Limbaugh v. Robinson; a Point of Clarification Please
While my sympathies in the titanic clash between David Limbaugh and Peter Robinson lie with the Limbaugh wing, owing to my general reluctance to compromise on positions of principle, I can see the strategic implications of Peter's logic, i.e., that the mainstream media's slanted coverage of a shut down might resonate with that portion of the electorate whose support we need but whose knowledge of events is insufficient to secure their support. Plus, more time spent on anecdotal evidence of the trials and tribulations of a shut down means less coverage of Paul Ryan's important work on a long-term solution. On the other hand, had Patrick Henry said, “Give me liberty, or give me something as close to it as can be realistically expected under the circumstances,” the 4th of July might be just another summer day when we pay allegiance to the Crown.
The situation having been further aggravated, in my case, by the fact that I've been in a medicinal fog for the better part of a week, I'm not as up to date on the particulars as I would like. So I was hoping that you, the superbly informed stars in the Ricochet firmament, could help out and in the process add some focus to the issue.
Specifically, where do things stand with regard to the CR's de-funding of Obamacare? In weeks past, I was given to understand that there was $105 billion worth of spending tucked away in the Obamacare law, a sum whose funding was continued in the previous two CR bills. That issue, for me at least, is of pivotal importance. The victors in last November's elections were dispatched to Washington precisely to send this unconstitutional beast to the infernal regions, and any measure that perpetuates its existence is a measure that must be defeated in my humble opinion. Remember, the current fiscal debacle has bi-partisan roots, roots grounded in the compromise of First Principles. In the eventuality that the Republicans can chew gum and walk at the same time, they ought to be able to remain consistent in their principles on both the CR and Ryan's plan, right? Or is that expecting too much?
- Comment (4)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Sep '10
Re: Limbaugh v. Robinson; a Point of Clarification Please
Although old and not terribly informative this article on the Washington Times blog has a pretty good summation of the situation. I've seen no change in the leadership position, which appears to be a lot of pointless mumbling. As far as I can tell, it's more of the same old "respect for the institution" type nonsense that we've been hearing forever.
Re: Limbaugh v. Robinson; a Point of Clarification Please
Thanks for the link, Metzger. That was the situation as I understood it, but I didn't know the extent to which Obamacare is figuring into the reckoning of the leadership on this latest CR initiative. I should think that respect for the Constitution would trump other institutional concerns.
May '10
Re: Limbaugh v. Robinson; a Point of Clarification Please
Here is the bottom line. Peter R is on the side of lets try to be more strategic because we don't want to make the electorate mad and have them blame the Repubs, because it will hurt us in 2012, like 1995, and the focus should be on defeating BHO. Peter is wrong about 1995 because Clinton won the day but the Repubs won the battle electorally in 1996. David L is saying basically, which I agree with, that no matter what the Repubs do the press and the Dems are going to paint them as evil water poisioning, old people killing, child starving SOBs so lets go for the touchdown and to hell with the first down because we don't have time to pussy foot around, we have a country to save. And of course David is right, just look what has been said since the release of the House Budget.
Myself and others have been upset with the Repub Leadership because they have continued to vote for the CRs without including language that defunds HCR and removes the automatic funding language which involves 105 billion every year just for implementation of the law.
Dec '10
Re: Limbaugh v. Robinson; a Point of Clarification Please
Two things, Dave:
1] The current CR does NOT have the language for defunding the stealth Obamacare funding, but does include other defunding, such as NPR and PP.
2] For strategic purposes that I find obscure, the raising of the Debt Ceiling, next to come, is perhaps more fertile ground for the defunding of Obamacare.
Strategy, in my opinion, should include every possible effort to let youngsters know that this fight is about them, not the "old, white, male" demographic publically associated with the Tea Party. Forty cents on every dollar we are spending is being borrowed and to be paid by the youngsters, allowing them to graduate into debtor's prison. The old white males will be long gone when these bills come due.
I think the David L. position, as fired by an activated young demographic, might win the war. I don't think that the Peter R. position will win, either in the current battle, or in the war. I dub the careful, studied path the "Road To Kloppenberg".