The Understanding Project
  • Resources
  • Author
  • Books
  • Logic

Republicans Strike Again

7/11/2012

 
Well, this is a tough one to explain. At first glance it seems to be yet another example of Republican hypocrisy and political flip-flopping, but the Republicans do offer an interesting explanation that makes me wonder.
After running on fighting illegal immigration, Republicans now cut funding for it. They claim that Obama has shown he can’t be trusted to use the money as directed. Worried that they will have to spend yet more money in the future to fix things the right way, they have opted to save the money for now to spend later when they have a president that will do his job.

There is a good chance that they are right, but how can I tell? Could it simply be a rhetorical tactic to cover their bad behavior? They could use this same tactic to explain away anything that takes money. They could run for office, promising to beef up homeland security, and then not do it. Democrats could do the same thing on any number of issues (voting for it before voting against it, perhaps?). Might not it be better to give Obama the money, and if he misuses it, broadcast it to the world as an example of how rotten and untrustworthy he is? Sometimes it makes sense to give people enough rope to hang themselves with. Why cover for Obama’s mistakes?

Note: For those of you that still think Sarah Palin is even remotely to blame for Gabby Giffords being shot, and those who are convinced that Obama was referring to Palin with his “lipstick on a pig” comment (I wonder myself, but I’m far from convinced), “give people enough rope to hang themselves with” is a common expression. I am not endorsing hanging the president.

On the other hand, when rope (money) is scarce, and there is a chance the rope could be used to hang others as well (misused in such a way to cause harm), and the media can’t be trusted to tell the truth, I can certainly understand the reluctance to give away rope (money). In fact, if things go wrong, the Republicans could be blamed for going along with and funding Obama’s failures. It’s kind of a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don’t situation (also a common expression).

In the past I have criticized Republicans for refusing to meet with Obama on health care (they claimed it was a waste of time as Obama had already shown he was unwilling to compromise, and didn’t want to be seen having any part of it) and for refusing to sign a civility pledge (they claimed it would be used against them for simply exposing the truth). I argued that by refusing to play along, they made themselves look bad by their own actions, which are hard to explain away, whereas if they did play along, it would be Democrats that would have to make the effort to make them look bad, which is easier to defend against – at least to reasonable people. Who would you rather have on your side? Reasonable people or no people? The unreasonable people are probably lost either way. This current funding dispute appears to be a similar situation. However, signing a pledge doesn’t put taxpayer money at risk in the same way as funding border security.

When faced with tough calls like this it is best to try to be understanding.


Comments are closed.

    Author

    Hi, I'm Dan. I like chocolate, hiking, and politics.

    Archives

    November 2019
    April 2019
    February 2017
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    January 2016
    May 2013
    November 2012
    October 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    February 2012
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010

    Categories

    All
    Abortion
    Al Gore
    Anarchy
    Animals
    Ann Coulter
    Anti-Semitism
    Approval Rate
    Barack Obama
    Bias
    Bill Clinton
    Budget Deficit
    Bush Bashing
    Bush-Bashing
    Bush-bashing
    Capitalism
    Center
    Christmas
    Civility
    Code Words
    Coffee Parties
    Collectivism
    Compromise
    Conservative
    Constitution
    Court Rulings
    Culture
    Debate
    Democrats
    Dick Cheney
    Discrimination
    Donald Trump
    Drew Weston
    Economy
    Education
    Environment
    Eric Holder
    Euthanasia
    Experience
    Flag Burning
    France
    George W Bush
    Glenn Beck
    Global Warming
    Health Care
    Hillary Clinton
    Historical Narrative
    Holiday
    Homosexual
    Huffington Post
    Humor
    Hypocrisy
    Immigration
    Independent
    Insult
    Insurance
    Iraq
    Israel
    Jared Loughner
    Jimmy Buffet
    John Kerry
    John Mccain
    Jon Stewart
    Joseph Stark
    Journalism
    Judith Curry
    Julian Assange
    Koran
    Liberal
    Libya
    Marginalization
    Marketing
    Marriage
    Media
    Memes
    Mike Huckabee
    Military
    Mit Romney
    Monopoly
    National Debt
    Occupy Wall Street
    Osama Bin Laden
    Partisanship
    Political Spectrum
    Pragmatism
    Prejudice
    Privacy
    Psychology
    Rachel Maddow
    Racism
    Recession
    Religion
    Republicans
    Rights
    Rush Limbaugh
    Sarah Palin
    Sean Hannity
    Semantics
    Sex
    Sexism
    Socialism
    Sources
    State Rights
    State Secrets
    Stephen Colbert
    Suicide
    Taxes
    Tea Parties
    Term Limits
    Theory
    Tom Tancredo
    Torture
    Unions
    Van Jones
    Wikileaks

    RSS Feed

Please check out my books!

  • Resources
  • Author
  • Books
  • Logic