What’s Old is New Again (and What’s New is Old)

By Ronald Glenn
America’s Right

In the past few days and those coming in the immediate future, there has been and there will be a lot of pointed attacks against the economic stimulus package recently passed by Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives. The criticism, as demonstrated by the articles here at America’s Right, have by and large been on target and necessary. Further perspective, and indeed some less-technical criticism which does not touch on specific pork, can be found in our own recent history.

When the first attempt at the new John F. Kennedy manifestation was elected president in 1992 in the bodily incarnation of William Jefferson Clinton, the left promoted the revolutionary concept that the former Arkansas governor represented the “new American politician,” a political superman charged with combining liberal social policy and conservative economics. This was promoted by the urban college effete who wanted to be multi-millionaire capitalists yet still have access to every liberal vice whenever they so desired. At worst, it was a corporate-sponsored crack-and-hooker party; at best, it was The Jerry Springer Show.

President Barack Obama is the new incarnation of the old incarnation, a failed attempt if, in fact, it was ever sincerely attempted at all. Now, in the first few weeks in office, Obama is selling this stimulus package as a way to save capitalism with the same fervor as a carnival huckster. Of course, this is not liberal politics according to him, you see. He is doing what is necessary to preserve the affluence created by the conservative values of hard work and keeping what you earn. If his comrades and he spend trillions, they will be the real capitalists. Bankers, the logic goes, have been proven to be the real liberal spenders because they buy private jets.

At the same time, President Obama is signing every liberal executive order placed on the desk in front of him. The first volley on the liberal attitude toward abortion was already placed in the forefront in Obama’s first week in office, for example, when he overturned the so-called “Mexico City Policy,” former President Bush’s order concerning international pregnancy counseling. We can expect him to venture much deeper into the liberal social agenda throughout the next four years.

A liberal social agenda requires lots of government cash to make it work. All liberal social agendas–including ACORN–must be vigorously promoted and, since they are deemed to be “for the public good,” such agendas and programs will be promoted through government. At further cost, if legislation is passed to enforce certain aspects of the agenda, enforcement of those laws is required. During the 1980s, the conservative and liberal agendas under Ronald Reagan and the Democratic Congress were both allowed to exist because each side, one represented by Reagan and the other by Tip O’Neill, agreed to compromise and, for the most part, give the other side what it wanted. Reagan had defense, the congress had social spending. Now, in 2009, the Democrats have it all. In order to silence conservative critics, therefore, Obama is going to attempt to portray himself as strong on defense and the champion of a strong economy.

Is is possible to be a liberal on social issues and a fiscal conservative? The stimulus package tells us the answer is no. One of the basic premises of the conservative movement is the belief that good government gives its citizens greater freedom, not less. All this money will do is make the American public more dependent upon government, and since the stimulus is unlikely to fix the economy in any significant way, the public will become more and more dependent on government expenditures. This will be especially true if Obama has his way and puts America on the road to socialized medicine. Like the pimple-faced pre-teen given his first taste of a hard drug for free, once Obama gives the American people a taste of health care for children or any one of the liberals’ government-expanding pet projects, the people will become hooked and the conservatives will always be painted as the ones trying to take it away.

However, one thing has changed in the since President Clinton’s election — America and the American people are far more willing to accept government solutions than they were twenty-five years ago. Unfortunately, President Bush only added to that willingness by passing his own versions of government solutions tied up in the largest deficits in American history.

Knowing all of this and keeping an eye on recent American history, the Republican party must not allow itself to go soft on the social issues and concentrate solely on the economy. The social issues and the economic issues are one. Social responsibility and economic responsibility are one. To split them apart as if they have nothing to do with each other would be to re-live the nightmarish Clinton era, where he even tried to convince us that the personal conduct of the president had nothing to do with how he performed his job. By now, we should know better than that.

—————
Ronald Glenn has worked in real estate and law for more than twenty years. He now works in Philadelphia, and lives outside the city with his wife. Ron has been writing for America’s Right since January 2009.

Share

Comments

  1. Anonymous says:

    Get on the phones TODAY! Call your Congress people and tell them to just say NO to the tax cheat Daschle and the pork stimulus bill!!! Do it now! When you are done go check out H.R. 45. If they tagged that one on to the stimulus bill like they want to do we are done with no way to defend ourselves unless we are lawbreakers which I would then become! call, write letters, email! Do not give up on this folks! we need to get active and stay active.
    Appreciate all you do, Jeff!
    Thanks! jmi

  2. Ian Thorpe says:

    You ask Jeff
    “Is is possible to be a liberal on social issues and a fiscal conservative?”

    Is it possible? It is possible :-
    )
    Really it depends on how liberalism is defined. If, as most of the American right, you define liberalism as a political commitmnt to an authoritarian centralised government then the answer to your question would be a resounding “NO.” That is Bolshevism.

    If on the other hand you mean light touch regulation and a system that provides for state funded education and welfare then the answer is yes, if it was otherwise Germany would be a failed state.

    The problem with social liberalism is people and political parties become dogmatic about it. Here in Britain, despite warnings from Liberal and Conservative politicians that the ageing population is a ticking time bomb, the Labour party which is trying desperately to snuggle up to Obama, insists the official retirement age stays at 65. It has become a point of principle for them (or an attempt to show they still have principles.

    At the time the retirement age was set the average age at death of working class men was 62. Now it is 80. Clearly some rethinking needs to be done.

    I could give many examples of how classical liberalism such as mine differes from the authoritarian, paternalistic liberalism of Obama, Blair, Brown etc. but nobody needs a 5000 word comment.

    Clasical liberals understand the need to govern pragmatically, according to circumstances while preserving the individual’s right to think for themselves and act in their own interests on their conclusions. Paternalistic liberalism which gave us politically correct social policy holds there is only one right way of thinking and all other should be suppressed.

    Paternalistic liberals, mostly middle class “meritocrats” labour under the misapprehension that because they are “on message” their opinions have more value than those of other groups. It’s a class thing really, these people are not as high up the social ladder as they like to think they are so they overcompensate by pretending superiority. One thing we British know about is class.

  3. MaryAlice says:

    Georgia House Bill #HB 139 will require proof of citizenship to register to vote, if passed. The Secretary of State, Karen Handel supports this bill. My question now,what about proof of citizenship to run for elected office and to get your name on the ballot?

    I am a registered Georgia voter. What is everyone’s opinion on this??

    Thanks,

    Mary Alice
    The Peach State

  4. Anonymous says:

    Ronald,
    Excellent! I’m bookmarking this one. I’ve always felt the two issues were intertwined but couldn’t articulate it.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Mary Alice,
    I’m a GA voter too. I agree. If we need transparency to vote, then we must have transparency to run. I’ll write Karen. Will you also?

  6. TROUBLESHOOTER says:

    Sos…
    I know I’ll have nigtmares after seeing the posted pictures?
    soo see/read this for a reality check:
    http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editorials/kirby/2009/0202.html

  7. SeeksTruth says:

    Killefer withdrew. Daschle withdrew.

    In announcing his choice of Sen. Judd Gregg to be commerce secretary, Obama took no questions Tuesday and left the White House lectern ignoring a shouted question about why so many of his nominees have tax problems.

    LOVE IT!!!!

    Jeff, If I fail to pay my taxes, would I have standing and would there be precedent due to Geithner’s actions? Just curious. :-)

  8. Gail B says:

    MaryAlice–

    I, too, live in GA and sent this to my State Senator:

    “Senator Douglas:

    “Please talk with your peers about crafting state legislation to require candidates to provide to the Secretary of State proof of eligibility to serve in certain elected positions where the U.S. Constitution states that, in order to hold such offices, they must meet the eligibility requirements of age, natural-born citizen, and residency.

    “I am spreading this request nationwide in an effort to uphold and protect our U.S. Constitution, while we still have one.

    “Thank you for your time and for your serious consideration of this vital matter.”

    (Reply from Senator Douglas)

    “Gail:

    “Thank you for the email. We have laws in Georgia that establish requirements for running and holding public office and we enforce those laws. I appreciate your interest and you can be confident that we will continue to uphold our standards and laws here in this state.

    John”

    (My Reply to this)

    “Thank you for your reply to my concern.

    “Senator Douglas, if we have laws in place, how is it that Obama was able to get onto the Georgia ballot without proof of his eligibility to hold the office of POTUS? It seems that there is a loophole in the laws protecting us against a usurper.”

    (The Senator’s mind-boggling reply)

    “Great question Gail”

    My suggestion is to get in touch with the sponsor of GA H.B. 139 and ask him to include the eligibility clause as outlined in my letter to Senator Douglas. That’s what I’m going to do, thanks to your heads-up comment!

    I guess everybody has heard the good news about Daschle–he withdrew as Obama’s HHS nominee, the 3rd such nominee to withdraw from consideration for cabinet positions!

    I guess “hounding” really does help! Anyway, I don’t feel deranged anymore!

  9. You won't post this, so what does it matter says:

    And yet, the American right has put in in the horrific situation we are in right now due to its incessant attacks on regulation, fair health policies, and the civil liberties of people who try to unionize or marry who they want, and re completely willing to let young men and women of our military be assaulted, dismembered, and killed in order to satisfy the delusional manifest destiny of the true elite, the super-rich who so successfully play on the dimwitted right’s xenophobia, homophobia, and righteous intolerance of anyone who doesn’t bow down to some imaginary god to vote against their own true best interests under the illusion of maintaining small government. Nice one.

    Keep on painting good people like Daschle as our greatest risk. It’ll work because good men don’t fight dirty like you, who are the reason we are here now. your lies and filed polices will be your own ruin, as well as everyone else’s.’

  10. Anonymous says:

    IMPORTANT – Please read!

    Congressional Contact Info
    With today’s technology, many Members of Congress do not even accept “old fashioned” email anymore. Rather, they utilize an internet-based “web form” system of communications. Below you will find links to a few sites that we have found to be useful. Simply choose the site that works best for you.

    http://www.senate.gov/
    This is the Official website of the United States Senate. When sending your message you will be asked to:
    1.Select your home state under “Find Your Senators” and click “GO”
    (top right corner of page).
    2.Click on “Web form” link under senator’s name.
    3.Complete contact info section and write your message.

    —————————-

    https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
    The Official website of the United States House of Representatives. Here, you can send a message using the web form for your specific Representative. All you need is your full 9-digit zip code which can be found on your drivers license, junk mail, or a utility bill. When sending your message you will be asked to:
    1. Select your home state and enter your 9-digit zip code.
    2. Complete the steps in the form (contact info., etc.)
    3. Write your message.

    ———————————
    http://www.congressmerge.com/onlinedb/
    Congressmerge.com offers comprehensive contact and profile information for each member of the US House and the US Senate. Just click on your state and you will be taken to a list of the Members of Congress for your state where you will find links to:
    Congressional Photo
    Washington D.C. Contact information
    Link to their Email / Web
    District Office Contact Information
    Political Profile
    Link to Voting History
    Committee Memberships
    Office Staff Information
    Personal Bio

    Consider becoming an Intelligent Thinker.
    http://www.hermancain.com/hitm.asp

  11. toto says:

    This nonsense needs to stop. I am in the auto business, and I can tell you, the banks aren’t lending the money out, in fact, they’ve become so tough its ridiculous.

    As for Daschle, didn’t I read where he removed his name from consideration? As the article says, these bailouts, are just another way for the new regime to lead us closer to socialism. It amazes me that these people are the same ones who don’t pay their taxes, while at the same time telling us to pay our taxes, weird. And of course, we have Timothy Geithner as the head of all this, and he states he didn’t know he was suppossed to pay taxes? How are we, the lay people, suppossed to know what to pay taxes on? If you want to see something really funny, type in youtube on you putor, and then punch in Harry Reid, you’ll find one about his take on taxes. If you take the time to view this video, I guarantee you’ll end up scratching your head.

  12. Anonymous says:

    Dear You won’t post this, so what does it matter,

    You are welcome to come spend some time in our home. We are a conservative military family. You’ll have the opportunity to see first hand what life is like in the home of conservatives. From your post I gather you don’t have many conservative friends. I’d like the opportunity to shatter your stereotypes.

    I warn you that we live modestly but you’ll be comfortable and have a home cooked meal every night. Our door is open when you are ready.

    Sincerely,
    TJ

  13. Gail B says:

    GA Rep. Roger Williams sponsored (Georgia) HB 139 (that Mary Alice talked about above) and can be reached through his secretary at judy.kind@house.ga.gov.

    The House Directory for email addresses is here: GA House . (I hope that worked!) Georgians, bookmark the site first, then click on an email address!

    Those outside of Georgia, find contact info for yourselves in your state and insist that legislation be crafted to ensure eligibility under the US Constitution for any federal office sought on your state’s ballot.

    If enough states will do this, we will be protected by our state laws from a usurper in the White House!

  14. Anonymous says:

    Seeks Truth said:

    Jeff, If I fail to pay my taxes, would I have standing and would there be precedent due to Geithner’s actions? Just curious. :-)

    =============

    Oh Lord, I sense a tax revolt brewing up somewhere on the horizon. (About time, too.)

    JV

  15. Seeks Truth says:

    Mary Alice and Gail B,
    So……. does this mean if we get this on the books now that it would be used in 2012?????? Interesting thought.

  16. Pere Ubu says:

    Hey, Mr. Glenn. Let’s read something from your beautiful wife. She is even smarter and more erudite than you, if such a thing be possible!

Speak Your Mind

*