Free Markets, Free People

Pretending there’s a way out of our mess

Drew over at Ace of Spades encapsulates what many of us are feeling:

…there’s no need to leave for Red State or anywhere else to join the “Let-it-burn crowd” because it’s everywhere.

Note the actual phrase begins with “let”. It’s a passive word. No one is saying “Start a fire and burn it down”. It is burning already.

Out of control entitlement spending, zero political will to control discretionary spending and an unchecked debt is the fuel that is feeding this fire.

You want to know who is actively fanning the flames of this fire? Mainstream Republican candidates and office holders, not tea party fanatics or people who simply have lost interest in trying to stop the conflagration.

I have sometimes thought about responding to people such as Charles Cooke and Jay Nordlinger at National Review when they tell us that the establishment GOP isn’t that bad, and they really deserve our support, and other rationalizations. They’re just fooling themselves. Responding does no good, however, because if someone can’t see reality at this point, it means they are willfully blind to it and can’t be argued with.

It’s just too painful for them to think about the essential reality: the establishment GOP is never going to change. They are never going to fight for limited government. They are never going to shrink government at all.

They are never going to willingly turn over the power they have amassed to people who do intend to do those things (i.e. Tea Party types and other limited government advocates). They are going to fight those people with every weapon at their disposal – including the dirty ones.

They are the first obstacle that must be removed before any reclamation of freedom from the federal government can be attained.

Many of us on the right figured that out a long time ago. The civility junkies, the excuse makers, the cocktail party attendees, and the “why can’t we all get along” wafflers can’t seem to see what’s right in front of their face. This fight is on. Choose your side.

If you choose based on your principles, you will choose those who are dedicated to reducing government, knowing that their first actions will be to fight hard against the establishment GOP in order to eventually fight the Democrats on an equal footing. If you choose based on who you’ve met as soirées, who posed with you for pictures, and who radiates power because the control the GOP today, then you are effectively casting your lot with those who want to grow government indefinitely, until the debt mountain finally collapses. Because that’s what the establishment GOP is going to do, whether you like it or not.

You will never change their minds, so you better start lining up with the people who already believe in the principles you espouse.When the burning starts accelerating in earnest, they are the ones who might be able to build some firewalls to contain the damage, and repair things afterwards. Squishes such as Boehner and McConnell will look at the flames in horror, and then let the Democrats amass as much power as they ask for. The sooner they lose control of the GOP, the better the implications for freedom and limited government.  

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

118 Responses to Pretending there’s a way out of our mess

  • At this point it no longer an excuse for establishment republicans, but the Media is poised to slaughter anyone with principle and reward those who help with the slaughter.  Until a way can be found around that, finding national level viable candidates for office for even senate positions will be next to impossible.

    • Except…Ted Cruz…and a few others.

      • Go outside the choir and ask about Ted Cruz.  They either (a) haven’t heard of him or (b) haven’t heard anything good
        The choir doesn’t determine who wins elections, the swing voters do who generally are comprised of Rush’s “low information voters”

        • Now you’re changing your argument.  It IS possible to elect reformers.  We see it being done.
          We also see them being amazingly effective, despite all the political class can do to squelch them.  Not to say there is no need to be glum about the future.  But there are reasons to be less uniformly and uniquely glum.

          • And Obama should have lost in 2012 against a broomstick.  But he didn’t.
            The internet era has given the right means of communication, but the other effect of that plus other tools at their disposal is that the Left has an even firmer hold of everyone else.  Texas is an exception in the swing voter demographic for now.  And Texas ain’t the country yet.  In a generation or less we will lose Texas.

      • Unfortunately, in a race between Ted Cruz and Shillary Cruz would lose. The principles that those here hold are outside the mainstream of the populace. The rugged individualist is a dead commodity anymore. A thousand polls have demonstrated that.

        • Yeh, there was no way Cruz could be a Texas Senator, either, Sharps.  Stuff changes.

        • Unfortunately, in a race between Ted Cruz and Shillary Cruz would lose.

          The key demographics which gave Obama the win (young single women) could make Hillary (or maybe even Fauxcahontas) unbeatable, against any Republican out there.
          1. War on Women.
          2. Clinton campaign machine.
          3. They don’t care about Benghazi.
          4. Whitewater and the fraudulent Watergate brief happened before most were even born.
          5. Bill Clinton.
          Ted Cruz won’t be the nominee:
          1. He is not charismatic and comes across as arrogant.
          2. He has been soundly trashed by the media and leftists.  (Anecdote: I’ve even seen commenters on the Interwebs who earnestly believe he is comparable to Hitler.)
          3. He was born in Canada.
          4. Establishment in the Dead Elephant Party.
          The only hope the GOP has is that Hillary doesn’t run (e.g., health issues) or that the Republican campaigners find some major scandal material that can penetrate the media phalanx, sufficiently big to motivate key male demographics to show up in droves to vote against her.

  • The TEA party impulse, as I view it, is a reform urge.  Most of us understand that our government is WAY too large, powerful, and unaccountable to the people.  It does things most of us do NOT think it should.
    That…HAPPILY!…is a very well-supported position in America.  Now, actually getting to it is problematic at the moment.  But maybe only for the moment.

    • Most of us understand that our government is WAY too large, powerful, and unaccountable to the people.

      Yes, that’s true, and when you ask people what to do about it they inevitably come up with non-sense like cutting Foreign Aid (0.2% of the budget), or, YES, cut defense spending. Well, that latter is what Obama is trying to do, as we’ve seen some of his horrific proposals.
      In 1900, even before WW1 and WW2, military spending was 75% of the budget. The wars kept the same rate (IIRC), but merely boosted the overall numbers temporarily.
      But after the FDR welfare/regulatory state, military spending was down to 52% of the budget in 1960, down to 29% in 1989 (under Reagan) and down to 16% by 2008. Obama’s latest “budget” would drive it below 6%.

      • But the funny thing is that nobody…well, except complete morons like Erp…thinks that we can sustain entitlement spending going forward.
        Even Pres. ScamWOW PROMISED (yes, he did) to tackle it when running for office.
        Sooner or later, people will coalesce around reality.  Then the political will will exist to actually do something about it.
        Or not…

  • I’ve been thinking the same thing.   There just doesn’t seem like enough time to fix this before something bigger and worse squashes the 800 Gentry GOP gorilla, the room, and the building, that it’s sitting in.
    Maybe it’s just doom and gloomers highlighting things as issues that have been issues and will continue to be issues.
    But it sure feels like ‘this’ is what’s happening


  • Lighten up.  I say if borrowing about a trillion dollars a year is possible, why not borrow the whole budget ?  … why do we keep annoying citizens with taxes anyway ?

  • The Dems want to drive the car off the cliff at 100 mph.

    The Repubs/main streams think it’s the essance of conseratism to drive the car off the cliff at 75 mph.

    To them, the 25 mph reduction is the epitomy of good governance.

  • You realize reading words like that make mainstream liberals and Democrats tap their fingers together like Monty Burns and say “excellent.”  Your views cannot win, they are out of date.  But if you start a civil war with establishment conservatives, then the only ones who can win are those who want to shift the culture left of center.  The good news – it ain’t gonna burn.   We’ll re-balance the economy and people will move forward, be prosperous, and work to solve problems and yes, continue to value liberty, individual responsibility and markets.   Because believe it or not, those are values of almost all of the mainstream left too.  Reality doesn’t fit into the metaphor of “war” you embrace.

    • “We’ll re-balance the economy and people will move forward, be prosperous, and work to solve problems and yes, continue to value liberty, individual responsibility and markets.”
      I’m still waiting for the reductions and sanity you claimed would happen in the budgets….that haven’t been approved since Obama became President.
      Is there no level of lying that will move you to say “My God!  They’re lying!”
      Clearly not.

    • You’re a clueless fool who doesn’t have the first idea of what we’re discussing here. Exponential curves don’t care what you think or how much of a positive attitude you have.
      Now go back and mislead some more students. You know, the ones that are going to get stuck with the world idiots like you foisted on them. They’re already suffering because they can’t find decent work. That’s just an early symptom of the coming meltdown. As was the mess in 2008, the sub-prime housing disaster, the bailout of GM, the politicization of the federal government, and a dozen more that you are too f*@king stupid to see.

      • You are lost in an ideological fog.  You don’t understand politics or how the world is changing.  You can have your cute little fantasies of meltdowns and everything burning.  But you’re losing, and you know it.  You can’t cope, so you convince yourself that your lose is the destruction of everything.   *shaking my head with a sad but knowing smile*

        • (Laughing uncontrollably)
          “Ideological fog” from the guy who STILL thinks Pres. ScamWOW is a foreign policy MAVEN…!!!
          AND who STILL can’t admit that he was lied to up, down, and sideways by his Collectivist chums and heros.
          No wonder that lil’ Russian worked you the way she did.

        • You really lack any cognitive skills to enable you to think outside the patterns you read in your masters’ propaganda, don’t you? You didn’t even understand the point of the post – not surprising, given your cognitive limitations and political biases. You immediately jump to the political implications, because that’s quite literally all you can do. Your isolation from reality doesn’t permit anything else. Your imbecility precludes your ability to respond to anything I actually said, and try, as usual to steer the conversation to somewhere that allows you to preen.
          You really don’t get that I don’t care what Democrats think of what we have to do to the establishment GOP. If we have no alternative, we do what me must and take whatever consequences come in terms of elections. Plus, you are whistling in the wind, because what Democrats really say “Excellent” to is the continued leadership of the GOP by people who will never seriously oppose their desire to grow government and be heedless of the consequences. The people they (and you) really fear are the committed limited government types.
          We can tell who you all fear by who you attack. The Democrats and the media are all buddy-buddy with Boehner and the rest of the gentry GOP. They don’t say anything bad about them. They reserve their vitriol for the Ted Cruz and Rand Paul types.
          Which ought to tell anyone with a functioning brain where the split between the sides really is. Democrats, the media, and establishment GOP are in it together, and they know it. They all fight limited government types, because they both fear the consequences of seeing such people showing the total bankruptcy of their collectivist philosophy and endangering their elite status.

          • Reform is scary.  Change is frightening.  Losing power is desperately to be avoided.
            And ALL those things are what we are about.  Those who resist it are going to fight with all they have, in spite of knowing it should and must occur.
            What is MOST funny about Erp is that he pretends not to be terrified of the inevitable.
            But what we fight for IS inevitable…either by rational means or catastrophe.

          • What’s hilarious is that you think stringing together insults has any meaning on political forums.  Yah!  You can insult and call names!  How nice for you!  *eyes rolling*   And talk about pot calling the kettle black – I’m a pragmatist, meaning I look to solve problems and avoid ideological thinking.  Ideologies are vast simplifications of reality that should not be taken too seriously.  They can lead people to see false categorizations and imagine the world as battles between isms.  Reading your blather about “collectivist philosophy” and all that silliness shows me that you’re caught up in that.  I believe you see the world that way, and truly think you are on the side of good and virtue against these evil “collectivists” who are warping freedom yada yada.  You see the world that way, I get it.  You’re wrong, and most people recognize that which is why you’ll never get beyond writing angry blogs and think the world is collapsing around you.
            It’s not.  We’re undergoing a cultural and political change brought about by globalization (interdependence, decreasing importance of sovereignty) and the information revolution.  This has positive and negative consequences.  You are correct in recognizing some of the negative, your error comes when you put it in these ideological “evil collectivists” vs. “good” terms which avoids seeing how the world will never be what it used to be.  This is a transformation as profound as the one caused by the printing press.  You’re closing your mind and following ideological scripts, rather than really trying to understand what’s happening.
            You can have the last word here.   I’m not going to get into the mutual insult style net debate that is, frankly, boring.  Insults have no sting on forums like this, they are a dime a dozen.  But reflect – think about the fundamental changes in the nature of politics caused by how the international political economy has transformed in the last 30 years, about the information revolution, and demographic change.  We’re in a new era, you need to factor that into your calculations.   OK – that’s all I have to say for now, I’m done with this thread.

          • The good professor posting very early in the morning again and flouncing off in a huff promising to not return. Where have I seen this show before? Sounds like Moose-squeezer is getting no squeeze at home again.

          • “and most people recognize that which is why you’ll never get beyond writing angry blogs”
            Erb, most people don’t think anything at all….which is how you get 8 years of ScamWow.
            Which is how you get a group of politicians who sneak a health insurance bill into existence using parliamentary parlor tricks when over half of the politicians themselves probably haven’t a clue what the bill actually says or does.  It’s how you get a senior leader of a party telling people we have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it, and people not being outraged at such a clueless anti freedom statement that they drag her screaming from the chamber.
            Which is how you get a society that thinks wealth is produced by the government, and should be evenly distributed by the government.
            I can go on, but the fact is Scott, most people do NOT think until reality whacks them upside the head.   We’re, you surprisingly included, a very limited subset that’s paying attention.
            The rest, when they listen at all, are listening to the packaged and distorted info intended to guide the sheep along the proper path so they don’t get out of hand in groups large enough to cause our self appointed elite shepherds too much grief.
            “We’re in a new era,”
            Only in the speed of communication and travel – otherwise men are still men and the goals and desires of some haven’t changed.  And globalization is so last century Scott.  The 90’s are the ‘one world’ world, get into the new millennium would you?  As a reminder the Romans had ‘one world’ long before Coke decided they could teach the world to sing.   But you suffer from a distinct historical fact deficit.

          • I’m a pragmatist, meaning I look to solve problems and avoid ideological thinking.
            Which is Erp’s most laughable conceit (and, BOY, are there a few of those!) He is TOTALLY blinded by his ideology AND his narcissism. Little wonder he’s enamored with Pres. ScamWOW.
            We’re undergoing a cultural and political change brought about by globalization (interdependence, decreasing importance of sovereignty) and the information revolution.  This has positive and negative consequences.

            There’s that rich and creamy analysis for which the Erpster is so renowned here.  Meaningless buzz-words strung together, leading up to a high-school essay conclusion that would garner a “C”, if that. Note that Erp’s Collective…as usual…is running COUNTER to the tide of history and technology by attempting to force CENTRAL PLANNING schema on the nation when technology is enabling innovative small-scale arrangements never before possible.
            ObamaDoggle will only impede the entire economy, as it has indeed done since its passage.

        • *shaking my head with a sad but knowing smile*

    • Your views cannot win, they are out of date.
      Ah, yes.  The Hegelian chant of the Collectivist tool.  Funny, Erp, you never can back any of that crap up with reality-based anything.
      people will move forward, be prosperous, and work to solve problems and yes, continue to value liberty, individual responsibility and markets.
      How’s that “prosperous” thing workin’ out in the Obamic Decline for ya?  The rest is just a lie, or denial.  And you know it.  Why is your Collective currently enamored with the shallow thinking of Piketty and his recycled Marxism?

      • His ideas date from the 1890’s through the 1930’s, to be about a specific as they are, and those ideas have their own foundation in he idiocies of Rousseau and Marx.  They have demonstrated their failure every time they have been tried, to the degree they have been implemented.  Venezuela is just the latest and one of the most apotheotic case studies.

        Our ideas date from 1775, and they have yet to fail to move society optimally whenver they are tried, to the degree they are tried.

        The last thing anyone could say about the establishment GOP, is that they understand they succeed as statesmen when they make themselves as without relevance to Americans in the day-to-day travail as possible.  The first thing that could be said about Democrat politicians, is they think they are succeeding as statesmen when they make themselves as consequential as possible, and that nothing can be done without their writ.

        The ash heap of history is a fit place for both.

        All hail the Revolution!  The American Revolution, the Revolution That Worked (TM)*.

        *Until we turned our backs on it anyway.  We’ve imported Progressivism and Conservatism both from Europe, and each is inferior to Liberty.

        • Good grief.  I apologize for all the typos.  Had to get up at 1am ish, should have had coffee first.

    • “be prosperous”
      Are we than, not prosperous?    How not?   How can you say that?
      We’ve been in recovery for at least 4 years now, with a unemployment down, jobs up, infrastructure repaired, Al Queda destroyed, racial and sexual equality,  same sex marriage, national energy problems nearly resolved and government spending under control.  We all have health insurance thanks to Obamacare, the border is secure and there’s not a hint of scandal in the government!
      I don’t understand how you can say will ‘be prosperous’, future tense.  We are now today are we not?
      Or are you suggesting we’re going to get even MORE prosperous?   Awesome!

    • “We’ll re-balance the economy and people will move forward, be prosperous, and work to solve problems and yes, continue to value liberty, individual responsibility and markets.”
      Right there, your words.   It means subconsciously YOU see the problems while telling us how they’re going to be fixed in the sometime future tomorrow world.    You’ve been waiting for, and predicting, the imminent arrival of the rainbow unicorns since Nov 5th of 2008.

      • Professor Erb has always been at war with Eastasia.

        • Well, that and the truth and reality.
          He’s SUCH a happy warrior…!!!

          • Erb! What is best in life?

            To educate your enemies, see them adore your wisdom, and to hear the lamentation of their tea-parties.

          • psssst!  pssst!!!!!!
            Quantums, don’t forget the quantums!

        • If only all the racist whites who elected Obama in 2008 and 2012 hadn’t suddenly discovered he was “different” from the previous Presidents!

    • Reality doesn’t fit into the metaphor of “war” you embrace.
      This from the most reality-challenged person who ever posts here, and who cannot even deal with the reality of his own words?
      The REALITY is that Pres. ScamWOW has been at war with American values since BEFORE he ascended to power.  We are aware of that.  You steadfastly deny, apologize, and cooperate with that war.  We won’t.

      • Unless you are man enough to put your real name on your posts, you’re just a rubbish pile.

        • Ewww…
          The pathetic resort to “squirrel”…!!!
          What a POS, Erp.
          The contest is over IDEAS.  You prove every time you are bereft, bemused, and benighted.
          BTW, wasn’t Rubbish Pile Gomer’s younger brother…???
          Heh!  LOVE punking you…!!!

          • Next he’ll be back to his “mano a mano” throw-downs, meaning his love life is on the fritz again. Don’t you love it when mild-mannered social “scientists” get all testoseroney?

          • I thought that was one of Chef Boyardee’s more epic marketing failures…

          • It is the real San Francisco treat.

          • Well, I will never view a can of Beefaroni the same way again after that allusion…

        • Non sequitur. You put your real name on your posts, and they’re the biggest pile of stinking garbage I see on any political site.

        • Did the concealment of the names of the authors of the Federalist Papers make their arguments any less valid?
          You’ve just moved on from very carefully implying people here are ‘racist’ to implying that choosing to use net handles makes their arguments less credible.  As if they’re only shadow puppets or nefarious individuals simply because they don’t use their real names.

        • Erb, aren’t you the one lecturing everyone here about name-calling?  And yet, you just called someone a rubbish pile.  Are you completely self-unaware, or just a big liar?

    • “We’ll re-balance the economy and people will move forward, be prosperous, and work to solve problems and yes, continue to value liberty, individual responsibility and markets.”  The Bitch is Back.  Yes folks and neighbors, once again Erb raises his ugly little pointed leftist head and comes here to tell all of our poor deluded souls that he knows for a fact all will be well!  Now, pray tell us how your and your leftist masters plan to do this great and wonderful deed – you know the one – re-balance the economy, be prosperous, etc.  when you have been preaching at us for all these years how the US is in decline and such.  Tell us poor folks how you on the left (or mainstream as you like to call it) plan to deal with these issues.  We’ll wait.  Really we will.    What a Maroon!!!

    • If companies can pay women 77% of what they have to pay men for the same job, how did you ever get hired ?

    • We’re discussing the STUPID party, so it’s appropriate we hear from a representative of the DERANGED party.

      • Harry Reid is his hero, the deranged land-grabbing terroist who looks like a funeral director

      Puuuuurrr GE…
      You play with the fascist economic model, you takes your chances.

    • Except that many, many countries do have financial budget problems which they then fix, even if run by the left, by cutting spending. Canada cut social security, cut corporate taxes, etc. NZ did the same. Sweden did the same.
      But first, they all have to run out of money. Apparently you don’t rebalance until that happens.

      • We’re already out of money. Our currency’s special status is just enabling us to hide that fact for a while.
        The problem with the argument on other countries coming to grips with similar problems is scale.
        We’re ten times the size of Canada, and bigger than the others by even larger multiples. That order of magnitude makes the feedback mechanisms to realize the problem much, much less efficient, so the problems have to get much worse before they are recognized by the bubble-residing elites. I don’t think it’s an accident that the smallest of your examples recognized the problems and faced up to them first.
        That large scale also makes the implementation of any solution much more difficult. As a software guy, I’m well acquainted with implementations that work for one size but melt down when applied to a size an order of magnitude larger. I think our political systems have the same limitations.
        So, yeah, some countries have managed to avoid the worst consequences of collectivist control. I don’t think we will be one of them. We’re already past the point that Canada figured out they had to change, and the elites are busy manufacturing “narrative” every day to convince everyone that things are not really as bad as they obviously are.

        • Size is one thing, another is diversity.
          Diversity makes things worse. When a meltdown happens it will be worse when there is greater diversity.
          On the flip side the core culture has a history of self reliance and having its sh*t together, so we have that advantage.

          • Scale is something people never think of, or deliberately conceal, when they compare the US to country (x) which has some desirable thing they want us to have (generally at government expense).   Examination often reveals that in many cases country (x) would only rival the 7th or 8th the largest metropolitan area of the United States in population and would occupy a land mass smaller or equal to the size of the 6 New England states.

    • How did we end up with the Republican and Democrat parties as the main to begin with?  The Whigs has a good year or two in the polls and then disappeared.  Right now Democrats have de facto absolute power regardless of who wins so there would be very little sacrifice anyway.
      When prosperity means killing the incentive to work hard, making markets extensions of the government by hyper regulation,  and printing money to compensate, it is burning.  And when it burns out there will be nothing for anyone.  You’ll have to earn your next meal or die and that’s if we don’t fall into anarchy.

      • This is not unique to the USA. Most Western democracies have either been there (see NZ, Sweden, Canada as noted earlier), are there now (PIIGS countries) or getting close (USA et al) so all political parties end up looking like this. When you can vote for the government to give you a lot of stuff, people will bankrupt each other. The end effect is that someone is voted in to fix it rather brutally by rebuilding the economy (eg NZ) and democracy carries on, or the country becomes a basket-case. I think the bigger the country, the greater the chance of becoming a basket-case.

    • Your views cannot win, they are out of date.

      You are correct in that statement, but not for the reasons you offer.  This is a consequence of deeply ingrained bureaucratic and political structures.  The frequently misattributed quote about the public discovering they can vote themselves generous gifts goes to the core of a major fatal flaw of elections.  Combine this with abject ignorance and irrationality of the majority of voters, the two-party system rigging the process, a mostly compliant media reinforcing the two-party establishment, plus a few other factors, and there simply is no way to nominate a candidate for POTUS, or a significantly large number of legislators, who hold sufficiently principled positions necessary to change the course of leviathan government.
      It is too late, but not because notions of fiscal responsibility and individual rights are thus rejected by a more “enlightened” majority who genuinely rebut such ideas in the way that slavery, segregation, and other genuinely evil ideas were overthrown.  Such ideas are eclipsed by The Endarkenment, the rejection of reason, decency, and any pragmatic appreciation of long-term consequences.

      We’ll re-balance the economy….

      How?  The only people who advocate even minor moves to stem the hemorrhaging are the “looney birds” whose ideas you dismiss as “out of date”.  The Democrats and establishment Dead Elephant Party members generally continue to vote for massive deficits.  When they actually have a “showdown” followed by a “compromise”, the alleged savings are in the fractions of a percent, padded with previously scheduled cuts, and the result of accounting tricks (front-loading increases in spending, back-loading cuts so far down the road as to be meaningless).
      So long as the federal government spends more than it takes in, balancing the economy will not only be impossible, but the growing debt will make any future attempts even more difficult.  Thus, the debt will continue to grow.  At a critical point, the burgeoning debt will exceed the capacity of the government to maintain.  Other governments will, at some point, stop buying bonds.  QE∞ can only trigger hyperinflation.  Avoiding that will require drastic cuts creating dire consequences to the majority of Americans who depend upon government checks, which could cause major unrest and/or recession.  Some may endorse massive taxation, raiding private retirement accounts, wholesale taking of property, etc., not understanding that even the maximum amount of outright theft from the wealthy only funds the federal government for a matter of months, after which there will be no more to take and the source of capital which drives the economy will be depleted, thus decimating any source of traditional revenue.
      I can’t decide if you are so stupid and blind that you honestly believe what you wrote, or if you are a ridiculously cynical propagandist, on the order of Baghdad Bob. I guess it doesn’t matter.
      The fact that you make such a declaration is solid proof that your political opinions are of no consequence.

      • “Re-balancing” as Erb means it is a shrouding word for Wealth Redistribution and Central Planning.

        • Well, THOSE and shrinking the pie.
          Remember, the Collective HATES the middle class, and seeks a poor and rich society with very little in between.  Useful idiots like Erp think they will be among the rich.  But, really, his utility is very limited.

        • Nah, “rebalancing” according to Erb is the stage between “Collect underpants” and “profit!”. Otherwise known as “miracle happens here”.

        • I don’t dispute what everyone else has said about the use of the term “re-balancing”, but one benefit for the perpetually preening Professor Polywobble is that, in this context, the word doesn’t mean anything. It’s completely ambiguous, and could be applied to any actions taken by his sainted Democrats, or even applied to doing nothing and waiting for things to get better on their own.
          Using such a meaningless term allows him to come back at some point where there has been minor improvement and crow about how he predicted that the “re-balancing” would take place. It’s part of how he fools himself into believing he’s so smart and capable, even as his lack of real-world accomplishments scream to the world how mediocre he actually is. He has more finely honed psychological defense mechanisms than anyone I’ve ever encountered on the Internet.

          • He has more finely honed psychological defense mechanisms than anyone I’ve ever encountered on the Internet.
            To paraphrase Ben Franklin…
            “Necessity is a mother…”

          • He has more finely honed psychological defense mechanisms than anyone I’ve ever encountered on the Internet.

            Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf didn’t believe his own statements to the press.  He was an actor, playing his part, speaking to the gullible who would seize his preposterous propaganda to demonstrate against the US and its allies.  The absurdity of it all made him a court jester, earning him the moniker Baghdad Bob.
            Scott aspires to be as consistent as al-Sahhaf, but he has failed, time and again, by letting his mask slip.
            When you read Scott, first consider that he is not very smart. Regardless of whether he is delusional, trolling, psychotically narcissistic/masochistic, a disingenuous fraud, or any of the other sorts of creatures that many here, in Usenet, and elsewhere have speculated him to be, the fact that he shows no signs of true intellect to compare with his peers or with the average level of those with whom he debates (or used to debate) means, to me, that there’s not much point devoting time to analyzing him psychologically.
            He is banal, mundane, unremarkable.
            Even as a foil, he is of limited use. Now, he just does a drive by, offering boilerplate talking points and obscenely graphic servicing of Democrat leadership, he tosses in a few lines with buzzwords intended to provoke, and then takes his ball and runs home crying.  Less the object of demonstration, he’s just a kook.  Even refuting his nonsense is of very limited use in developing counter-arguments to Democrat/progressive/collectivist ideas, or even rhetorical debate tactics.
            At least when you have an argument with your child, you can hope that your child will learn to reason and develop into an intelligent adult. There’s no such hope for Scott.

    • Funny thing, Erb. I specifically recall that comment being floated about Reagan. Maybe you remember some of the ensuing discussions on Usenet? Apparently, your connectivity with both history and reality has not improved over the years.

      • I remember those days, BitMan.  I posted as “Eagle Eye”.
        See my comment above about his lack of intelligence.  Scott doesn’t try to learn from history or to make rational conclusions from available data.  He just puts up a mish-mash of boilerplate political propaganda and ideological dogma. Whether it’s playing Baghdad Bob for the Democrats, extolling the supremacy of the chosen one, or muttering about basic philosophical concepts he lacks the capacity to fully grasp, he’s just cranking out mediocrity.  And, the truly pathetic part is that he does it for free.  No campaign hires him.  No news program has him on air as an expert in foreign policy or electoral politics.
        Instead, he just trolls conservative and libertarian website comment sections, trying to rile up comment denizens who are, on average, quite a bit more intelligent and informed than he is, will all his self-proclaimed expertise.
        Reread some of his comments and articles, see if you don’t agree.

  • BIDEN: “Mark my words, within the next — first six months of this administration, if we win, they’re going to — we’re going to face a major international challenge, ’cause they’re going to want to test him, just like they did John Kennedy, they’re going to want to test him, and they’re going to find out this guy’s got steel in his spine.”

    I’m told that it’s Putin’s NR-40

    • Look, man, there’s only one reason Obama is alive today… and that reason is Joe Biden.
      Even the whack-jobs like Erb understand that Biden would be an even larger disaster than Obama has been.

  • Erb-
    When the time comes, make sure you remember.
    It will help you understand why.

    • He’ll never remember anything that conflicts with delusional self-image. That’s been proven dozens of times over the years.
      He might manage to avoid the meltdown by dying first, but if not, and he has to chop wood to keep from freezing in the winter, he’ll be telling himself how vigorous and healthy it is to get back to nature. If he can get Internet connectivity, he’ll be talking down to us about how pragmatic is all is to live a simpler life and eat moose meat because nothing else is available. And how elites like him should decide who gets the liver.
      All the while claiming that he predicted exactly what was going to happen, and we are just out of touch and being left behind.
      Unless, of course, after a meltdown, someone less interested in delusions than he is just decides to pragmatically take everything he owns. In that eventuality, he probably won’t be thinking anything at all.

      • From “job lock”…free at last…free at last…Thank Baracula, I am FREE at last…

      • Oh, I don’t know…..
        Might be kinda nice to drive through Farmington in a Republic of Texas deuce and a half flinging food packets to rag wrapped idiot college Professors begging for a hand out.
        Such a small dream, but it makes me smile.

        • Much more likely that once the green dreams come true and he can’t afford to heat his loveshack in Maine during the winter, due to his exorbitant healtcare premiums and low pay because of the f***ed economy and no one neeeding creamy Erb-brand soupy analysis, and his latest squeeze gets fed up with being told that the great leap forward will justify this pain and moves out… he’ll be slinking about the backstreets of Austin looking for a little tenure in the sun.

  • I don’t see any point on being opposed to the mainstream GOP in general. In specific I’m not at all happy with the speaker of the House, and AZ needs to stop electing McCain. But I don’t see any hope for better then a RINO in Main, and I think Romney would have been a decent POTUS.
    The real enemy is Democrats. The problem is the voters who will vote for Democrats even in Nov 2012.

    • The real problem are politicians who “want to get something done” as opposed to representing their constituents wishes.
      More often than not, doing nothing is better than doing something stupid.

    • The real enemy is Democrats. The problem is the voters who will vote for Democrats even in Nov 2012

      >>> I’ve used Lord of the Rings analogy before.  Sure, Sauron was the REAL enemy, but they had to defeat Saruman before they even had a chance to take the big guy down.

      And in a lot of ways, the real enemy isn’t a party so much as the professional politician class. That Dems are demonstrably worse is no real reason to support the GOP anymore.


      • The point I’ve often made is that the problem is “we, the people” and the choices we have made. That “professional political class” has pandered to the wishes of “we, the people”. At least the GOP does; Dems can rely upon lies and the media and push through stuff like the UnaffordableCareACT and still win the 2012 election.
        I prefer not to donate to the RNC, but rather try to fund candidates I like. But they are almost all Republicans. I am no fan of the Speaker or other beltway types like McCain, but I voted for Romney without regret (and I’ll note that RomneyCare and his assault weapon ban were both revisions of prior state law that was worse).
        If not the GOP, by what mechanism do we win? The current third parties are all jokes. Further, many Tea Party favorites were not ready for prime time.
        My view is we can’t win by demanding ideological purity. Candidates for high level executive office need solid executive experience; this typically means governorships and hence a history of making compromises (since that’s the nature of the game).
        I agree we have a lot of beltway Republicans that need to retire from the Senate and House. At the same time we also need to accept that at present the path forward centers on the Republican Party, and we will have to accept that high level executive candidates will have some history of compromise.

      • The problem is the more the Democrats win, the more the Republicans want to be like them and the further they move to the Left.   This makes the policitical median shift left all the faster.  Because the Left is running full speed from the median because it can. 

        But the ‘battlespace’ isn’t policy, its people.   Its why a full out marxist can get elected.  Because the public doesn’t give a crap.  We live in an idiocracy of people who vote likable faces/personalities to office.   They vote for people who they wish would show up to the parties they go to. 

  • I see comments by Boehner making fun of the GOP on immigration and I think Speaker Pelosi wouldn’t be so bad.
    Then I hear McCain talk about how lack of amnesty is a “stain” on our honor and I think a new Dem Senator from AZ wouldn’t be so bad.
    Maybe we can’t win, but that just means all will lose.
    I’m growing more and more ok with that. The burning will provide some…..”unique” opportunities.

    • I would prefer to replace Boehner and MCCain with other Republicans who actually do things like attempt border enforcement.
      The meltdown will take longer then you expect, and the outcome is hard to predict. The effect of illegal immigration in CA has been a solid blue state, the same effect will happen elsewhere. That basically means a banana republic US, but the rate it will happen will allow a lot of rationalization to rule the day. The end result will be almost impossible to undo (any more then, say, the UK could undo the long term destruction to its culture from decades of socialism).
      The impact from the entitlement spending going off the fiscal cliff is still likely decades out. At some point we reach a point of no return–we fall of the cliff–but the impact won’t be felt until we actually strike bottom. The delta between cause and effect will confuse low information voters. For example, all those who blamed Bush for the financial crisis caused by Clinton’s housing bubble.

  • Piketty’s book is much more radical. Never again will the idea fly that all we must do as a society is permit the flow of capital and leave entrepreneurs alone and everything else will take care of itself. Society requires collective decisions about how and why resources are produced and consumed.
    —From Esquire
    And, at The Nation, Chris Hayes has written one of those pieces that would add a LOT more dead to the Collectivist ledger
    But Erp assures us there is no “evil collectivism”.
    A junior Walter Duranty, without a novel thought in his head.

      An after-thought…
      Society requires collective decisions about how and why resources are produced and consumed.
      —From Esquire
      I wonder what the moron who reviews books for Esquire thinks markets are? They are immense “collectives” of free people who “make decisions about how and why resources are produced and consumed”.
      But that, I’m sure, is not the “collective” he and Pinketty want to impose.

      • “Society requires collective decisions about how and why resources are produced and consumed.”
        Generally what they mean is that the elite will get together and make decisions for the rest of us.
        Too much time would be spent wrangling if we all got together to decide you see (of course if government weren’t into every aspect of existence, there wouldn’t be that much for them to decide, and less decision time would therefore be needed, and they might have to get real jobs to fill in the space between decisions!)
        So when they say ‘collective’ it wasn’t the collective everyone as it would be if people were allowed to access the market and buy or not buy what suited them.
        And when they permit the fiction of the market they have previously determined what people can and cannot buy there, all done in the best interest of the people (light bulbs, classic example).
        When and if that doesn’t work out they’ll declare ‘the market’ decided or was to blame, and engage in another round of preventing the market from actually being a market.

        • “Generally what they mean is that the elite will get together and make decisions for the rest of us.”

          And we all know how spectacularly well that has worked.

          This is the card that collectivists keep trying to palm. In any sufficiently complex human system (nation, state, city, large company), distributed decision making beats centralized “”collective” decision making hands down, every time. But that stands in the way of their own personal, deeply-held feeling that they should be running things (because they’re so smart and pragmatic, and so much smarter than we yahoos out there in flyover country, don’t ya know). So they keep finding ways to hide it or rationalize that flaw away. They seize on any book such as Piketty’s the way a starving coyote seizes a squirrel – it gives them enough rationalizations to deny reality for another few months.

        • Again and again, from electric lights to health care to trans fats to ethanol additives, the government doesn’t let the market determine whether or not we do or do not want to pay for something, instead they skew the market by forcing us to buy things either by regulating them INTO products or as products or they prevent us from buying them by outlawing the products, most often on the spurious fiction that they’re doing it to save ‘tax payers’ money.

          • OR “save the planet”.
            How has that cost in freedom benefited the “planet”?  I mean, seriously

  • ObamaCare is so good that …

    BOSTON — Federal health care officials are balking at Gov. Deval Patrick’s request for a permanent waiver for small businesses from some requirements of President Barack Obama’s health care law, instead granting the state an additional year to come into compliance.

    The state now has until 2017 to transition into the federal requirements.

  • If not the GOP, by what mechanism do we win?

    — grassroots capture of the GOP. But that doesn’t mean we empower Boehner in the meantime.

    One thing to consider- maybe just aren’t meant to win. Free candy always beats strong medicine.  And at least half the electorate is for free candy.
    My preferred (for now) solution is a national divorce. The other solution is a violent breakup which is what’s gonna happen. Kind of inevitable really

    • And if that is the outcome (violent breakup, hopefully not too violent), then we need a cadre of people who understand how to build a long-term sustainable limited government. Otherwise, we are likely to get an even more authoritarian government than we have now.
      That alone is enough reason for me to support Cruz And to marginalize statists such as McCain and crony capitalists such as Boehner.

    • Well, the key to success has always been the culture. Cultures that create banana republics (in Mexico, Russia, or where ever) don’t produce well behaved prosperous nations. There is no reason to suppose our culture will always retain virtues that allow for success. In fact there are signs going back quite some time that our culture is in decline.
      Government impacts culture as well as visa versa, and you can see how the UK culture of socialism has impacted there. As culture declines it becomes hard to reverse things. I think what we see now is the political disagreement between the culture of virtue and the banana republic culture.
      So be kind to Scott. He’s our local representative of banana republic culture.

      • When he first came around here, I was kind to him because I thought he was brain damaged.
        I still think that. But then I realized how smug he is about his imaginary intellect, and how he takes advantage of anyone trying to be nice by playing his “Let the great and powerful Erb instruct you on the true way.” Every discussion ends up insulting him because that’s the only way to get the point across that nothing he says makes any sense. So now we all just go straight to the insults and avoid wasting a lot of time.

        • Not just smug, but judgemental

        • I was insulting him. He has demonstrated what he is many times. For example his reaction to Palin late in the 2008 election cycle. It was clear he was in the tank for Obama/leftism, and his efforts to appear balanced or bipartisan are really just lies.

          • Erp is a poseur, and nothing more than that.  He has been busted coming here with totally discredited talking-points from the fringe of the moonbattery (i.e., the Benghazi talking-points were not coordinated among the Obami, etc., and MORE etc.).
            He lies constantly, in true Collectivist fashion.
            And he runs like the proverbial scalded spider when called on his bullshit.  I can’t count the number of simple, direct questions I have yet to see him answer.
            Being that kind of morally bankrupt coward is its own perdition.

          • Rags, It is much easier to count the questions he has actually answered. After over 20 years of reading his nonsense on the web, I cannot remember a single instance where he has not dodged, moved the goalposts, or just went tangential.

      • A good (by which I mean terrible) example of how a culture can be corrupted is Scotland.  Not that long ago, Scots were prolific inventors, skilled craftsmen, and just generally a hard-working people who were fiercely individualistic.  Now they are indolent and dependent.

        • Sometimes I think the (temporarily) worst thing the Brits could do is cut them loose.  I can’t imagine Caracas on the Firth of Forth, but I can see them in Greece’s condition and Cyprus.

    • Two points.

      First, the strong medicine isn’t avoidable.  The debt is what it is.  The obstacles to growth and liberty the increasing state represent, these also are, and they are the foremost cause of the debt and the hindrance to growth which would relatively shrink it.  We are functionally bankrupt, our creditors just haven’t turned the tap off yet.

      Our primary means of avoiding the worst possible realization of that bankruptcy, because so much of our debt is in the form of unrealistic “social securities” owed to ourselves, is to alter how those promises are viewed and kept, while praying our circumstances do not force us to alter or abandon them catastrophically–or if you prefer more catastrophically than must be at minimum.

      But have no doubt, the establishment will view the realization of any such alteration as being the catastrophe, such indicts them for having kept the con game up for so long.

      Secondly, why is any “divorce” a good outcome?  Why is a violent breakup otherwise an inevitability?  Why are you conceding before Breed’s Hill, before even a “Tea Party” event, that the thing cannot be won?  Rather than either of those two options, I think civil war killing serveral tens of millions but keeping coutry and constitution intact is more likely, and more to be desired.  The rule of actual law is worth a very great deal, even that red flood, and the law begins, “We The People”.

      You may have seen the acronym TWANLOC, those who are no longer our countrymen.  War is not the worst thing, and at this rate, it’s far from unlikely.

  • John Hinderaker asks: Who Has More Integrity, Barack Obama or Kim Kardashian?
    Ouch !

  • We may be short selling him!  It occurs to me he has a spectacular underwear collection that he expects to profit from at any moment.  There is no reason to believe he has not appropriated the gnomish model as his own.  It would make perfect sense to him.

  • Secondly, why is any “divorce” a good outcome?  Why is a violent breakup otherwise an inevitability?  Why are you conceding before Breed’s Hill, before even a “Tea Party” event, that the thing cannot be won?  Rather than either of those two options, I think civil war killing serveral tens of millions but keeping coutry and constitution intact is more likely, and more to be desired.  The rule of actual law is worth a very great deal, even that red flood, and the law begins, “We The People”.

    —-I’d personally rather we split rather than have a civil war killing tens of millions. But that won’t or can’t happen.   You seek to fight against human nature. I say you cannot win. That isn’t defeatism, that’s inexorable logic at play.
    Good luck with that. I’d much rather “we the people” applied to a much smaller group that actually cared about it, as opposed to a wider group who much rather prefer “from each according to their abilities….”

    • “as opposed to a wider group who much rather prefer “from each according to their abilities….”
      and to each according to their greedy whims.

      • and to each according to their greedy whims.

        >>> True. That’s MUCH more their speed. And incompatable 100% incompatable to live with for much longer.

      • There has been such a subset of people throughout human history. However, the innovation in the last century is that they discovered a way to outsource the violence required to satisfy their whims. Now they don’t have to overtly threaten anyone themselves. They just go vote for their Democratic Party proxy thug, who promised to satisfy their every whim by stealing on their behalf.


        Everyone in that arrangement gets what they want. The proxy thug wants to boss other people around and gain from it. The wastrel wants to do nothing productive and entertain themselves with media, drugs, and sex. It’s a classic symbiotic relationship.



        • Pity these days the Visigoths have changed the name of their tribe to “Undocumented immigrant”.  They’re harder to recognize that way.
          Perhaps we can have them take over the job of defending the country as part of becoming citizens.
          I mean, what could go wrong?

          • Then again, there are plenty of completely documented US born citizens that are acting like Visigoths, so it’s not fair for me to target illegals like that.   A good number of them may appreciate their citizenship more than those born to it.

          • Well, fundamentally Rome faced the same problem. The decay of their culture, and the influx of alien culture. Those things work together. Note that the problem is not that illegals from Mexico are bad people; some are but many are not. The problem is that they have a different culture, one that is fine with a strong central government and one that accepts government paternalism. The huge influx makes it more difficult to assimilate them, as does the fact that the left in America has resisted assimilating them.

        • Everyone in that arrangement gets what they want. The proxy thug wants to boss other people around and gain from it. The wastrel wants to do nothing productive and entertain themselves with media, drugs, and sex. It’s a classic symbiotic relationship.

          >>> Which is why we need to step away and allow them to devour each other.

          • Locusts end up eating each other only after they’ve eaten everything else available.

  • I’m going to vote my conscious, I’m going to vote the TEA Party.
    If the country continues to go up in flames, so be it.
    Voting GOP just “because” is akin to Peeing on a house fire.

    • What, the GOP leadership getting ready to pass Amnesty doesn’t excite you????

  • Well I can be even more depressing.

    Many people attach the notion of a ‘reset’ or fresh start to the coming collapse. 


    There will be no reset.  We will rebuild from the bottom and the process will be a century or more and that’s if someone else doesn’t move in and buy Washington and make the situation indefinite. 

  • This is at the 92nd Street Y. Jeff Greenfield speaking with Joe Klein, this is Sunday night, New York City.

    KLEIN: I come home and I turn on CNN at six o’clock at night because that’s something I kind of do in preparation for the 6:30 network news to see what Wolf is being really hyperbolic about, and he’s talking about the plane! I mean .. well, actually this is is matter of real sadness.

    It is such an embarrassment to our profession that CNN has gone in the toilet the way it has. It really is. I miss being able to turn on a straight newscast. And it turns out the only place you can go to get one at six o’clock at night is Fox.

    GREENFIELD: That’s right Yes. It’s true.

    AUDIENCE: (gasps and grumbling)