We offered, you refused

Dear Repub­li­cans and/​or conservatives,

I don’t know how to break this to you, since you obvi­ously haven’t fig­ured it out your­selves yet, but it’s start­ing to become a prob­lem. So here it goes.

You lost.

Last Novem­ber, the Amer­i­can peo­ple took a good hard look at where your ideas and poli­cies have taken us, and decided, as they say in show­biz, “to go a dif­fer­ent way.” It’s not that we didn’t under­stand your posi­tion, it’s just that, well, we’re just not that into you.

I know it hurts. I know you’re used to throw­ing your weight around and get­ting your way. But that’s just not going to hap­pen any­more. Democ­rats, lib­er­als and other folks you’ve spent the last three decades demo­niz­ing are call­ing the shots now. It’s over.

It didn’t have to be like this. Pres­i­dent Obama (gee, I just love say­ing that) and the rest of the Demo­c­ra­tic lead­er­ship tried to reach across the aisle. They asked for your input into how we should go about fix­ing the mess you put us in. We tried, so very hard, to be not bipar­ti­san, but post–par­ti­san. We wanted your help.

What we got instead was a bunch of petu­lant prima don­nas stomp­ing their feet, hold­ing their breath and shout­ing “NO!” at the top of their lungs at any­thing and every­thing. In the great­est cri­sis most Amer­i­cans have seen in their life­times, Repub­li­cans have opted to act like three-​year-​olds. Well, that’s your call.

But here’s how it’s going to go down. We’re going to fix this coun­try with or with­out you. We’re going to do what’s nec­es­sary, even if it’s not pop­u­lar. We’re going to raise taxes to pay for nec­es­sary infra­struc­ture. We’re going to spend tax­payer money to cre­ate jobs. We’re going to nego­ti­ate with other coun­tries rather than just wav­ing bombs at them. And we’re going to see if just maybe you cre­ate fewer ter­ror­ists by build­ing schools than by blow­ing them up.

And as we do this, you will have no input and no choice. This is entirely your own doing. We asked for your input, and the only thing you offered was the same tired and thor­oughly dis­cred­ited ideas that got us into this mess in the first place. Let me be very clear. Neo­con ide­ol­ogy, of pros­per­ity through tax cuts for the rich and peace through bel­liger­ent nation­al­ism, is has been proven just as wrong as the flat Earth the­ory. We don’t believe the sun revolves around the Earth, and we don’t believe in Reaganomics. The extreme ver­sion of con­ser­vatism espoused by the Repub­li­can party has been proven to be wrong. It sim­ply doesn’t work. So we’re not going to do that anymore.

And as long as that’s all you’re will­ing to bring to the table, you will remain in exile, ignored and irrel­e­vant. If we have to, we’ll start forc­ing you to actu­ally fil­i­buster the bills you want to force to 60 votes and show the Amer­i­cans you sup­pos­edly rep­re­sent how you’re try­ing to hurt them for your own polit­i­cal gain. It’s sad, but it’s your own deci­sion. When you’re will­ing to act like adults and have a seri­ous dis­cus­sion about our seri­ous prob­lems, we’ll be here. But we’re not hold­ing our breath.

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

8 Responses to We offered, you refused

  1. Logan says:

    That’s f*ckin right, you tell ‘em Jeff.

  2. Josh says:

    Here here. Although I’m a bit wor­ried about this first attempt at fix­ing the econ­omy I’m well aware it’s a “we need to do some­thing right now, it ain’t great but it’s a start” move. Don’t get me started on tickle down bull­shite­nomics. I work for a com­pany that is so small it would never effect them but they still believe whole heart­edly in it. It makes me sick as they lay peo­ple off to hire engi­neers. Engi­neers which are being man­aged into uselessness.

    OK, no rant­ing from me. Well said Jeff.

  3. Gurn Blanston says:

    Wow. I was fol­low­ing a link in search of a GTD imple­men­ta­tion method for Win­Mo­bile 6 and instead I’m shot in the face with child­ish par­ti­san vit­riol. You know Jeff, there are many decaf­feinated brands that taste just as good as the real thing. –GB

  4. Jack Greene says:

    Jeff, your post is need­lessly imma­ture. I occa­sion­ally check your site for info on mobile com­put­ing issues; I have other sites I use for polit­i­cal insights.

    When exactly did Nancy Pelosi meet with the Repub­li­can lead­er­ship to com­pro­mise on any issues with the bailout of $700B+ ?

    When the Democ­rats were in the minor­ity, I recall there was con­stant crit­i­cism of Repub­li­can poli­cies. Par­ti­san pol­i­tics is the push and pull of con­trast­ing ideas. I recall that much of the lib­eral crit­i­cism lacked basic civil­ity, i.e., Bush=Liar; Bush=Hitler; Gen­eral BetrayUs

    –Jack

  5. Jeff says:

    Gurn, Jack, sorry y’all feel that way. I stand by what I said, though. Obama said, “It’s the respon­si­bil­ity of the major­ity to be inclu­sive, but it’s the respon­si­bil­ity of the minor­ity to be con­struc­tive.” As long as the Repub­li­cans don’t have any­thing to say but “no no no”, they’re going to be mar­gin­al­ized and ignored. Come up with some con­struc­tive ideas, and we’ll lis­ten. We’ve already tried “get gov­ern­ment out of the way and let pri­vate indus­try do every­thing for profit” and we know that doesn’t work. Come up with some­thing else.

  6. Jack Greene says:

    Jeff, the House Repub­li­cans had a plan that was not well cov­ered in the media. Using the same eco­nomic model that Pres­i­dent Obama used, the Repub­li­can plan would have cre­ated 2x as many jobs at half the cost.

    Just because you were not aware of the Repub­li­can plan does not mean they were not try­ing to be con­struc­tive; they didn’t agree with the spend­ing bill where most of the autho­rized spend­ing doesn’t even occur until 2011.

    The non-​partisan Con­gres­sional Bud­get Office (CBO) deter­mined the large spend­ing plan that passed will be a net neg­a­tive to the econ­omy. The CBO stated that only a small por­tion of this huge spend­ing bill could be con­sid­ered stim­u­lat­ing for jobs.

    Most of the spend­ing increases were for the majority’s pre­ferred social pro­grams that have a tan­gen­tial rela­tion­ship to an imme­di­ate stim­u­lus to the econ­omy and should have been con­sid­ered in the usual appro­pri­a­tion process in Con­gress rather than for an emer­gency stim­u­lus plan. — Jack

  7. Bethany says:

    Bril­liant! I think you said what all of us were think­ing so clearly! That was an awe­some way to put it! Nice going Jeff!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>