"But beyond that, the notion that everything is solved by a tax cut, of course there are sensible tax policies you could have. But there are public needs we have in this society...that cannot be accomplished by a tax cut. No tax cut builds a road. No tax cut puts a cop on the street."He also points out the obvious elephant in the room--the nearly trillion dollars spent invading Iraq and undermining our military. Republicans, or at least these in power, love to spend money on the military and had no interest in checking Bush's power or ambition, but now are complaining about trying to jump start a nearly moribund economy.
****
Btw, I have noticed that Amity Shlaes is everywhere promoting her revision of the New Deal, and using that to argue for more supply-side economic response to the current crisis. I am fine with her making her argument, don't get me wrong, but it strikes me that no matter how far out of the mainstream a conservative idea is right now, it will get equal billing with the more accepted knowledge. Not as big of a problem with Shlaes, because there have always been critics of the New Deal, but I was just at the bookstore and noticed the prominence that absolute wingnuts like Coulter and Hannity get, as if their ideas have any legitimacy at all.
Anyway.
****
So, I am going to make some turkey chili and watch the Super Bowl. It is often enjoyable to watch a game where I have no real preference for who I want to win. Not a huge fan of Roethlisberger, but then again, Kurt Warner bugs me for a lot of the same reasons. But I do admire the skills of people like Fitzgerald and Ward. So, I am cheering for a good game.
13 comments:
I agree that there are sensible tax policies, but it is hard to take Frank seriously when I read about stuff like this. Giving money to your high placed cronies is hardly good tax policy.
Sorry, Steve. Nothing there that undermines his point.
His credibility is shot, in my book. You have no problem with his past actions? I don't see how nayone can take him seriously when he has certainly contributed to our current financial crisis.
This is a case of ad hominem argumentation. The first question about this quote is, is it a valid point. If it is a valid point, (which I think it is) then Frank's credibility is irrelevant.
I don't doubt that he is hypocritical (though that link was an argument piece, not an analytical piece) but that isn't the primary question raised by this quote. Is the quote accurate? I believe it is. If it is, then it doesn't matter of George Bush himself said it--the quote would still be valid and arguable.
If the question really revolved around Frank's own policy initiatives, then I could see your point. But it doesn't.
I read it as kind of a "See, even he thinks tax cuts aren't a magical cure for our economic woes" statement, kind of like if W were to say "Hm, maybe randomly invading countries can sometimes cause problems." Definitely not the first source you go to for support, but good for comic value.
Honestly, I was just focused on the quote, not the person saying the quote. And that is why, it seems to me, the originator of the quote is not terribly relevant. In retrospect, I should have just quoted him anonymously.
Sorry to be so harsh, but I have never been a fan of Frank. I was not attacking his basic argument. I agree with the idea that there are taxes that are necessary. You know where I stand.
Hope you enjoyed the game it was a good one.
Wasn't it the Republicans that pushed the motto, "There no such thing as a free lunch?" They sure try to feast on them when in office.
Steve, I have no problem criticizing Frank. I only objected to the form of your comment.
PM, the game was great. I enjoyed it.
On some level, credibility does count, though I will admit that, by itself, it is a weak argument. As I said, I wasn't taking a position on the quote. The fact that Frank may not be praticing what he preaches certainly doesn't help the side using his quote.
If I were to somehow find an intelligent quote from Bush regarding restraint and caution in foreign policy, how would you react? What about using Malkin or Coulter? Now, I am not suggesting that they are all somehow the same.
Didn't Robert Heinlein say there is no such thing as a free lunch?
Actually, I think George Bush said a lot of things that I could agree with. The reason that was always so laughable, is that the implementation of those ideas was left up to him, so his credibility, or lack thereof, usually trumped anything good he said about foreign or domestic policy.
I think the issue here, is that I actually could have just posted that particular quote as "read this somewhere on a blog" and it would have worked very well.
And, might I add, that finding an intelligent quote from Bush is actually a much easier task than finding one from Malkin or Coulter. :)
Not sure who originated the quote, but I recently read that the idea of the "no free lunch" came from early 20th century brew houses who gave away salty sandwiches to workers for lunch, and then sold them large amounts of beer.
But that said, I think PM's point is well taken. Republicans have been the ones to bash federal spending, as well as the ones most likely to bring up "moral hazard."
And, might I add, that finding an intelligent quote from Bush is actually a much easier task than finding one from Malkin or Coulter. :)
True, but it would be much harder if Bush wrote all his own speeches.
True, but it would be much harder if Bush wrote all his own speeches.
Maybe, maybe not. I'm sure they would have been terribly unfitting for their various occasions, but nothing makes you sound like an idiot more than trying to recite other people's words that you don't quite believe. He was apparently plenty articulate in informal settings.
Post a Comment