I liked Ike

I was thinking that recently. A president who wasn't on tv 24/7 haranguing us with communist stupidity. A president who understood the constitutional limits on his office. A president who didn't hate Christians. A president who didn't stick his nose into every area of Americans' lives.

So this is just a part of a recent article by Al Martin [you'll have to google him... too tired to do tutorials today]...

But Martin's observations are precisely why those who understand the goofiness going on in D.C. - ARE NOT cringing in a corner, trembling with fear of a "govt shutdown".

Shut it down - the sooner the better.

*******************************************

partial article:

September 30 is the end of the fiscal year – and of course we went through the same thing last September as well as the September before. The result was the reduction in budget deficits. Because spending bills can’t get authorized. This has actually been helpful in terms of keeping a lid on budget deficits.

What is happening then is a non-purposed redux of the Eisenhower years, except in the Eisenhower years it was done on purpose whereas now it's being done by circumstance.

This was the Eisenhower Hands Off Approach since Eisenhower spent most of his presidency on the golf course. In Obama's case, what helps a Hands Off approach is when you can't pass a budget and budget authority lapses after a certain date -- in this case September 30, then budget authority lapses, Congress can not vote in any new spending bills.

The Eisenhower Hands Off Approach was largely responsible for the economic growth in the mid-1950s and this was something that was done by design. Now we are having a redux in that hands off approach except it is not being done by design but by circumstance -- the circumstance being the inability of Congress to pass a coherent budget.

This is a good thing but it would not have been a good thing in the Eisenhower years, but now with a $1.6 trillion annual budget deficit, it is a good thing because it prevents government from doing further harm. That's what has changed between the Eisenhower years and now.

Now anything that prevents government from spending, since this government has demonstrated it can no longer be a positive force and it can no longer be useful and it can no longer proffer useful stimulative fiscal policy, then you have to resort to Plan B which is at least to prevent government from being part of the problem by increasing budget deficits.

Now the Republicans have to continue to pander to their constituency, both above and below, as they say in politics. The feet on the ground as the old campaigners say – "putting bums in the voting booth" as illustrated in the classic film "The Great McGinty" is one thing.

However on top of that, the Republicans still have to pander to business and industry because that's where their personal money comes from once they leave office.

For the rest of this FREE SAMPLE COLUMN by Independent Geo-Political, Economic & Market Analyst Al Martin, please click here -- Al Martin Raw

* AL MARTIN, author of "The Conspirators: Secrets of an Iran Contra Insider," is an Independent Political-Economic Analyst with 25 years of experience as a trader on NYMEX, CME, CBOT and CFTC. He is also currently trading the commodity futures market day and night and has a teleconferencing service to facilitate transactions in the markets. This is a service for independent experienced traders.

For more details on commodity futures trading recommendations and more FREE sample columns, take a look at Al Martin's website "Insider Intelligence" Insider Intelligence for weekly exclusive commodity futures trading recommendations.

No votes yet

Admin edit - vulgar post

Conservatives love boys in bathroom stalls

Just when you think that Bushblows couldn't possibly come up with another pertinent response--well, let me just say that one normally has to go to a trailer park to find men of such intellect!

Republican Party Platform of 1956
August 20, 1956

Read more at the American Presidency Project: Republican Party Platforms: Republican Party Platform of 1956 http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=25838#ixzz2gFnY178u

"We are proud of and shall continue our far-reaching and sound advances in matters of basic human needs—expansion of social security—broadened coverage in unemployment insurance —improved housing—and better health protection for all our people. We are determined that our government remain warmly responsive to the urgent social and economic problems of our people."

"The record of performance of the Republican Administration on behalf of our working men and women goes still further. The Federal minimum wage has been raised for more than 2 million workers. Social Security has been extended to an additional 10 million workers and the benefits raised for 6 1/2 million. The protection of unemployment insurance has been brought to 4 million additional workers. There have been increased workmen's compensation benefits for longshoremen and harbor workers, increased retirement benefits for railroad employees, and wage increases and improved welfare and pension plans for federal employees.
In addition, the Eisenhower Administration has enforced more vigorously and effectively than ever before, the laws which protect the working standards of our people.
Workers have benefited by the progress which has been made in carrying out the programs and principles set forth in the 1952 Republican platform. All workers have gained and unions have grown in strength and responsibility, and have increased their membership by 2 millions.
Furthermore, the process of free collective bargaining has been strengthened by the insistence of this Administration that labor and management settle their differences at the bargaining table without the intervention of the Government. This policy has brought to our country an unprecedented period of labor-management peace and understanding.
We applaud the effective, unhindered, collective bargaining which brought an early end to the 1956 steel strike, in contrast to the six months' upheaval, Presidential seizure of the steel industry and ultimate Supreme Court intervention under the last Democrat Administration.
The Eisenhower Administration will continue to fight for dynamic and progressive programs which, among other things, will:
Stimulate improved job safety of our workers, through assistance to the States, employees and employers;
Continue and further perfect its programs of assistance to the millions of workers with special employment problems, such as older workers, handicapped workers, members of minority groups, and migratory workers;
Strengthen and improve the Federal-State Employment Service and improve the effectiveness of the unemployment insurance system;
Protect by law, the assets of employee welfare and benefit plans so that workers who are the beneficiaries can be assured of their rightful benefits;
Assure equal pay for equal work regardless of Sex;
Clarify and strengthen the eight-hour laws for the benefit of workers who are subject to federal wage standards on Federal and Federally-assisted construction, and maintain and continue the vigorous administration of the Federal prevailing minimum wage law for public supply contracts;
Extend the protection of the Federal minimum wage laws to as many more workers as is possible and practicable;
Continue to fight for the elimination of discrimination in employment because of race, creed, color, national origin, ancestry or sex;
Provide assistance to improve the economic conditions of areas faced with persistent and substantial unemployment;
Revise and improve the Taft-Hartley Act so as to protect more effectively the rights of labor unions, management, the individual worker, and the public. The protection of the right of workers to organize into unions and to bargain collectively is the firm and permanent policy of the Eisenhower Administration. In 1954, 1955 and again in 1956, President Eisenhower recommended constructive amendments to this Act. The Democrats in Congress have consistently blocked these needed changes by parliamentary maneuvers. The Republican Party pledges itself to overhaul and improve the Taft-Hartley Act along the lines of these recommendations."

Read more at the American Presidency Project: Republican Party Platforms: Republican Party Platform of 1956 http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=25838#ixzz2gFpGbo7r

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

This has become a kind of conventional wisdom: that the Republican Party has gone so far right Reagan himself wouldn't fit in.

But, I'm here tonight to call bullsh*t on that. Ronald Reagan was an anti-government, union-busting, race-baiting, anti-abortion, anti-gay, anti-intellectual who cut rich people/s taxes in half, had an incurable case for the military-industrial complex, and said Medicare was socialism that would destroy our freedom. Sounds to me like he would fit in just fine. 

Now...I know over at Fox News right now, they're already putting out a fatwa on me. For committing the cardinal sin of taking in vain the sacred name of Ronald Reagan. It's a name like Jesus Christ. You can say it, but only in a good way. Like, "Jesus Christ, bless this chili dog." 

Not like, "Jesus Christ, look at the ass on Rihanna!" 

But, what they cannot contest is that even though Reagan did a few things today's GOP would not like, he wrote the playbook for them on every issue of consequence. Sure, he raised taxes a few times. But, when you look at where he started with taxes and where he ended, this is where our income inequality problems began. He invented "voodoo economics." 

On race, his ideas couldn't have been more Tea Party if he shouted them from a Rascal scooter. He ran on states' rights. He invented the notion that black people get all the breaks...constantly telling the story of the "Chicago Woman"--wink, wink--who has "80 names, 30 addresses, 12 Social Security cards, and her tax-free cash income is over $150,000." 

And that woman today is RuPaul. 

Actually, that woman never existed. Reagan just made sh*t up. Something else he pioneered for his party of today. 

He described the New Deal as fascism, Medicaid recipients as "waiting for handouts," unemployment insurance as "prepaid vacation for free-loaders.  And once said, "A tree's a tree. How many more do you need to look at?" 

He was the original, official pitchman for bat-sh*t. When they hold up signs that say "No Socialized Medicine," where do you think they got it from? We got it from you, Dad, we got it from you. [slide of Reagan record album] 

RECORDING OF RONALD REAGAN: "If you don't do this and I don't do it, one of these days, you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it once was like in America when men were free." 

Drama queen much? Worst of all, Reagan inspired a whole generation of people who hate government, to get into government. Both sides really should stop pretending he was something other than the man most responsible for our decline. And I do mean both sides. 

You know, I get why Republicans worship Reagan. They're the religious party. Worship is in their DNA. They can't help it. They love him beyond logic. Last year, they tried to elect his haircut. [slides of Reagan and Mitt Romney]  

They want him on a stamp so they can lick his backside. 

But, why are Democrats conceding the argument on Reagan? Obama talks about him like he's a "brother from another mother." "He changed the trajectory of America." Yes, but not for the better.

When you mainstream Reagan, the far right becomes the new middle. He wasn't a friend to all Americans. He was "Patient Zero" for everything you're fighting against now. He was the original "teabagger." 

Stop agreeing he was a saint, especially when his two miracles were turning water into polluted water, and walking on the poor.

For the low information WSPD listener.
George H. W. Bush and "Voodoo Economics"
http://capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/bruce-bartlett/2083/george-h-w-bush...

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

I liked Ike also. What I didn't like about Ike is that he abandoned the Democratic Party just for the purpose of running for President. Why did he do that, because the Democrats would have never nominated him because they knew about his short comings.

Comment viewing options

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