Contrasting the visions of our Founders and today’s Progressives, Matthew Kuchem at The Heritage Foundation writes:
Americans…must conclude with Lincoln that the Constitution was designed to uphold the principles of the Declaration. Securing the rights affirmed in the Declaration—life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness—requires limited self-government. An unrestricted government—such Britain’s harsh rule over the American colonies—endangers rights. Hence, the first Americans designed the Constitution to restrict the powers of the government and reserve all unspecified powers to the states and the people. Only when the government’s role is limited and prevented from exercising total control can self-government flourish. Government ought to act vigorously, but only within a set scope.
Kuchem notes that as part of their Pledge to America, the GOP “will require all bills to cite specific constitutional authority. One can only hope and pray this comes to pass, though the Pledge has been criticized by both the Left and the Right.
Based on a recent poll it conducted with NBC News, the Wall Street Journal reports that “the tea party has emerged as a potent force in American politics and a center of gravity within the Republican Party, with a large majority of Republicans showing an affinity for the movement that has repeatedly bucked the GOP leadership this year.”
Not only are tea-party fans “ticked-off people,” as pollster Bill McInturff put it, he also claims that — if the election replaces Democrat control of Congress with conservative-Republican control — “the survey shows ‘enormous amounts about how limited the interest is going to be in those new majorities to try to seek negotiation with the president or the Democratic leadership‘ ” [my emphasis]. And, just how interested were President Obama, Sen. Reid or Rep. Pelosi in “negotiating” with the Republicans since January 2009?
When a guy who’s the former chairman of the President’s Council of Economic Advisors, and currently dean of Columbia University Business School, says the U.S. economy is going down the toilet, we should probably listen to him.
R. Glenn Hubbard, the highly credentialed guy, is the one who says “America is very close to a destructive tipping point,” in a new book he’s co-written with Peter Navarro that’s titled Seeds of Destruction: Why the Path to Economic Ruin Runs Through Washington, and How to Reclaim American Prosperity [find on Amazon].
Hubbard makes good points in a brief video interview attached to this article.
Hubbard and Navarro’s prediction follows on those of Nouriel Roubini, who correctly predicted the mortgage meltdown and now says the U.S. “has run out of bullets” with which to battle a double-dip recession or even a depression. There’s been a lot of pooh-poohing of Roubini, but Hubbard hardly qualifies as another “Doctor Doom.”
With respected government/academic voices like Hubbard’s joining Roubini’s and Peter Schiff’s, how can House Minority Leader John Boehner even consider the reimposition of earmarks in Congressional legislation? Is Boehner as out of touch with fiscal reality as Nancy Pelosi?
If you’re old enough to remember Ronald Reagan’s popular “Morning in America” theme, and the related TV ad that played during his 1984 re-election campaign, you’ll find the new “Mourning in America” takeoff particularly poignant. The new ad uses many of the same images as the original, but makes a completely different point: that four years of a Democrat Congress, and two years of Obamanation, have devastated our country.
1984: “Morning in America”:
2010: “Mourning in America”:
TechCrunch’s Michael Arrington reports on a recent meeting in San Francisco of so-called “super angel” investors, friends of his who “together account for nearly 100% of early stage startup deals in Silicon Valley.” In his post about the meeting, So A Blogger Walks Into A Bar…, Arrington recounts what sources told him about the meeting. Apparently, it included discussion of unlawful practices such as “collusion and price-fixing” to drive down valuations of new startups and keep out other investors.
Arrington points out, “This isn’t minor league stuff. We’re talking about federal crimes and civil prosecutions if in fact that’s what they’re doing. I had a quick call with an attorney this morning, and he confirmed that these types of meetings are exactly what these laws were designed to prevent.”
Like other conservatives, I’m all for innovation, small-biz incubation and financial risk-taking in search of great rewards. But there needs to be a level playing field. The type of behavior Arrington describes stinks as badly as the kind of Washington deal-cutting that spawned the Tea Party phenomenon.