SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: longnshort who wrote (59378)2/8/2013 11:02:23 AM
From: Peter Dierks1 Recommendation  Respond to of 71588
 
Why the Sequestration Cuts Backfired on Obama
By Andrew Stiles, National Review - February 6, 2013

Obama’s proposal to delay the $1 trillion sequester with a “balanced” package of spending cuts and tax increases should come as no surprise. Since its initial conception back in August 2011 (it was Obama’s idea), the sequester has always been viewed by Democrats as a mechanism with which to exact higher taxes from Republicans. However, at this point, that strategy appears likely to fail.

From a post I wrote at the time:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D. Nev.) warned that if new tax revenue was not included in the [super]committee’s proposal, the [sequester would be enacted]. Many Democrats are outraged that the recently-passed bill included no new taxes and are insisting that the [super]committee produce a plan that does. “It’s the only way you can get a larger handle on the deficit problem,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.). Schumer said the inclusion of a trigger that involves “very, very, very deep” cuts to defense spending, was something that “brought Democrats around” in support of the final deal. Such a trigger, he said, was akin to “sharp swords hanging over the heads of both parties.”

“Hopefully they can bring both sides together to realize coming to a compromise is better than the trigger being implemented,” he said. “That’s the point.”

Sen. Ben Cardin (D., Md.), a senior member on the Senate Budget Committee, was less diplomatic. He said Democrats would have significant leverage going forward that would allow them to press for higher taxes, which he called “the number one priority,” and suffer relatively few consequences if the [sequester is enacted]. “Those of us who are for revenue I think are in a pretty strong position because we’re not too concerned, as we were with the debt ceiling, that if we don’t reach an agreement it will be devastating to our priorities,” he said.


The assumption was that, because national security is apparently less of a priority for Democrats, the GOP would ultimately cave and agree to raise taxes in order to avoid the sequester, half of which would come from the defense budget. That is why the White House was somewhat baffled during the fiscal-cliff negotiations when House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) did not come to the table with an alternative to the sequester, specifically the defense portion.

Obama ultimately got $600 billion in new revenue as part of that final deal, in the form of rate hikes on wealthy earners. Now, he’s insisting on more, and has said he will oppose any effort to replace the sequester that does not involve further tax increases. Unfortunately for him, Republicans appear willing to let the sequester take effect, and insist that any effort to raise taxes is “dead on arrival.”

nationalreview.com



To: longnshort who wrote (59378)3/20/2013 10:37:07 AM
From: Peter Dierks  Respond to of 71588
 
Republican Establishment Misdiagnoses Party's Ills
Posted 03/19/2013 06:48 PM ET

Listening to enemies' advice is seldom wise, but that seems to be what's behind a new self-dissection by the Republican Party establishment. Autopsies make for a strange cure.

We're not in the business of providing consultation to political organizations, but to the extent the GOP is the vehicle for ideas that can save this country from expanding government, some observations are in order.

Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus' new "Growth and Opportunity Project" describes itself as "a top-to-bottom tuneup" for the party.

But it smacks more of juggler Michael Davis' joke about using as a prop George Washington's ax that cut down the cherry tree. "I had to replace the handle," Davis would tell his audience. "And the blade. But it occupies the same space metaphysically."

Renowned neurosurgeon Ben Carson has been getting audiences excited as a possible candidate, but not by planning to transplant the GOP's soul. It's that he is a minority who personifies the party's Reaganite roots.

Raised by a single mother in Detroit, he rose to the top of his profession through discipline and hard work. He quotes scripture as often as he extols the free market, which suggests he can re-electrify the coalition of economic and social/moral conservatives that led Ronald Reagan to electoral victories and policy successes.

A presidential nominee such as Carson would do far more to attract nonwhites than the $10 million the Priebus report proposes spending on black and Hispanic outreach — including the insane idea of kowtowing to the NAACP and similar race-based leftist bastions.

After allegedly consulting more than 52,000 people, this 97-page autopsy recommends that the GOP "actively prepare for interviews with 'The Daily Show,' 'The Colbert Report,' MTV" and other "hip" media venues.

The idea seems to be that if Jon Stewart or David Letterman could just meet a well-briefed Sen. Marco Rubio in the flesh a few times, by 2016 they'll stop making jokes at his expense.

But Republicans will never make friends of the left-leaning media. As Reagan did, they must go over their heads to the people.

Priebus wants the party to "champion comprehensive immigration reform." But the GOP's pro-amnesty 2008 presidential candidate, Sen. John McCain, couldn't secure even a third of Latino voters — most of whom are liberal for reasons unconnected to immigration policy.

There is one area where Priebus gets it right:

"The Democrats ... spent more money than ever before attacking Gov. Romney and other Republicans. ... We strongly recommend our side actively seeks to define our opponents as early as possible in the process."

Why are liberal commentators saying kind things about the Priebus report — such as Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank's insisting that "Many of the ideas are good"?

Because the left wants the GOP, this sleeping giant, sliced up and cremated, not reawakened.

news.investors.com