What Is Olympia Snowe Smoking?

Seriously, try to figure this one out. Olympia Snowe says she hasn't changed, the GOP has. But look at her rationale. How can she possibly say what she does below given that she's been part of a government now trillions of dollars in debt and more entrenched in the private sector than it has ever been?

Can she honestly defend this position? Can she even come close to doing that with a straight face? My God .... if so, how?  h/t TPM for the video.

"I've always been a Republican for the traditional principles that have been associated with the Republican party since I became a Republican, when I registered to vote. And that is limited government, individual opportunities, fiscal responsibility, and a strong national defense. So I think those principles have always been a part of the Republican party heritage. And I believe that I reflect those views and I haven't changed as a Republican. I think more that my party has changed."

Comments

[AMF]

"How can she possibly say what she does below given that she's been part of a government now trillions of dollars in debt and more entrenched in the private sector than it has ever been?"

That sentence displays a pretty breathtaking logical failure. Being part of a government now trillions in debt is EXACTLY why she can say what she does - eight years of the Bush administration (six under a Republican Congress as well) building up tremendous deficits demonstrate that the party has zero interest in fiscal responsibility or limited government unless it's their ox being gored.

If that's true, then Snowe's remaining criterion for domestic decision-making is "individual opportunity," which is why she can vote with the Dems on the issue of the day: there's a strong argument on that front alone that expanding healthcare availability to all will increase the flexibility of the job market and allow people to move from one opportunity to the next with significantly fewer non-job-related externalities standing in their way.

In other words, she's taking the position that if no one's going to be responsible with money anymore, what the hell, spend it on something useful. Which is quite rational, if depressing.

[Dan Riehl]

I don't see that as defensible, AMF. Not as contrasted with a Grassley or DeMint or are at least somewhat more serious about fiscal responsiblity. If she believes that, she should be fighting with them, not of the exact other side. She's a swing vote on spending, at best.

[Jpers]

Uhhhh...is she laying the ground work for an Arlen Specter?

[Fred Beloit]

That's right AMF, she is saying Bush lied, people died. She is saying Republicans used to be socialists but now they want freedoms for individuals. She is saying Repubs used to sit still for any crap that she and the Dems could shove at them. But now, oh now they are acting as if she worked for them and they are trying to tell her and the rest in the government who represent them what to do. No wonder she is confused. No wonder you are too.

[rrpjr]

I've noticed certain aspects of appearance which people like Snowe -- veteran Republican politicians known for their easy virtue -- seem to have in common: a washed-out quality, a slackness and tonelessness of expression and voice, and often a kind of fixed, lifeless but ever-so-slightly smug smile. It's as if they're deeply tired of their neediness for power but unable to let go, and can't believe anybody would ever be able to make them.

She really needs to go home. It's over, Olympia.

[Old Trooper]

Ok, I agree with her on one point, the Republican Party has changed.
Sadly there are no Barry Goldwater types, there are no true Conservatives
in their ranks anymore. The Republicans are the Party of compromise now.

There are no Democrats anymore like JFK. They are all Socialists now.

[AMF]

Dan:

You run a tight ship, and I appreciate the response.

That said: The Chuck Grassley who voted for Medicare Part D? The Jim DeMint who demagogued the hell out of trimming the budget of a fighter plane that no one in the DoD wanted? No, they're not my preferred models of fiscal restraint. I appreciate that they use the language of fiscal restraint more often than others, but that's all it is: language. The GOP has zero credibility with me as the party of rational finance - the entire party is couching its anti-Obamacare argument as protection of Medicare when they know that's about to run off the rails. Hell, Medicare will be in better shape under Baucus's plan (though still ultimately doomed) than under the status quo! At least there's a productivity rationale for universal health care - what the hell was the justification for Medicare Part D?

Fred:

By the way, Medicare Part D - that was George Bush and a Republican Congress. I'm not sure what you mean by "Bush lied, people died" but I'm quite sure that legislation passed under such circumstances does not constitute "sit[ting] still for any crap that she and the Dems could shove at them." The Republican party only enforces fiscal responsibility when Democratic priorities are on the table, and Dem priorities don't look so bad in a fiscal vacuum.

[BD57]

"limited government" and "fiscal responsibility" are not words that come to mind when viewing the record of Olympia Snowe.

[anon]

I have to agree that the GOP's record over the last 10 years has been pathetic when it comes to fiscal responsibility and anything that was traditionally held as "conservative" other than the hot button issues of abortion/school prayer/evolution.

I'm hoping the GOP has learned their lesson by having gotten thrown out of power when it became crystal clear that they were flagrant spenders just like the Dems and that their "morality" when in office was just as poor as the Dems....

But, only time will tell, when the Republicans get back in power whether or not they regress to their level of stupidity during the Bush years. My guess is they will.

I totally agree on the Medicare angle, it's really sad to see ANYONE holding public office that has more than a high school diploma trying to "save" Medicare as it is or/and trying to tell seniors that benefits are not going to have be cut down the line or taxes raised.

My prediction is that in 100 years the trifecta of Social Security, Medicare, and wefare/Medicaid are going to be seen as one of the fundamental causes for America's decline. Who knows, FDR may ultimately, eventually go down in history as an idealistic do gooder who didn't know what the hell he was doing and who laid the seeds for America's destruction. Ah the irony. Who knows, maybe Bush II will be rehabilitated afterall.

[neomom]

Olympia Snowe - one of the 3 to vote for the "Stimulus"

'nuff said...

[Fred Beloit]

I have to laugh when libruls chastise Repubs for voting with the Libs, don't you AMF? There is a particularly dense female congressperson who was on telie last weekend. She was going after Repubs because many of them supported Bush's drug program. Unfortunately, Mike Wallace missed his opportunity to then ask her, "I suppose then, Congresswoman, that you did not vote for the drug plan?" Of course she did. It would have been delightful to see her start doing the dance of the I Got Cha.

[Fred Beloit]

Sorry, I want to make sure everybody knows she is a stone Lib Dem.

[Fred Beloit]

Anon says: "I have to agree that the GOP's record over the last 10 years has been pathetic when it comes to fiscal responsibility and anything that was traditionally held as "conservative" other than the hot button issues of abortion/school prayer/evolution.

Why Anon, you bold, brazen piece of humanity, you forgot to mention two wars started against terrorists and their supporters and one war won. National Defense, a REAL government responsibility, unlike giving cars to illegal aliens.

Anon, how do you like Obama selling Poland, Checko, Georgia, etc, down the river with nothing in return (except some new contracts for Immelt's company, GE. (Immelt is a big Obama supporter).

[FeFe]

Only dead fish go with the flow.

[anon]

I don't agree with the Iraq war, never did, never will, "winning" that war is an oxymoron since it should never have been waged in the first place. As for immigration, Bush had SIX YEARS to do something about illegals, and he did nothing, if only I could count the billions wasted down the black hole of Homeland Security.

Sorry, George W. Bush was no conservative.

[Fred Beloit]

You like straw men as your leader does, Anon. Bush tried to do something about illegals, amnesty. Who says he didn't. His base and like-minded independents wouldn't let him. Obama and Bush agree on this. We'll see what happens.

Winning a war is not an oxymoron, Anon. Don't you know what an oxymoron is? It is a contradiction in terms, like liberal librul. Wars are won, lost, or stalemated. Iraq was won, instituting a new democracy in the world, or at least a government wherein people can vote for their leaders. Do you like the result of the war? Or do you oppose that also?

And defense of the country is "traditionally held as "conservative", to use your own words.

[anon]

What "leader" would that be?

"Winning" the Iraq war is indeed an oxymoron, because we have lost much more than we won, so no I don't like the results of the war: a trillion and counting of my tax dollars spent, an ongoing drain on the U.S. treasury, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead...what's the upside? Oh, we killed Saddam and a few hundred fighters? Whoopie.

Amnesty for illegals is nothing more than an admission of being too cowardly to do anything else.

Maintaining a strong defense as a deterent is a traditional conservative value, starting wars of choice against country's that are not a threat in support of a utopian dream of a democratic middle east living in love alongside Israel is a) radical, b) deeply stupid, c) impossible.

[Palooza]

How can she possibly say what she does below given that she's been part of a government now trillions of dollars in debt and more entrenched in the private sector than it has ever been?

Isn't this what Bush and the GOP running congress did for the past 8 years? Amazing how fiscal responsibility becomes a GOP priority after the Democrats took over. Where were all the rightwing blogs during Bush's deficit run up? Do "conservatives" think they actually have any credibility on this issue?

[Fred Beloit]

Wow! Anon writes: "...because we have lost much more than we won[jn the Iraq war]."

What's the matter? Are you saying you expected to get oil out of the war? As to your leader, I always thought it was Al Gore. Am I wrong?

?????? ...starting wars of choice against country's that are not a threat in support of a utopian dream of a democratic middle east living in love alongside Israel is a) radical, b) deeply stupid, c) impossible."

With this attitude I am quite surprised you expected to get some kind of gain, other than security, out of the war. "...living in love alongside Israel..." This is another straw man. Who ever made an absurd claim like this?

(1) Iraq was firing weapons at our pilots.
(2) The UN said Iraq was a threat, so much so that they issued over 17 resolutions condemning Iraq. Bill Clinton and his lovely wife thought Iraq was a threat. Other prominent Dems did too, even the whirling dervish, dancing Dick Durbin from the great state of Whatchamaycallit. It is all on video tape. But this has been argued ad infinitum. You people keep bringing up the old false charges long ago disproved. What the heck is wrong with you? You write just like a rabid Leftist troll.

[dsimon]

"how do you like Obama selling Poland, Checko, Georgia, etc, down the river with nothing in return"

I don't like building and deploying weapons systems that have no proven capacity of, you know, actually working. I think that would be a pretty "conservative" stance against wasteful spending.