"The Republican Party is not really a party. It doesn’t stand for anything except re-electing itself. The neocons are only oriented to an aggressive, imperialistic foreign policy of big defense establishment and suppression of our civil liberties. That’s bad.
"The tax cons want to just cut taxes — any time, any day — regardless of the fiscal situation.That has gone to an absurd length. The social cons, social policy people — the right-to-life issue and gay marriage and all of that — that’s irrelevant to governing a democracy in a free society.
"That’s basically the heart of the Republican Party. In that mix, how can you find anything that’s going to stand for conservative economics, fiscal rectitude, free markets, sound money? It’s not there.
"The Republican Party is basically irrelevant to the economic crisis that faces the country."
He also had some harsh words for Wall Street and corporations:
"When you have Wall Street and corporate leaders who don’t care about any principle except keeping the game going and stimulating it for one more quarter so they can report better earnings and get a pop in the stock and cash in their options, the corporate leadership in America today is basically sold out. They support everything."
I don't usually agree with much that Stockman says, but this time I think he hit the nail right on its head.
That's true. The Republicans have become a revolutionary party. If they ever get control of the government in this form, it will be very bad because they clearly don't believe in norms.
ReplyDeleteHowever, Stockman has always been an iconoclast and doesn't have much credibility. Regarding the economy, he believes exactly what the current Republican Party believes. Few people alive have had as negative an effect on this country as Stockman has.
I certainly wasn't trying to say Stockman has any economic credibility (since he is one of the architects of "trickle-down") -- just that even a nincompoop like him can see the ridiculous nature of the current GOP.
ReplyDeleteI understand that. I didn't mean to suggest you were a Stockman apologist. It's just that I can't hear Stockman's name without ranting.
ReplyDeleteBTW: I love your heroes and especially that you've listed Cesar Chavez first.
Meta: none of your pages completely load for me. I believe there is a problem with the LeftyBlogs image.
I just wanted to make it clear to everyone that I don't really care for Stockman, and I didn't really think you were accusing me of that. As for Cesar Chavez, I have admired him for many years now.
DeleteBTW - I checked out your blog and I liked it a lot. I've added it to my blogroll.
Thanks, I've done the same for you. But could you help me parse your blog name? Is it "Job's Anger"? I rather like that, although I can never quite decide what I think of Job.
DeleteYes. Although I am an atheist, it is a play on the Job of the Bible. I figured if Job wasn't going to use any of his anger, then I sure could use it -- because there's a lot in this world that angers me! Also I figured it was an unusual name that no one else would have. Thanks for the link!!
Delete