idiots. They just have different goals than most
of us, and those goals do not include having us not need them.

You're buying fire insurance from an arsonist, my friend."
.

Quantcast