OT – Who will run for President on the Republican side?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Pri: I do NOT hate Obama. To the contrary, and on a personal level, I think he’s a likeable cat. He’s just in over his head is all. Same as that frat boy Dubya was in over his.

Pointing out Obama’s inadequacies does NOT count as “hate”, by the way. It’s nothing more than pointing to the obvious.

As to your LOL, let’s stick with the facts, pri, and remember that Obama had BOTH houses of Congress and HUGE political capital when he began on healthcare. He squandered this opportunity badly and that is readily admitted to by many on the liberal-left. The fact that he did NOT lead on this issue, instead choosing to delegate this to Congress, backfired badly and resulted in the muddled mess that Obamacare ultimately became. Thse are all FACTS and NOT “hating”.

On jobs: The stimulus package was good in theory and absolutely hamstrung in delivery. The “shovel-ready” jobs weren’t shovel-ready (and Obama himself made THAT particular quote), the funds that went to city and state government were used to pay down debt and NOT hire new employees (thus not delivering the promised multiplier effect) and the overall effect was muted by the fact that the economy was in far worse straits than the administration realized (and, no, I’m not blaming that on the administration, they WERE working with incomplete data).

An effective jobs bill would be tied to tax reform and meaningful incentives, i.e. those that get businesses, especially small businesses, to re-invest and, more importantly, hire. I like Robert Reich’s idea about imposing a “severance tax” on those American businesses that outsource. I’ve openly advocated for years, on this board, that we need a WPA-type organization and a serious industrial policy (not this green-energy boondoggle bullshit).

I’d go strong on re-building America’s nuke program, in that it would create a HUGE multiplier effect, especially among Heavy/Civil Engineering disciplines and high-wage, high-skilled blue collar workers. You put a dozen nuke generating stations on fast track approval, including DOE loan supports, and you’d see a re-emergence of American Heavy Industry.

I’d significantly increase R&D spending, and in conjunction with an American Industrial Policy (similar to what we had in WWII and during the Cold War). Don’t let the government pick winners, allow successful R&D to create market drivers and then support those market drivers with incentives to Build American, Stay American and Sell American.

While I’d love to see Huntsman mount a serious challenge, it ain’t gonna happen. I’d vote for Perry as the “better than Obama” candidate. Yeah, he is badly flawed, but so was Reagan. However, when you compared him to Carter…

This country needs a dose of someone putting a boot up our ass. You know, like in the Army. Speaking of the Army, what, exactly, did you do in the Army? You seem to get rather upset and play the “hater” card whenever someone raises their voice. Wasn’t that an issue when the SFC started yelling at you?

[Anonymous]

Allan, as I’ve said before, my military career was a joke compared to yours. Feel free to poke fun at this former mediocre, butterbar, five-jump-chump combat engineer as much as you like (but don’t you dare knock the sappers – I know you know better than that.)

But that’s not the debate here.

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]I like Robert Reich’s idea about imposing a “severance tax” on those American businesses that outsource. I’ve openly advocated for years, on this board, that we need a WPA-type organization and a serious industrial policy (not this green-energy boondoggle bullshit).

I’d go strong on re-building America’s nuke program, in that it would create a HUGE multiplier effect, especially among Heavy/Civil Engineering disciplines and high-wage, high-skilled blue collar workers. You put a dozen nuke generating stations on fast track approval, including DOE loan supports, and you’d see a re-emergence of American Heavy Industry.

I’d significantly increase R&D spending, and in conjunction with an American Industrial Policy (similar to what we had in WWII and during the Cold War). Don’t let the government pick winners, allow successful R&D to create market drivers and then support those market drivers with incentives to Build American, Stay American and Sell American.[/quote]

I appreciate your use of specifics, and your ideas have merit, but you seem to be ignoring the obvious problem here. Let’s try out some of your ideas…

BREAKING NEWS:

Obama wants to to raise taxes and increase federal involvement in the marketplace…

“Big Government” President Obama wants to increase the national debt with more R&D spending, and pork-laden, nuclear projects….

Obama wants to build an expensive nuclear plant in your backyard, using your tax dollars…

Why does Obama want to build targets for terrorists?

Severance Tax? That’s right folks, Obama wants to create a whole new tax targeting business productivity…

Now the above words would seem ludicrous, except that we’ve heard all of this and worse for the past two years. The problem isn’t that a few extremists make these silly claims – the problem is that the entire Republican machine, from Fox News, Limbaugh, the WSJ, and every office-holder and candidate in the party has fallen lock-step into this narrative.

It’s true that there has always been an opposition party. But I’m not aware of any time in history were the opposition party was so entrenched and so childish – so fixated on undermining the President at any cost.

Your military metaphors bring up an interesting point. True, no plan survives contact with the enemy. And the Republicans are behaving as if the President of the United States was THE enemy.

Back to your ideas:

If Perry/Romney is going to pass WPA-type legislation, or create any new programs when he becomes President it will be one helluva surprise for everyone because there is no way he is able to campaign on anything but “zero taxes, smaller government.” Any deviation from this dogma will lead them into the “I was against it before I was in favor of it” trap.

Which means the entire Republican 2012 Presidential strategy comes down to a simple choice:

1) Carry on with the doomed-to-fail “cut government and tax the poor to create jobs” platform.

2) Perform the most fantastic 180 in political history.

My bet is that we are going to see #1, along with some even more bizarre arguments and contrived word-smithing in an attempt to do #2 at the same time.

[Anonymous]

Allan, as I’ve said before, my military career was a joke compared to yours. Feel free to poke fun at this former mediocre, butterbar, five-jump-chump combat engineer as much as you like (but don’t you dare knock the sappers – I know you know better than that.)

But that’s not the debate here.

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]I like Robert Reich’s idea about imposing a “severance tax” on those American businesses that outsource. I’ve openly advocated for years, on this board, that we need a WPA-type organization and a serious industrial policy (not this green-energy boondoggle bullshit).

I’d go strong on re-building America’s nuke program, in that it would create a HUGE multiplier effect, especially among Heavy/Civil Engineering disciplines and high-wage, high-skilled blue collar workers. You put a dozen nuke generating stations on fast track approval, including DOE loan supports, and you’d see a re-emergence of American Heavy Industry.

I’d significantly increase R&D spending, and in conjunction with an American Industrial Policy (similar to what we had in WWII and during the Cold War). Don’t let the government pick winners, allow successful R&D to create market drivers and then support those market drivers with incentives to Build American, Stay American and Sell American.[/quote]

I appreciate your use of specifics, and your ideas have merit, but you seem to be ignoring the obvious problem here. Let’s try out some of your ideas…

BREAKING NEWS:

Obama wants to to raise taxes and increase federal involvement in the marketplace…

“Big Government” President Obama wants to increase the national debt with more R&D spending, and pork-laden, nuclear projects….

Obama wants to build an expensive nuclear plant in your backyard, using your tax dollars…

Why does Obama want to build targets for terrorists?

Severance Tax? That’s right folks, Obama wants to create a whole new tax targeting business productivity…

Now the above words would seem ludicrous, except that we’ve heard all of this and worse for the past two years. The problem isn’t that a few extremists make these silly claims – the problem is that the entire Republican machine, from Fox News, Limbaugh, the WSJ, and every office-holder and candidate in the party has fallen lock-step into this narrative.

It’s true that there has always been an opposition party. But I’m not aware of any time in history were the opposition party was so entrenched and so childish – so fixated on undermining the President at any cost.

Your military metaphors bring up an interesting point. True, no plan survives contact with the enemy. And the Republicans are behaving as if the President of the United States was THE enemy.

Back to your ideas:

If Perry/Romney is going to pass WPA-type legislation, or create any new programs when he becomes President it will be one helluva surprise for everyone because there is no way he is able to campaign on anything but “zero taxes, smaller government.” Any deviation from this dogma will lead them into the “I was against it before I was in favor of it” trap.

Which means the entire Republican 2012 Presidential strategy comes down to a simple choice:

1) Carry on with the doomed-to-fail “cut government and tax the poor to create jobs” platform.

2) Perform the most fantastic 180 in political history.

My bet is that we are going to see #1, along with some even more bizarre arguments and contrived word-smithing in an attempt to do #2 at the same time.

[Anonymous]

Allan, as I’ve said before, my military career was a joke compared to yours. Feel free to poke fun at this former mediocre, butterbar, five-jump-chump combat engineer as much as you like (but don’t you dare knock the sappers – I know you know better than that.)

But that’s not the debate here.

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]I like Robert Reich’s idea about imposing a “severance tax” on those American businesses that outsource. I’ve openly advocated for years, on this board, that we need a WPA-type organization and a serious industrial policy (not this green-energy boondoggle bullshit).

I’d go strong on re-building America’s nuke program, in that it would create a HUGE multiplier effect, especially among Heavy/Civil Engineering disciplines and high-wage, high-skilled blue collar workers. You put a dozen nuke generating stations on fast track approval, including DOE loan supports, and you’d see a re-emergence of American Heavy Industry.

I’d significantly increase R&D spending, and in conjunction with an American Industrial Policy (similar to what we had in WWII and during the Cold War). Don’t let the government pick winners, allow successful R&D to create market drivers and then support those market drivers with incentives to Build American, Stay American and Sell American.[/quote]

I appreciate your use of specifics, and your ideas have merit, but you seem to be ignoring the obvious problem here. Let’s try out some of your ideas…

BREAKING NEWS:

Obama wants to to raise taxes and increase federal involvement in the marketplace…

“Big Government” President Obama wants to increase the national debt with more R&D spending, and pork-laden, nuclear projects….

Obama wants to build an expensive nuclear plant in your backyard, using your tax dollars…

Why does Obama want to build targets for terrorists?

Severance Tax? That’s right folks, Obama wants to create a whole new tax targeting business productivity…

Now the above words would seem ludicrous, except that we’ve heard all of this and worse for the past two years. The problem isn’t that a few extremists make these silly claims – the problem is that the entire Republican machine, from Fox News, Limbaugh, the WSJ, and every office-holder and candidate in the party has fallen lock-step into this narrative.

It’s true that there has always been an opposition party. But I’m not aware of any time in history were the opposition party was so entrenched and so childish – so fixated on undermining the President at any cost.

Your military metaphors bring up an interesting point. True, no plan survives contact with the enemy. And the Republicans are behaving as if the President of the United States was THE enemy.

Back to your ideas:

If Perry/Romney is going to pass WPA-type legislation, or create any new programs when he becomes President it will be one helluva surprise for everyone because there is no way he is able to campaign on anything but “zero taxes, smaller government.” Any deviation from this dogma will lead them into the “I was against it before I was in favor of it” trap.

Which means the entire Republican 2012 Presidential strategy comes down to a simple choice:

1) Carry on with the doomed-to-fail “cut government and tax the poor to create jobs” platform.

2) Perform the most fantastic 180 in political history.

My bet is that we are going to see #1, along with some even more bizarre arguments and contrived word-smithing in an attempt to do #2 at the same time.

[Anonymous]

Allan, as I’ve said before, my military career was a joke compared to yours. Feel free to poke fun at this former mediocre, butterbar, five-jump-chump combat engineer as much as you like (but don’t you dare knock the sappers – I know you know better than that.)

But that’s not the debate here.

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]I like Robert Reich’s idea about imposing a “severance tax” on those American businesses that outsource. I’ve openly advocated for years, on this board, that we need a WPA-type organization and a serious industrial policy (not this green-energy boondoggle bullshit).

I’d go strong on re-building America’s nuke program, in that it would create a HUGE multiplier effect, especially among Heavy/Civil Engineering disciplines and high-wage, high-skilled blue collar workers. You put a dozen nuke generating stations on fast track approval, including DOE loan supports, and you’d see a re-emergence of American Heavy Industry.

I’d significantly increase R&D spending, and in conjunction with an American Industrial Policy (similar to what we had in WWII and during the Cold War). Don’t let the government pick winners, allow successful R&D to create market drivers and then support those market drivers with incentives to Build American, Stay American and Sell American.[/quote]

I appreciate your use of specifics, and your ideas have merit, but you seem to be ignoring the obvious problem here. Let’s try out some of your ideas…

BREAKING NEWS:

Obama wants to to raise taxes and increase federal involvement in the marketplace…

“Big Government” President Obama wants to increase the national debt with more R&D spending, and pork-laden, nuclear projects….

Obama wants to build an expensive nuclear plant in your backyard, using your tax dollars…

Why does Obama want to build targets for terrorists?

Severance Tax? That’s right folks, Obama wants to create a whole new tax targeting business productivity…

Now the above words would seem ludicrous, except that we’ve heard all of this and worse for the past two years. The problem isn’t that a few extremists make these silly claims – the problem is that the entire Republican machine, from Fox News, Limbaugh, the WSJ, and every office-holder and candidate in the party has fallen lock-step into this narrative.

It’s true that there has always been an opposition party. But I’m not aware of any time in history were the opposition party was so entrenched and so childish – so fixated on undermining the President at any cost.

Your military metaphors bring up an interesting point. True, no plan survives contact with the enemy. And the Republicans are behaving as if the President of the United States was THE enemy.

Back to your ideas:

If Perry/Romney is going to pass WPA-type legislation, or create any new programs when he becomes President it will be one helluva surprise for everyone because there is no way he is able to campaign on anything but “zero taxes, smaller government.” Any deviation from this dogma will lead them into the “I was against it before I was in favor of it” trap.

Which means the entire Republican 2012 Presidential strategy comes down to a simple choice:

1) Carry on with the doomed-to-fail “cut government and tax the poor to create jobs” platform.

2) Perform the most fantastic 180 in political history.

My bet is that we are going to see #1, along with some even more bizarre arguments and contrived word-smithing in an attempt to do #2 at the same time.

[Anonymous]

Allan, as I’ve said before, my military career was a joke compared to yours. Feel free to poke fun at this former mediocre, butterbar, five-jump-chump combat engineer as much as you like (but don’t you dare knock the sappers – I know you know better than that.)

But that’s not the debate here.

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]I like Robert Reich’s idea about imposing a “severance tax” on those American businesses that outsource. I’ve openly advocated for years, on this board, that we need a WPA-type organization and a serious industrial policy (not this green-energy boondoggle bullshit).

I’d go strong on re-building America’s nuke program, in that it would create a HUGE multiplier effect, especially among Heavy/Civil Engineering disciplines and high-wage, high-skilled blue collar workers. You put a dozen nuke generating stations on fast track approval, including DOE loan supports, and you’d see a re-emergence of American Heavy Industry.

I’d significantly increase R&D spending, and in conjunction with an American Industrial Policy (similar to what we had in WWII and during the Cold War). Don’t let the government pick winners, allow successful R&D to create market drivers and then support those market drivers with incentives to Build American, Stay American and Sell American.[/quote]

I appreciate your use of specifics, and your ideas have merit, but you seem to be ignoring the obvious problem here. Let’s try out some of your ideas…

BREAKING NEWS:

Obama wants to to raise taxes and increase federal involvement in the marketplace…

“Big Government” President Obama wants to increase the national debt with more R&D spending, and pork-laden, nuclear projects….

Obama wants to build an expensive nuclear plant in your backyard, using your tax dollars…

Why does Obama want to build targets for terrorists?

Severance Tax? That’s right folks, Obama wants to create a whole new tax targeting business productivity…

Now the above words would seem ludicrous, except that we’ve heard all of this and worse for the past two years. The problem isn’t that a few extremists make these silly claims – the problem is that the entire Republican machine, from Fox News, Limbaugh, the WSJ, and every office-holder and candidate in the party has fallen lock-step into this narrative.

It’s true that there has always been an opposition party. But I’m not aware of any time in history were the opposition party was so entrenched and so childish – so fixated on undermining the President at any cost.

Your military metaphors bring up an interesting point. True, no plan survives contact with the enemy. And the Republicans are behaving as if the President of the United States was THE enemy.

Back to your ideas:

If Perry/Romney is going to pass WPA-type legislation, or create any new programs when he becomes President it will be one helluva surprise for everyone because there is no way he is able to campaign on anything but “zero taxes, smaller government.” Any deviation from this dogma will lead them into the “I was against it before I was in favor of it” trap.

Which means the entire Republican 2012 Presidential strategy comes down to a simple choice:

1) Carry on with the doomed-to-fail “cut government and tax the poor to create jobs” platform.

2) Perform the most fantastic 180 in political history.

My bet is that we are going to see #1, along with some even more bizarre arguments and contrived word-smithing in an attempt to do #2 at the same time.

[briansd1]

Thank you, pri_dk. You said it very well here.

At no time in memory has the opposition been so hell bent on undermining the president to the detriment of national interest.

When it comes to foreign policy and national interest, politics need to stop at at the water’s edge.

[briansd1]

Thank you, pri_dk. You said it very well here.

At no time in memory has the opposition been so hell bent on undermining the president to the detriment of national interest.

When it comes to foreign policy and national interest, politics need to stop at at the water’s edge.

[briansd1]

Thank you, pri_dk. You said it very well here.

At no time in memory has the opposition been so hell bent on undermining the president to the detriment of national interest.

When it comes to foreign policy and national interest, politics need to stop at at the water’s edge.

[briansd1]

Thank you, pri_dk. You said it very well here.

At no time in memory has the opposition been so hell bent on undermining the president to the detriment of national interest.

When it comes to foreign policy and national interest, politics need to stop at at the water’s edge.

[briansd1]

Thank you, pri_dk. You said it very well here.

At no time in memory has the opposition been so hell bent on undermining the president to the detriment of national interest.

When it comes to foreign policy and national interest, politics need to stop at at the water’s edge.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]Thank you, pri_dk. You said it very well here.

At no time in memory has the opposition been so hell bent on undermining the president to the detriment of national interest.

When it comes to foreign policy and national interest, politics need to stop at at the water’s edge.[/quote]

Brian: I couldn’t agree more. Speaking of foreign policy and national interest, whose ideas are being implemented by Obama?

That was a serious question, BTW, if you’d like to answer it.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]Thank you, pri_dk. You said it very well here.

At no time in memory has the opposition been so hell bent on undermining the president to the detriment of national interest.

When it comes to foreign policy and national interest, politics need to stop at at the water’s edge.[/quote]

Brian: I couldn’t agree more. Speaking of foreign policy and national interest, whose ideas are being implemented by Obama?

That was a serious question, BTW, if you’d like to answer it.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]Thank you, pri_dk. You said it very well here.

At no time in memory has the opposition been so hell bent on undermining the president to the detriment of national interest.

When it comes to foreign policy and national interest, politics need to stop at at the water’s edge.[/quote]

Brian: I couldn’t agree more. Speaking of foreign policy and national interest, whose ideas are being implemented by Obama?

That was a serious question, BTW, if you’d like to answer it.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]Thank you, pri_dk. You said it very well here.

At no time in memory has the opposition been so hell bent on undermining the president to the detriment of national interest.

When it comes to foreign policy and national interest, politics need to stop at at the water’s edge.[/quote]

Brian: I couldn’t agree more. Speaking of foreign policy and national interest, whose ideas are being implemented by Obama?

That was a serious question, BTW, if you’d like to answer it.

[Author]

Posts