Comments on: If Powell Is Right, Gop Will Have To Proceed Without Me

By: Patrick

Patrick — Fri, 22 May 2009 12:39:26 +0000

You grazed on what I believe to be the central issue that Republicans face - credibility.

For years we were told that the GOP is the party of Fiscal Responsibility, Rule of Law, Constitutional Inviolability, Personal Responsibility, Good Governance and Principles over Personality.

The 8 years of the Bush administration completely wrecked all that.

Besides the spending spree you noted, the Rule of Law was cast aside when convenient (Scooter Libby, Torture, et. al.), the Constitution was ignored when convenient (spying, torture, et. al.), Personal Responsibility was abandoned in favor of Constitutional initiatives (aimed at denying American citizens their full measure of citizenship, Terri Shiavo, personal hypocrisy, et. al.), Good Governance was abandoned in favor of hyper-partisanship and ineptitude (Donald Rumsfeld, Doug Feith, etc., etc.) and the Cult of Personality surrounding George Bush allowed many to embrace all of the above in direct violation of what they claim to adhere to.

The GOP lacks credibility on all these issues because their words do no align with their proven actions.

And frankly, I don't know how the GOP can regain the credibility they once had. Being so far out of power, they lack the ability to actually prove that they can act on the principles they claim to want to return to.

Talk is cheap, and unfortunately, the ability to act is severely compromised by just how far the GOP has fallen in recent years.

It's a nasty mess, and one not easily solved. What is clear is that just being the so-called "Party of No" isn't going to get it done.

The GOP has to engage the DEMs and do their utmost to try and shape policy, influence direction and moderate the actions of the President and Congress - thereby proving that they walk the walk.

But the damage is done and it's going to be a long road back, and until the GOP can prove that they will actually act upon Conservative Principles again, the credibility just isn't there.

Furthermore, the Old Guard of Cheney, Gingrich, and folks like Limbaugh, Kristol and Hannity are doing their utmost to insure that credibility gap stays exactly where it is.

By: Jeffryw

Jeffryw — Tue, 19 May 2009 21:03:33 +0000

Sinz. The interstate highway was a military project so as that falls under the realm of what government is meant to do I am not upset at all about it. As to the dams, I would have to see if it could be done privately. Can't comment more than that on it as I know very little about it.

I DO know that all the make-work projects did NOT get us out of the Depression (see economic stats in 1938 for reference) but rather WW2==despite what liberals would like to believe so.

I also know that there are few true libertarians. That government does provide vital unique services. But I prefer to first make sure the money I already give an institution is spent wisely and efficiently before digging into my pockets for yet MORE tribute because those in charge of my taxes are spendthrifts.

You seem to see your government as efficient. Are you saying we should pay MORE in taxes??

By: sinz54

sinz54 — Tue, 19 May 2009 13:43:25 +0000

Jeffreyw: Are you sorry that the Federal Government built the Interstate Highway System? Or Boulder Dam?

Measured in today's inflated dollars, these projects cost trillions of Federal dollars.

Would you have preferred that they not be built, if the only way to have built them was with Federal money?

There are services worth paying for. We pay taxes to support highways, bridges, and the air traffic control system. We pay for the National Weather Service, the National Institutes of Health, the Center for Disease Control.

Unless you take the Ayn Randian position that the only things a government should do are cops, courts, and military.

In which case you are not a conservative.

By: sinz54

sinz54 — Tue, 19 May 2009 13:28:21 +0000

Franco claims: "the majority doesn't PAY taxes."

That is FALSE.

Virtually everybody who works for a living has to pay Social Security payroll tax. And despite what liberals may say, it really is a tax, not a "contribution." Some $200 billion of SS revenue is diverted each year to be used as general revenues for the usual Federal expenses.

Beyond that, some 60% of American workers--a clear majority--pay income tax each year.

By: ChristianMiller

ChristianMiller — Mon, 18 May 2009 13:21:46 +0000

Jeffryw ,

Powell certainly wants a free lunch from Democrats.

If he voted for Obama and is calling himself a Republican it is obvious he just needs love and attention.

By: Jeffryw

Jeffryw — Mon, 18 May 2009 11:22:20 +0000

Franco, maybe Powell should say: The majortiy of Americans want a FREE LUNCH”! That would be more apropos.

By: ChristianMiller

ChristianMiller — Mon, 18 May 2009 11:16:24 +0000

kroner "Franco, the polls you're asking for are plentiful. They are our elections. If a majority decided that it was best to severely reduce or abolish taxes, then representatives who supported those policies would be elected."

First, the majority doesn't PAY taxes. If people are paying zero in taxes and they, as Colin Powell asserts, want to pay taxes, then why aren't they doing it? So a large part of the "majority" that elected Obama want taxes raised on other people, therefore, they themselves don't wish to pay more taxes, right?

Powell could have said " the majority of Americans want other Americans to pay higher taxes" That statement might be safe to say is inherently true and could be backed-up by polls and even this election. But that is not what he said is it?

Conflating those who already don't pay taxes with those who do and then saying they all want to pay taxes is misleading. If Powell is as smart as his resume one would have to believe he phrased this statement deliberately to mislead. You cite the election as proof that Americans have accepted higher taxes even as Obama campaigned on not raising one dime from 95%!

And few if any other Democrats campaigned on raising taxes. You are flat-out wrong.

By: Jeffryw

Jeffryw — Mon, 18 May 2009 09:13:52 +0000

Kroner..."they have to accept their fair share of the burden as determined by the law."

I see that phrase "fair share" tossed around a lot. The stat that Schaeffer ciites (granted just one study) shows that people felt that they were paying more than their fair share before 2003. Now they seem more content. So maybe we are at that equilibrium at the moment. If Obama starts to raise them again we may see dissatisfaction re-emerge.

As to taxes in general. I think people object more to paying taxes that are WASTED rather than taxes per se.

By: kroner

kroner — Mon, 18 May 2009 05:14:00 +0000

Franco, the polls you’re asking for are plentiful. They are our elections. If a majority decided that it was best to severely reduce or abolish taxes, then representatives who supported those policies would be elected. That hasn’t happened recently at least on any sort of national scale.You’re right that people don’t want to volunteer more taxes individually. That would represent a large loss for them, for marginal gain, since their donation would be spread among the services provided to an entire nation of 300 million people. But the majority of people do recognize that it’s in their interest for the collective population to pay taxes, and that in order for that to happen they have to accept their fair share of the burden as determined by the law. After all, the majority collectively decides the the law through our representative democracy.

By: ChristianMiller

ChristianMiller — Sun, 17 May 2009 11:26:33 +0000

ottovbvs,

You need rube lessons. Obviously your education has served to cover up the truth rather than reveal it. So here are some facts and logic from a simple mind, one that is clearer than the complex web of falsehoods clouding your brain under the guise of education.

"Americans do want to pay taxes for services"

This statement is false. No one prevents Americans from paying taxes. Most Americans don't pay taxes, and of those who do, none volunteer to give the US Government extra money, therefore the statement is false.

This stands the issue on its head and then tries to criticize the newly elevated feet. Americans don't send the government money and then say, "please give me some service for that". The government takes taxpayer's money as a requirement for services that have already been decided and being rendered.

It would make more sense to say, "Americans want services for their tax dollars", but that puts the onus on the government, and I suppose Powell doesn't like that position, it doesn't advance his, or his friend and race-mate Obama's agenda.

Colin Powell whatever-the-hell-his-color-is and however brilliant his resume, cannot speak for Americans in this way. Is he citing a poll? Of what, taxpayers who are Americans or just "Americans". Is he trying to say "the majority of Americans"? But he didn't say that, did he? The statement is untrue.

But, even if there were some poll, and there was a specific question asking if the taxpayer was willing to pay more taxes for more (unnamed) services and the majority of taxpayers agreed, it still would not warrant the kind of overstatement Powell made.

Colin Powell said, "Americans are looking for more government in their life, not less."

The statement is false. There is no empirical evidence to back up this blanket statement.