GOP: Time to get things undone

Michelle Malkin's picture

President Obama thinks he knows what the primary objective of Republicans in Washington should be: to “get things done.”

Bashing Rush Limbaugh last week, Obama urged GOP lawmakers to ignore the voices of obstructionism and sign on to his behemoth stimulus package: “We shouldn’t let partisan politics derail what are very important things that need to get done.”

Meeting with GOP leaders on Tuesday, Obama repeated his entreaty: “I don’t expect 100 percent agreement from my Republican colleagues, but I do hope that we can all put politics aside and do the American people’s business right now.”

Since when did it become the Republican Party’s top priority to “get things done”? It was as annoying a campaign platitude when John McCain adopted it as it is now coming from Obama’s lips.

History has shown us that “Get Things Done” is mindless liberal code for passing ineffective legislation and expanding government for government’s sake. “Reaching across the political aisle” and “putting politics aside” always entail selling out the right and putting conservative principles aside.

How about preventing the damage done by Democratic meddlers trying to get their “things done”? How about getting more things undone?

For the past year, I’ve chronicled the inevitable lard-up of bipartisan bailouts and stimulus boondoggles — and the predictable Chicken Little dance in Washington when these massive emergency “fixes” have fallen short.

Contrary to the belief that Obama is America’s Lightworker who can defy political gravity, H.R. 1, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, guarantees more of the same old borrow-spend-panic-repeat cycle that got us into our current mess in the first place.

This is not an investment in America’s future. It’s an unprecedented mortgaging of America’s future — which is why the bill is forever known in my book as the Generational Theft Act of 2009.

The ruckus over Nancy Pelosi’s contraception funding (which still may sneak its way into the bill) is the tip of the iceberg.

Despite Obama’s vow to prevent earmarks from bogging down the bill, the package is stuffed with goodies for every special interest group from left-wing fraudsters ACORN and other subprime shakedown activists ($4 billion for “neighborhood stabilization”) to Hollywood ($246 million in new targeted tax breaks) to universal health care promotion ($600 million) to dubious “green job” projects ($24 billion). More fundamentally, there is no there there.

On Monday night, the Congressional Budget Office sent out a full analysis of the House stimulus bill. The new report elaborates on what last week’s partial analysis disseminated by Republican Hill sources illuminated: The vaunted infrastructure spending will take years and years and years to kick in. Just 7 percent of the total $800 billion-plus stimulus funding would enter the economy by the end of this year.

The nonpartisan CBO tells eternal truths about government spending in the past, present and future:

“Frequently in the past, in all types of federal programs, a noticeable lag has occurred between sharp increases in budget authority and the resulting increases in outlays. Based on such experiences, CBO expects that federal agencies, along with states and other recipients of that funding, would find it difficult to properly manage and oversee a rapid expansion of existing programs so as to expend the added funds as quickly as they expend the resources provided for their ongoing programs. ...

“Brand-new programs pose additional challenges. Developing procedures and criteria, issuing the necessary regulations, and reviewing plans and proposals would make distributing money quickly even more difficult — as can be seen, for example, in the lack of any disbursements to date under the loan programs established for automakers last summer to invest in producing energy-efficient vehicles. Throughout the federal government, spending for new programs has frequently been slower than expected and rarely been faster.”

Translation: They can’t spend the stimulus money fast enough to actually stimulate anything other than campaign coffers, media buzz and bureaucratic paperwork.

Obama asserted that there is no disagreement on the need to Do Something. He’s wrong. Two hundred economists spoke up this week in an open letter disseminated by the libertarian Cato Institute: “More government spending by Hoover and Roosevelt did not pull the United States economy out of the Great Depression in the 1930s,” they said. “More government spending did not solve Japan’s ‘lost decade’ in the 1990s. As such, it is a triumph of hope over experience to believe that more government spending will help the U.S. today.”

And that must be the message of gimlet-eyed fiscal conservatives in Washington who should wear the “obstructionist” badge proudly. Obstructionism in the name of fiscal sanity is no vice. Panicked profligacy in the name of blind bipartisanship is no virtue.

[Michelle Malkin is author of “Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild.” Her email address is malkinblog@gmail.com.] COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

login to post comments | Michelle Malkin's blog

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Spear Road Guy's picture
Submitted by Spear Road Guy on Thu, 01/29/2009 - 11:00pm.

Nancy's solution for welfare is keeping those under-class citizens from birthing young ones.

Did the Obama election come with a warranty?

Vote Republican


Submitted by skyspy on Fri, 01/30/2009 - 7:58am.

It might be cheaper than paying for all of the welfare and food stamps. Does it come with instructions? How can we force them to take it?

Submitted by ptcmom678 on Fri, 01/30/2009 - 10:56am.

tend to originate with one teen mother not taking advantage of birth control, not knowing where to get it, or not being really aware of it. She has a kid, same thing happens to that kid because no one's talking about contraception and/or sex in school OR at home, and before you know it, there's three generations on welfare, food stamps, etc. Just ask some of the Grady staff.

mapleleaf's picture
Submitted by mapleleaf on Fri, 01/30/2009 - 7:41am.

Are you gonna volunteer to financially help out the single mother in California who had six young children and has just now added eight more to her brood in one fell swoop?

If not, are you going to let them starve?

Is that what being a Republican means to you? (Heartless and brainless, both.)


Submitted by skyspy on Fri, 01/30/2009 - 12:05am.

That careless idiot in CA is a single mom. Living with her parents and already has 6 kids. She had invetro. according to ABC news.

She did it on purpose. Who knows why. Maybe she wanted the attention. I wouldn't give her a dime. They had medical experts questioning kaiser and why they let this happen. The kids will likely have many health problems.

She asked for trouble and she got it. She was probably hoping for all of the free stuff people have given other people who did the same thing.

The crazy things people do to make their lives difficult.

JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 9:10am.

She came to Kaiser twelve weeks pregnant. Six kids already and bankrupt on welfare? What kind of guidelines makes her a viable candidate for fertility treatments and who paid for them?

The fertility clinic should be forced to support them.


Submitted by pomsmom on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 1:11pm.

Were all 14 of these children concieved this way? Somebody is arrogant enough to keep playing God. This sounds like someone is making a game out of something as tragic as not being able to have a baby. How stupid can you get. How much money and how many children does this doctor have? Since it is a given that someone other than the parents will have to support these precious babies they should be taken away from their parent(s). Give them to people who can make them a better home. This is one of the reasons I think school tax for someone as old as I am should not be required. I raised my children my grandchildren are also grown. I have paid my fair share of school tax over the years.

Submitted by gardner on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 4:48pm.

Pomsmom you should go to the following link and find out if you already haven't about the homestead exemption for your age. If I could at 38 I would already have the school taxes exempt from my taxes. I don't have any children and don't plan on having any but I have to pay school taxes for all of them that choose to have them. I'm on my soap box but that is one subject I feel strong about. People that live in apartments and rent don't even have to pay those taxes but us homeowners do. That is were you see alot of kids living at is those types of areas.

http://www.etax.dor.ga.gov/ptd/county/index.aspx

suggarfoot's picture
Submitted by suggarfoot on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 5:33pm.

I agree with both of you. We have paid our share of taxes, and then some.

The problem is our money is squandered and now some on the school board, according to their email trees, want seniors to keep on paying.

No matter how much we pay, some will never get it right.


Git Real's picture
Submitted by Git Real on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 5:31pm.

People that live in apartments and rent don't even have to pay those taxes but us homeowners do.

Rest assured the property owner of the apartments is assessed annually for school taxes. Now don't think for a minute that those taxes aren't built into the cost of their tenants montly rent. Without a doubt the apartment dwellers do indeed pay school taxes. The question though is whether they pay enough to offset the heavy saturation of kids that go into our schools. This may or may not even be an issue at all as many, many apartment dwellers pay their built-in taxes without even having children themselves.

With that said....Let's keep future apartment projects out of our area. Smiling


suggarfoot's picture
Submitted by suggarfoot on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 5:35pm.

there is a grandmother in Southfork, in Tyrone, putting 4 or 5 grandkids on the buss there. Now that just isn't fare.


Git Real's picture
Submitted by Git Real on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 6:14pm.

YIKES! Shocked


JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 2:48pm.

The Daily News is reporting friends who say she is not on welfare.

Doctors face inquest

I hope that's true.


Submitted by dollaradayandno... on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 1:53pm.

I thought all kids were miracles!
People like you generally say they are when it comes time for an abortion!

How does one "play" God? (I personally can't do miracles)

Hate that you might have to pay some school tax for these 14. Maybe we could just select the ones we don't want to educate?

I didn't like paying school tax for your children and grandchildren either---maybe I didn't have any?

Goodness, if she hadn't had 14 we would be fourteen short wouldn't we?

Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 9:18am.

this lady can do it again and have another brood if she so desires because it is "her" choice.
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.


diva's picture
Submitted by diva on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 8:52am.

Spear buddy: Let's put your words on the lab table and disect them like a frog in biology class:

"Nancy's solution for welfare is keeping those under-class citizens from birthing young ones.

Did the Obama election come with a warranty?"

So, Spear road and Skyspy, the suggestion here is making contraception available to underprivileged folks is a BAD idea, and based on that idea, we should be able to un-inaugurate President Obama and receive the McCain and "Me and my daughter both done been knocked up before we was married" Palin ticket that SHOULD have won the 08 election.

Again, Spear Road, you are suggesting that the woman who has a "just say no even though I didn't" approach to sex outside of marriage, along with John McCain would have the better solution to contraception; a solution that obviously would not, based on your words, include accessible contraception.

Okay, "Vote Republican so we can have another fun 8 years," can you explain your logic to us?

Malkin at her wildest and craziest


Submitted by skyspy on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 9:42am.

I think contraception is much cheaper than food stamps and welfare.

I think we need to have a policy that forces these people to be surgically sterilized before they got even one dime of welfare. Too many people have learned that they get a bigger check if they have more kids. It would be cheaper to sterilize them than to pay for more kids. Sterilize both the mother and the father if you can find him.

Welfare is just a legal way to steal. We are throwing good money after bad.

Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 10:09am.

you mean there would no longer be any anchor babies!

Oh well, Speaker Pelosi has more or less said that children are a drag on the economy.
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.


Submitted by skyspy on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 11:25am.

The real message is stop having them if you can't pay for them!

Submitted by gardner on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 11:30am.

Why is that people that have no kids have to pay property taxes to the schools?

Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 3:03pm.

that's why! Smiling
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.


carbonunit52's picture
Submitted by carbonunit52 on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 5:29pm.

you were a kid once, that's another why.

"I can't wait until tomorrow, because I become more lovable every day."


Git Real's picture
Submitted by Git Real on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 5:33pm.

I felt that one and it wasn't even aimed at me. LOL!


diva's picture
Submitted by diva on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 6:05pm.

All life, from conception, is sacred.

Embryos should be respected as human life.

People should not make careless decisions with sexual or, in this case, asexual reproductive decisions.

Citizens of free countries are free to make unwise decisions.

To avoid socialistic trends, we should not have to shoulder the burden of supporting innocent lives created by poor decisions of free people; lives which should be held as sacred at the same time.

Have a headache yet?


Git Real's picture
Submitted by Git Real on Sat, 01/31/2009 - 6:20pm.

I merely complimented Carbon on his comeback.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.