Brent Nyitray
Fairlington Blade
Let the mutherfuker burn!
jnc4p
Kevin S. Willis
Michigoose
lmsinca
markinaustin
Arcanaut
novahockey
quarterback
ScottC
yellojktHi all,
We’re about an hour from debate time and I wanted to expand upon something that came up in an earlier debate. Rick Perry voiced what I thought was a dangerous line of attack on Newt. Here’s the quote: “If you cheat on your wife, you’ll cheat on your business partner, so I think that issue of fidelity is important.” It’s an interesting challenge and one worth expanding upon.
Let’s take fiscal conservatives as an example. I consider myself a fiscal conservative in both the personal and political senses of the world. We bought our house in 2005, when the real estate world seemed to have gone mad. People were getting all kinds of crazy mortgages, which really pissed me off as it meant I couldn’t afford the kind of home I hoped to have. We held to a firm rule. 10% down. 15 year fixed mortgage. It would mean sacrifices, but it made fiscal sense. I’m glad we were careful as despite our care, we had financial troubles. The place needed a good deal more work than anticipated and so we blew through our savings, I took out a $15k improvement loan, and we were still running a bit short. [I’m fiscally conservative, but also make mistakes.] We bore down, built up some minimal savings, and paid off that loan 7 years early. We’re working to pay off my wife’s student loans next year (way early after having consolidated), and I want to pay off the mortgage by the time the boys exit elementary school (that’d be about 3 – 4 years early). I don’t want to be in a position of needing a paycheck ever again. I’ll note that I’m lucky in that I’ve had a relatively secure position during the last 4 years and my wife’s freelancing has taken off.
I’m also a fiscal conservative in the political sense. For me, being a fiscal conservative means that expenditures should match income. Cutting taxes without cutting expenditures is the act of a fiscal fool. So is increasing expenditures without increasing taxes. So, Medicare Part D was reckless. Expanding Medicare to include a drug benefit? Great idea! Doing it without touching FICA rates. Terrible idea¡ If you want federal taxes to be limited to 20% of GDP, fine. Then propose a budget that meets that.
Now, shocks occur. I am horrified by the present fiscal situation, but it beats a second great depression. It flips my personal stance (short term pain for long term gain). Ironically, the opposite seems to be the case. Short term deficits and long term cuts. The alternative is Greece (or the UK, which slipped back into recession).
That’s a somewhat lengthy example. Let’s bring it to politicians. Example A would be Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Illinois). Owes child support, a condo foreclosure, and tax liens. How can anyone take such an individual seriously? I’ll also put Charlie Rangel in the same class. For all his tap dancing, the attacks on Al Gore for his mansion hit home.
I’m curious as to other analogues. Do apparent contradictions between a politician’s personal behavior and their political positions matter to you? Are there any cases of where your vote has been affected by a politician’s personal actions?
And most important of all. Would you like to grope Sen. Rand Paul? 😉
BB
Filed under: politics |
All Things in Moderation 
No groping lust here for Rand Paul.
I do hold to the notion that we can learn something about a person’s character from his/her personal life, but I also hold that I will not judge if I have not walked in another’s shoes. So I tend to judge character from public performance unless I know the pol personally.
LikeLike
Interesting questions, Paul (well, except for the Rand Paul one. He wishes!!).
I don’t know if my vote has ever been affected by personal behavior on the part of a politician; I certainly voted for Bill Clinton’s re-election, although I thought the way he handled that whole thing was reprehensible. . . but other than that I’ve been “represented” by a fairly upright group of people over the years so I really haven’t ever had to make that kind of a choice.
But how ’bout you and Senator Paul? What’s your answer to your own question??? 😉
LikeLike
Just a pinch on the cheeks! Upper ones, that is.
I lived in the UK during the Clinton impeachment. I memorably spent a summer school being kidded about American prudishness while in Austria.
I have cast a few such votes. I voted against the Democrat in the House in the first election after returning from the UK. Mainly, as I was disgusted by that press conference where all the House Dems rallied behind Clinton following the impeachment vote. I won’t get into issues back then, but felt the man should feel some censure (though I’m guessing nobody could touch what Hillary did).
My current representative (Moran) harbors some unsavory attitudes. I’ve only voted for him once since moving to DC in 2003. The candidate against him this time was an ass (thinking that one rep can control BRAC) and I correctly feared what would happen following a Republican takeover. Then again, it would have been our chance to get rid of him, so maybe I should have gone for it.
BB
LikeLike
Jim Moran is my rep too. I actually worked the phone banks for the ass that FB is referring to.
The district is overwhelmingly Democratic. D+20 i think. The locals Ds should be able to find someone better. same positions, less jerk.
LikeLike
FB
Because I agree with everything you’ve just said I think you’re genius. Seriously you make sense. As time continues on I’m losing my enthusiasm for the political debate.
Our current system of governance has become dysfunctional and both parties can share the blame.
I’ve just returned from the most stimulating lecture about energy and politics. A gentleman named John Hofmeister, a former CEO of Shell America in Houston has written a book titled “Why We Hate the Oil Companies…straight talk from an energy insider. But he’s after more than the oil companies, he’s disturbed by a lack of energy policy in our nation. He blames both parties. Richard Nixon declared in 1973 that he would lead us to energy independence by 1980. Of course seven Presidents and more than a dozen Congresses later we still have no coherent energy policy.
He blames this on several factors, the largest being that political time (when’s the next election) does not provide for energy time. What are our plans for 1-10 years..10-25 and then 25-50.
He reminds me of you FB in that just as you stated your fiscal conservatism you embrace policies that “titular” fiscal conservatives might find anathema. This man is against big government…the dozen or so cabinet level agencies that deal with energy and worse still the Congress with dozens of committees each with chairmen and members.
He also blames the “perversion of partisanship”. He blames both parties for members no longer voting their conscience and beliefs but offering blind obedience to their caucuses.
His solution however will probably irritate many of our small government posters. He thinks we need the equivalent of the Federal Reserve for Energy. An independent agency that does not answer to Congress, with long terms like the Fed members, and an array of technical energy experts. Eliminate all those cabinet level agencies..as well as all of those committees.
How can this happen. In his opinion it will happen when Americans reach the crisis which he believes is just around the corner. Blackouts, long lines at the gas pumps and people will mobilize just as they did to block SOPA and PIPA.
At any rate he has a grass roots non profit organization that is growing. It’s called Citizens for Affordable Energy. http://www.citizensforaffordableenergy.org
He is not partisan, is not an ideologue. His book has received favorable reviews from diverse publications like the conservative Washington Times as well as Newsweek and other from the librul media.
I’ll share more when I read his book. His talk tonight opened with some frightening stats from Chinese futurists. The Chinese are going to jump from 9 million bbl daily consumption to 15 million..a 40% increase in the next two years. The Chinese have already invested more than 110 billion in state owned oil companies in places like Venuzuela, Brazil, Ghana and around the world. That is oil that will not hit the world market..it’s already earmarked for China.
He points out ten energy sources and thinks the U.S. will have no problems once we get our political dysfunction under control…alas he also believes that will not happen until we hit the long gas lines and blackouts and the voters get really peoed. He is trying to get his non profit to get to 15 million so he can mount an assault like the internet providers did last week. Sorry to go on so long but it was a really stimulating lecture…lots of food for thought.
LikeLike
what’s the name of the book?
LikeLike
Its a tough call. Finding Clinton untrustworthy partially led to two Perot votes. Never trusted W either. But the reality is that politicians are human beings, so expecting flawlessness will mean eternal disappointment. Some of it comes down to hypocrasy. Here in MN the repub Senate leader stepped down for having an affair with a staffer, while promoting a constitutional (state) amendment to ‘protect the sanctity of marriage’ from same sex couples. Perhaps partners’ relative genders isn’t the biggest threat to marriage sanctity.
LikeLike
I have gotten the full TSA Grope while my boss took pictures with his cell phone. I wouldn’t wish that experience on anybody. Except for Rand Paul for being such a whiny baby about it.
LikeLike
Romney’s taxes are out.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mitt-romney-releases-tax-returns/2012/01/23/gIQAj5bUMQ_story.html
He paid 13.9% on $21M. And since he’s unemployed he pays no payroll taxes. I’d love to see some deeper diving into the dollars. The revelations so far are that he does have substantial ‘carried interest’ and he closed his Swiss bank account in 2010.
LikeLike
Questions…questions..questions..I’m full of them this morning.
An informal poll. How many believe Romney is going to satisfy his critics by releasing only 2010 and 2011?
LikeLike
I haven’t looked at them, but seeing yellojkt’s note above, how different could they really be? The details at this point likely aren’t all that different from the 14% on $21M.
LikeLike
Some of his deductions are loss carry-overs implying previous year paper losses exceeded income. That could mean that he paid much lower taxes in previous years. But all my tax knowledge comes form TurboTax. I am closer to Rick Santorum’s tax situation than Mitt Romney’s.
LikeLike
That’s a good point.
I also think this was an unforced error on his part. He should have released them the minute he filed to run, just because. Either get out ahead of the story or be destroyed by it.
LikeLike
If I had to guess, I would think Romeny won’t satiate people by releasing 2010 and 2011. Romney’s detractors gained some traction when Romney refused to provide the records and I doubt they want to just stop at this point.
I agree with NoVa that Romney should have gotten out ahead of this story. Had he done so, I think this would have been an non-story.
LikeLike
Okay, I’ve been saving this on notepad.
How does the personal behavior of candidates relate to my voting I think is the question.
Let me dig back to my first vote which was for Jimmy Carter. Nixon did this as well as the games Ford played during his short stint. I was young and saw the Democrats as not the Republicans.
I voted for Reagan the first time and after listening to his speeches, considering the 1980 hostage situation and his games, and the actions he took in warfare, I voted for Mondale(?). Mondale was not my first choice at all. My first choice was to later be found on a boat with another woman. However, I won my precinct for that guy over Mondale and over the Unions.
I know I did not vote for Bush Sr., however witrh the Iran-Contra coverup and the hearing I was again tired of Republicans. So I voted for Clinton. Some issues such as behavior with other women while married just didn’t overcome the constitutional issues the last administration presented. Weariness with the Republican Party was major. I recall Sr.’s involvement with the CIA put me off. Also, voters used to not know about the personal lives of candidates. There was a thing called virtue back in those days and this mostly involved the payment of debts. Also the behavior of Hillary was an important factor in how I looked at their marriage.
Clinton, I think, led a very controlled life in order to make it to governor and then President. (Remember that he did not inhale.) His attitudes toward women was southern and not very mature, but everything else about him was. The sexual part of his life was a mess not dealth with. This is how the Monica thing happened. This was hardly an impeachable offense. Malfeasence in office was not even a question at all. Grant did far worse things than Clinton ever did. I voted for him again.
I did not vote for GW Bush because I live in Texas and I know what he did as governor of Texas. I didn’t need him to do that to the United states.
I voted for Obama because of GOP exhaustion and also because Srah Palin was not a good choice for VP. Also because McCain turned into this character that was not reflective of the past McCain.
So I guedss the personal does not play out for me.
LikeLike