The Respectfully Republican Conversation

Benita you ask an interesting question...........I think it was like a "perfect storm"..........but to make it as basic as possible I believe that it is too much government spending..........I believe that it started in the Carter administration..........Reagan tired his best to stop it.............curtail as much spending as possible and cutting taxes......which in the 90's we reaped those efforts.......but then during the 90's the spending began again and has continued including the last 8 years..........I think it is like a family that has over extended itself with debt......spending on credit cards, buying too big of a house, buying expensive cars, etc.......right now the United States owes more then we have........passing this stimulus package is going to be disastrous......if you cannot pay your mortgage, cannot pay your credit cards you don't go out and try to borrow even more money.....it will only make matters worse.........not only are our children going to pay but our grand children and great grandchildren........it will take years for us to recover and it is going to extend the recession for years.........IMO........Shokk

Well, I don't know about other parts of the package but I am thrilled about this part and how dare other countries criticize our efforts to get back on track!  Did they not see what happens to them if we stumble? if we fall?  That NAFTA was a pile of crap anyway .... Obama is right about this part:

The House-approved plan's "Buy American" provision generally prohibits the purchase of foreign iron and steel for any infrastructure project in the bill.

The European Union's trade commissioner, Catherine Ashton, pre-emptively voiced concern about the US measure.

"We are looking into the situation. ... Before we have the final text ... it would be premature to take a stance on it," Ashton's spokesman, Peter Power, said in Brussels.

"However, the one thing we can be absolutely certain about, is if a bill is passed which prohibits the sale or purchase of European goods on American territory, that is something we will not stand idly by and ignore," he said.

Canada's government said it is concerned about US protectionism in the economic stimulus and its diplomats were lobbying US makers against the "Buy American" drive.

"We're always concerned when there are protectionist pressures in the United States," Industry Minister Tony Clement told public broadcaster CBC.

"At the same time the United States has treaty obligations," he said, citing US membership in the World Trade Organization and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

I am so behind reading here I wont even attempt to catch up, so I am going to post something that may have already been said. 

This morning I was "forced" to listen to GMA and they were giving an account of PBO's daily routine......  They said he starts his cardio workout at 6:45, does breakfast, girls off to school etc. then takes the 10 sec trip to work at 9:00am.  Then they said he "leaves" the office at 10:00pm THEN they said "our former president was in bed by 10:00"-----like it was a BAD thing that Bush went to bed early. 

I am surprised that the "almighty obama" would even need sleep........

Buy American sounds good - but if we buy only American - will that cause the Europeans to stop buying things from us. With our wage rates, I don't think companies here could survive selling only to Americans.

Well, I think Bush was in the office waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay before 9am.

But I think Bush took wayyyyyyyyyyyyy too many vacation days ..... even though he was briefed every morning .. well, as you know I am not a Bushie, so maybe it was good that he was on vacation alot ...  I guess, his focus was so much on the war instead of our economy .. Maybe the solution is to operate like a corporation ..  CEO, CFO and  a COO .. 

Campbell Brown, once proud supporter of Obama, is now questioning his moves ...

(CNN) -- Unfortunately, we are again asking the president to explain why exactly he announced, with great fanfare, new ethics rules if he had no intention of abiding by them.

The Obama administration is yet again asking for a waiver to its very own rules about hiring lobbyists.

This time, it is the new treasury secretary, Tim Geithner. He wants a former lobbyist for Goldman Sachs to be his top aide at the Treasury Department.

My view is simple: Mr. President, if you want to hire former lobbyists because you think they are the best people to do the job, then hire former lobbyists. Just don't hold a big news conference first to tell us how your administration is going to be so different from previous administrations in that you won't be hiring lobbyists.

Don't make your disdain for lobbyists and your pledges that they won't wield influence in your administration a centerpiece of your campaign. 

It's the hypocrisy and the double-talk that makes so many of us so cynical. Do what you think is best for the country. Just be straight with us about how you're going to do it

Hey IBC why did you delete that cartoon? It was pretty cool! I was just going to ask if you posted it twice in case they didn't get it the first time!

Edited to add: Spoke too soon! LOL!

herbie, go to photobucket and upload them there and you can tell it what size is best & it will resize for you ..

or www.resize2mail.com

or www.tinypic.com

then link from them.

ab...that is hilarious! Trying to go through a window! Ahhhhhhhhhh...oh never mind!

Amy, I saw that!  Fair is fair... if they show the flubs of Bush, show them of Obama.  But the msm is not really doing much in the way of fairness, they are still on honeymoon with him.

----------------------

Remember Dick Morris ....... he has been on both sides of the AISLE ... and this article is exactly the reason Rush hopes that many of Obama's ideas fail.  We don't want to be communist, we don't want to be like China ...We don't want the government dictating who loans money to whom ....... HELLO? ISN'T THAT WHY we are in the banking mess since they said to lend to people who didn't qualify???  ...  We don't need the government to hold all the preferred stock and we get what?  Here's the article:

GOP, push free enterprise
By Dick Morris
Posted: 01/27/09 05:41 PM [ET]

How should House and Senate Republicans react to the Trojan horse stimulus package proposed by the Obama administration?

In the name of economic stimulus, it not only has every item any liberal ever asked of Santa Claus on Christmas eve, it also contains the seeds of a permanent shift toward a European-style socialist democracy. Its dramatic exemption of more than half of Americans from paying federal income taxes (it is now about one-third who don't pay them) and its generosity in awarding this voting majority a welfare check - called a refundable tax credit - moves the politics of taxation sharply to the left. The federal government's acquisition of preferred stock in virtually all our major banks sets the stage for full nationalization. After all, if the feds are using their "preferred" status to hog all the dividends, why should any private person buy bank stock?

By demanding that Citibank cancel its plans to buy a private jet, the Obama administration is tapping into a justified populist anger against the greed, privilege, stupidity and sense of entitlement of the Wall Street biggies. But he is also setting the precedent for government control over the actions of private banks. If Obama extends his power to the selection of management and policies regarding the lending of money, nationalization will become a de facto reality. And once the government controls the banks, it controls the economy. At best, we will have a Japanese system where winks and nods from bureaucrats turn industrial policy upside-down; at worst, we will have outright federal control, with government-appointed latter-day Blagojeviches determining who gets loans and who doesn't.

With only 41 votes in the Senate and a distant minority in the House, what should Republicans do in the face of this onslaught against the basic free-market, private-enterprise system?

The answer is for the Republicans to caucus and come up with a Free Enterprise Amendment to add to the stimulus package. The amendment should spell out what the government may not do in influencing the policy of private banks. It should, for example, make it illegal for the feds to urge certain lending policies on banks or to suggest specific loans that might be granted. It should enjoin the feds from intervening in decisions on who should manage various aspects of bank operations. The idea would be to cordon off large parts of the private sector, even in subsidized institutions, to bar public federal government influence.

A well-drawn amendment would be akin to the protections in the Bill of Rights against government intervention in certain activities such as religion, press, speech, petitioning and assembly. It would lay down markers indicating what the feds may not do.

This amendment could draw strong support from Democrats and might even be negotiable with the Obama administration. Democrats are not anxious to be labeled as the party of socialism, and Republicans, who know the stimulus package will pass anyway, are looking for a way to, at minimum, influence it. Sitting on the sidelines and voting no is not the way to win friends and influence people.

If moderate Democrats and the administration prove truculent or overly limited in what they will accept, the Free Enterprise Amendment gives the Republican Party a place to stand in a filibuster. To filibuster merely to reduce the size of the stimulus or to influence the mix of the tax cuts or the specifics of the spending would not appeal to an America in shellshock over the depression. But a strong stand - refusing to allow the stimulus package to come up for a vote - in order to make sure that our economy remains private and that socialism does not come inside the Trojan horse makes a great deal of sense and will be seen by the American people as a wise use of power by the Republicans. Rather than asking the Republicans why they won't pass the stimulus package, they will ask Obama why he does not accede to so acceptable an amendment.

And the amendment, once passed, will be worth its weight in stopping bureaucrats from crossing lines that should not be crossed. One can easily see the day when prosecutions for violations of this amendment become commonplace.

Morris, a former adviser to Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and President Bill Clinton, is the author of Outrage. To get all of Dick Morris's and Eileen McGann's columns for free by email, go to www.dickmorris.com . To order a signed copy of their new best-selling book, Fleeced, go to dickmorris.com.