2009.11.08
Radmacher: No hope for Virginia's roads
Virginia voted for gridlock on Tuesday
By Dan Radmacher
Radmacher is editorial page editor for The Roanoke Times.
The decisions made by Virginia voters Tuesday will be most acutely felt on the state's highways and roads. The election of Bob McDonnell as the commonwealth's next governor and the gain of at least five more Republican seats in the House of Delegates guarantee that nothing of substance will be done to address the groaning, creaking, deteriorating transportation infrastructure for at least four years -- unless something happens before then to thrust the crisis dramatically into public consciousness, such as a bridge collapse.
RSS feed 
geez Dan what sour grapes...really a dismal column
Comment by pammala — November 8, 2009 @ 10:17 am
and besides, the vote really didnt have anything to do with roads..it was more about policy in this country and where we are headed...
Comment by pammala — November 8, 2009 @ 10:18 am
In the local and state election, if you weren'y voting for local and state policies and needs, you are a , let me rephrase that, you lack commonn sense.
Comment by Richard — November 8, 2009 @ 11:04 am
I love gridlock. I wish we had it in Washington. The longest period of gridlock we've ever had, 1995-2000 produced the greatest economic boom in history.
If it is determined roads and bridges need repaired, let's hope the larger GOP majority and McDonnell will take it from so many bloated unnecessary programs already in the budget. Republicans, you have the strongest mandate to cut what needs to be cut. Do it.
Comment by Suzie — November 8, 2009 @ 11:40 am
Of course you would find it dismal pammala. You don't want to deal with Virginia's problems, and infrastructure is a HUGE problem. As Dan said, every delay actually ends up costing you money -- basically a hidden tax. But you like to pretend that isn't so. And so does McDonnell. Between McDonnell and Griffith, the state will just slide backwards. But then that's what you want, isn't it?
Comment by gdad — November 8, 2009 @ 12:01 pm
Someone seems an itsy-bitsy bit bitter over Tuesdays results. Is the woeful diatribe above what you meant last week when you said:
"We'll add our voice, though, to all who respond to his call for opponents to "give me a chance to earn your trust and work with you for the betterment of the commonwealth of Virginia."
Or is it more in line with:
"The challenges ahead are too great, the cost of failure too dire to let pragmatic policymaking fall victim to partisan fights"?
I sure am glad to see you followed through on this statement:
"McDonnell asks for time to prove himself, and he should have it, so long as he works for the betterment of all of the commonwealth"
before unequivocally predicting failure with your "guarantee nothing will be done" to address transportation. If we weren't so accustomed to liberal hypocrisy it would be hard to reconcile this editorial as coming from the same people who have been crying for weeks about how unfair it is for conservatives to point out that Obama as yet has accomplished a great big zero. "He's only been in office 10 months" you wail. McDonnell hasn't even taken office yet and already the Roanoke Times has guaranteed failure. The true spirit of bipartisanship there. Maybe this blatant partisanship is why no one seemed to pay attention to your endorsements.
Is that a prediction of the obstructionist role the liberals are planning to play?
Comment by Another Chris — November 8, 2009 @ 12:26 pm
Hey gdad, if every delay is so costly, I guess you direct some of your anger at Kaine. After all he is the governor. Hopefully you'll remenber your position on this when the democrats move to block any McDonnell initiative. Somehow I doubt you will though. If yours and Dan's recent expressions are any example, the libs are already warming up the waffle irons.
Comment by Another Chris — November 8, 2009 @ 12:29 pm
Suzie, please tell us which programs are so bloated. Conservatives keep telling us that all these programs are bloated, but when they're in office, they can't find all that bloat. Ask Allen, Gilmore and Griffith. They didn't find it. In fact, Allen tried privatizing more of transportation and his movements had to be reversed because it ended up costing the state MORE. Your hero McDonnell didn't even claim there's huge bloat out here. Griffith has controlled the budget for years now and he hasn't found the bloat. But maybe you're smarter than them, Suzie, so perhaps you can find the bloat. We await the details.
BTW, IF it's determined that bridges and roads need repair??? You're kidding, right? There's absolutely no question that the state needs tens of billions in repairs. Hundreds of bridges are in bad shape or heading there. That's been determined long ago. Even folks like McDonnell agree that the infrastructure urgently needs help, although his transportation "plan" is stupid and hopeless.
I hope you're not sitting on that bridge when it collapses.
Comment by gdad — November 8, 2009 @ 12:39 pm
Is that a prediction of the obstructionist role the liberals are planning to play?
Goose, meet gander.
Comment by Art Hill — November 8, 2009 @ 1:02 pm
How much stimulus money did the state get from DC and how was it spent?
Comment by BUD — November 8, 2009 @ 1:29 pm
#8, gdad,
Actually Allen's privatization wasn't really reversed or aborted -it went stealth.
Since 1995, when VDOT had 11,900 employees, until today, VDOT's workforce has been shrunk to 7500 employees-or less(there is some dispute because of the "blueprint" program).
As the original article on privatization pointed out, contracts are extremely costly compared with an in house workforce, which VDOT does not really have.
They have small road crews for emergency work, and monitors who watch over contract workers, and huge office populations to watch over both.
Many of the projects, and much of the maintenance work is mandated by political orders.
http://www2.richmond.com/content/1999/aug/29/allens-vdot-cuts-may-have-backfired/
• In FY 2007, after review of all VDOT field maintenance facilities, 87 locations were closed or consolidated
http://www.vaperforms.virginia.gov/agencylevel/stratplan/spReport.cfm?AgencyCode=501
in 1999 there were 10,270 employees.
1n 1991 there were almost 12000 employees,
Robb cut VDOT employess.
Wilder cut VDOT employess.
Allen cut VDOT employess.
Warner cut VDOT employess.
Comment by joe Mostowey — November 8, 2009 @ 1:44 pm
BUD wrote "How much stimulus money did the state get from DC and how was it spent?"
-------------------------
The Commonwealth Transportation Board has awarded seven construction contracts to replace 119 structurally deficient bridges across the state that would otherwise have gone unaddressed. The awarded contracts, totaling $50.7 million, are part of the Commonwealth’s continued efforts to invest $694.5 million in highway funding from the ARRA.
http://www.whsv.com/news/headlines/65635077.html
Of course here's the real problem - a population steep in a freeloader tradition:
http://hamptonroads.com/2009/10/poll-fix-roads-dont-raise-taxes
Comment by joe Mostowey — November 8, 2009 @ 1:51 pm
Jack Nicholson stated the attitude of the population of Virginia in regards to our highway crisis very nicely, in the movie "A Few Good Men" . "You want the truth, you can't handle the truth."
And Virginian's definitely can't handle the truth when it comes to the state of Virginia's roads, and bridges and the costs to build and maintain them.
And the truth is that people in Virginia seem to think that it will be paid without any pain by someone else .
However the reality is that we will pay now or later, either by more, or higher taxes in one form or another, for better roads and alternatives such as light rail, or by constantly congested traffic and the price there is: more time and gas being used on the highways.
Now that the voters have decided, they will certainly get what they deserve.
Comment by joe Mostowey — November 8, 2009 @ 2:14 pm
Gdad,
I would start with government services that existed 50 years ago, and eliminate a whole lot of the ones we've added since then, especially in the education where we spend the most. Some of it was necessary; most of it was politically motivated BS.
Comment by Suzie — November 8, 2009 @ 2:30 pm
@5 But then that's what you want, isn't it?'
no
Comment by pammala — November 8, 2009 @ 4:13 pm
@3 "you lack commonn sense."
I may lack commonn sense but I don't lack common sense.
Comment by pammala — November 8, 2009 @ 4:15 pm
I've said, at length, all that needs to be said about our transportation system. Speaking with a fellow engineer from Pennsylvania, he thought the plans by McDonnell were completely laughable and that the toll plan would violate Federal law. He also stressed that we should not endeavor to resort to tolls like PA has with the Turnpike Authority. He mentioned that it is one of the most corrupt organizations in the state, that they will only award contracts to companies that pay the commsioners of the Authority a cash fee when they meet with them, and at a later time and date specified by the commisioners. Only then will that firm be awarded work, and if the contractor or consultant fails to pay those fees, they get blacklisted from future work. DO we really want to go there? I don't think we do. The problem is that we need an influx of revenues today, or we're going to face a future list of repairs and emergency spending several times higher due to innaction. McDonnell's ideas may raise revenues eventually, but they do nothing for today or tomorrow. 5-10 years from now, maybe, if they're legal.
Comment by Other John — November 8, 2009 @ 6:08 pm
Take....money...from...other...nonessential...programs...to fund transportation. If the state isn't "allowed" to do that, pass a statute that enables it. It's so simple. Am I really the only one who's thought of it?
Comment by Suzie — November 8, 2009 @ 6:23 pm
What I cannot figure out is why you libbers are so bent out of shape about roads. ROADS are themselves a thing of the past. Roads are not "green". They are wasteful and unnecessary in the new world. The more roads we have and the better roads we have the more people will want to remain dependent on those evil gas burning pollutin' cars. And besides, with so many SUV's in the country, transportation needs can be met by just driving off through some farmers field. To hell with roads".
Comment by Al — November 8, 2009 @ 7:04 pm
Al,
I have to admit. I get skeptical whenever liberals take on any cause, such as AIDS, homelessness, global warming. Every "crisis" of theirs has this in common: the situation is dire and only prompt action (tax hikes) will avert disaster. I have the feeling if Democrats were in charge of all aspects of Virginia government and did nothing about roads, the issue would just evaporate.
Comment by Suzie — November 8, 2009 @ 8:17 pm
Suzie:
Well stated and completely correct!!! BTW, be sure to write to you senators tomorrow, maybe follow with a call and email as well and remind him that this last election in va is a clear message in opposition to a continuation of Obammacare and all the other bs they are ramming up ours! Should they support the measure promise to go to whatever lengths necessary to see that Webb and Warner are defeated even if they are running against a neighbors DOG! I HAVE HAD ENOUGH! How about you?
Comment by Al — November 8, 2009 @ 8:52 pm
Suzie wrote "Take....money...from...other...nonessential...programs...to fund transportation. If the state isn't "allowed" to do that, pass a statute that enables it. It's so simple. Am I really the only one who's thought of it?
And
Al, I have to admit. I get skeptical whenever liberals take on any cause, such as AIDS, homelessness, global warming. Every "crisis" of theirs has this in common: the situation is dire and only prompt action (tax hikes) will avert disaster. I have the feeling if Democrats were in charge of all aspects of Virginia government and did nothing about roads, the issue would just evaporate."
----------------------------------------------
Hmmmn.
Common sense says you can't get blood from a turnip. Saying agencies and programs can spare funding and proving they can is too different things. Gilmore, a republican governor, tried the same thing years ago - couldn't find any money, waste or fraud. Net result: years wasted looking for something that wasn't there - and still no funding for VDOT.
VDOT has for years operated under a holding budget - Minimal construction, and static funds for maintenance that has been on the decline for years.
Currently the 17.5 cents, adjusted for inflation is less than eight cents in value compared to 1983. And in 1983 VDOT was already cutting back construction, and doing band-aid and cosmetic work on bridges hoping to get another ten to twenty years of extra life out of them.
Now, when a bridge fails to the point of needing replacement VDOT closes the road, and detours traffic until funding can be found to rebuild that bridge, which means years of detours instead of commencing a new construction while the old bridge is still stable enough to support traffic during construction.
Of course there are some people who will never understand that bridges, and roads have a finite life- A bridge is designed for about 50 to 70 years the last twent of which requires millions in repairs and maintenance.
Usually it costs millions more in delays to commuters,lost revenue for
businesses located on the opposite ends of the construction zone.
It can, like the bridge in Minnesota, cost lives when it finally reached the limits of its design parameters due to age and over use.
The Roanoke area has several old, high bridges. Perhaps they will survive until the Governor can find those funds from the "non-essential" services Suzie refers to.
Perhaps.
It's a long way down though - and a loooonng detour to the other side.
One thing I've learned watching conservatives over the years -it's only a crisis when it is personal, when they are inconvenienced - Unless its something that has to do with killing, such as a war, or an execution, then every second spent contemplating the best course of action is "dithering".
Comment by joe Mostowey — November 8, 2009 @ 9:53 pm
Chris, Republicans basically control the GA. If nothing happens, it's the Republicans' fault. Actually, it's Griffith's fault. He's been blocking progress for years.
Comment by gdad — November 8, 2009 @ 10:19 pm
Suzie, so you want to go back 50 years? Wonderful. Segregated schools. Women barely allowed to work. Mentally ill people in strait jackets.
However, I would take the level of funding for state universities, which back then was MUCH, MUCH higher than it is now. Is that what you're proposing?
You still haven't told us where all that bloat is that Allen and Gilmore didn't find.
Comment by gdad — November 8, 2009 @ 10:25 pm
"If the state isn't "allowed" to do that, pass a statute that enables it. It's so simple. Am I really the only one who's thought of it?"
Sorry Suzie, you can't just pass a statute that eliminates, say, medicaid. Even the conservative Supreme Court we have wouldn't go along with that. Now we could look at a more rational public justice system, but then you probably like jailing half the population.
Comment by gdad — November 8, 2009 @ 10:29 pm
"Am I really the only one who's thought of it?"
PS, you probably are, since it wouldn't be legal. And the state would spend tons of cash trying to defend it.
Comment by gdad — November 8, 2009 @ 10:31 pm
21 Al,
I agree. I have absolutely had enough.
22 Joe,
Yada yada. Oh and I forgot the TARP bailout and the stimulus. Failure to do both would collapse the economy. Well, neither got the money promised, and guess what. No disaster. No wonder people don't believe your party's chicken little tactics any longer. Virginians just stated very loudly they don't believe you.
Comment by Suzie — November 8, 2009 @ 10:42 pm
gdad,
I guess my reply would have to be a big 'whatever'. The liberals have been whining for years about the Republicans in the House of Delegates not supporting the governor's initiatves. Now we have Dan the Man Radmacher hoping for McDonnell's failure before the man even takes office. That is the very same act the liberals have been crying about since Obama took office. Well, clever goose and gander references aside, if your party truly believes it was wrong to do that to Obama, then you must also believe in principle that it would be wrong to do that to McDonnell. Yet, here you are, doing it a mere five days after the election. It's okay though, everyone is used to liberals inflicting a standard on others that they are unwilling to abide by themselves. I'm just asking that the party of enlightenment man up and own its hypocrisy.
And by the way, there are two houses in the General Assembly and if memory serves, the Democrats control the senate, but you go right ahead blaming everything on Griffith. Whatever helps the liberals look in the mirror every morning is fine with rest of us. We're used to liberal hypocrisy. Thankfully last Tuesday's results showed the populace is beginning to tire of it.
Comment by Another Chris — November 9, 2009 @ 12:54 am
Suzie Wrote: Yada yada. Oh and I forgot the TARP bailout and the stimulus. Failure to do both would collapse the economy. Well, neither got the money promised, and guess what. No disaster. No wonder people don't believe your party's chicken little tactics any longer. Virginians just stated very loudly they don't believe you."
------------------------
Yawn. More of Suzie's "it's true because I say so" proofs.
How boring.
As for our governments efforts to forstall the disasters brought about by GOP mismanagement over the last decade, you mean people like you don't believe, Big deal.
Your party blew it big time during the early part of this decade, and it won't take much for people to start remembering that fiasco.
TARP, and the Stimulus were not as big as they could have been, and that muted their effectiveness which means it's real easy for people who never research what is happening nation wide to discount their effects out of ignorance.
Just like those tea partiers. Like a little girl serving imaginary tea, they are long on fearful imaginings, and short on realities.
Comment by joe Mostowey — November 9, 2009 @ 8:01 am
Gdad 24,
"Suzie, so you want to go back 50 years? Wonderful. Segregated schools. Women barely allowed to work. Mentally ill people in strait jackets.
I'm sorry. I thought we were talking about what government services should be cut. Why are you changing the subject to segregation?
"You still haven't told us where all that bloat is
I believe I identified education as the best source to find bloating. Remove all the mulitcultural crap found on universities that weren't there 50 years ago, and you'll save a fortune. Perhaps your post was intended for someone else, since you seem not to have read mine.
Comment by Suzie — November 9, 2009 @ 8:08 am
Joe thanks for the response in #12...
It appears Virginia will receive some $5 billion in stimulus money over the next few years. It also appears Health and Education get the vast majority of that funding. According to the state gov stimmulus site Transportation receives a bit more than $800 million while Health and Education get about $3.5 billion. Does the 4+ to 1 ratio depict our needs?
Comment by BUD — November 9, 2009 @ 8:19 am
Gdad 25
""If the state isn't "allowed" to do that, pass a statute that enables it. It's so simple. Am I really the only one who's thought of it?"
Sorry Suzie, you can't just pass a statute that eliminates, say, medicaid. Even the conservative Supreme Court we have wouldn't go along with that. Now we could look at a more rational public justice system, but then you probably like jailing half the population.
_______________________________________
Of course the state can pass a law that changes how money is allocated. Right now they say they can't pay for transportation from the education fund. Baloney. They can change that law.
I see you're talking about Medicaid, again, something totally different than the subject at hand. It would be really nice if you could stay on topic.
Comment by Suzie — November 9, 2009 @ 8:22 am
The voters of VA are a lot smarter than the Dems and Deeds. They know that raising taxes now is foolish and were not having any part of it.
Northern VA and Hampton Roads were hardly hit if at all during this recession.
Explain how spending the people's money to build roads so those in NOVA and Hampton Roads will have a shorter commut will create jobs in Danville and Martinsville. And don't say the money will go for pot holes and bridge repair, very little would.
Comment by John R — November 9, 2009 @ 8:54 am
Let's see, John ... can't raise taxes now. It would be foolish to raise taxes during a recession. Couldn't raise taxes in 2006. We had a surplus! Why would you raise taxes when you have a surplus?
Starting to see the problem yet? There's never a good time to raise taxes, but transportation NEEDS a sustainable source of new revenue. That is already becoming critically apparent, and it will only become more obvious as more time goes by.
By the way, this region gets more from the transportation trust fund than we put in. Increasing the gas tax wouldn't change that.
If we continue to balk at doing what needs to be done to fix roads throughout the state, however, and as NoVa legislators gain more power, there's nothing to say the formula that benefits us today can't be altered.
Comment by Dan Radmacher — November 9, 2009 @ 9:04 am
@Another Chris #28: "Now we have Dan the Man Radmacher hoping for McDonnell's failure before the man even takes office. That is the very same act the liberals have been crying about since Obama took office."
Chris, I am not hoping for McDonnell's failure, I am predicting, based on his plan and history, that no new source of transportation revenue will be developed - and lamenting the likely outcome of that result.
I hope I'm wrong and McDonnell's plan will produce more than it appears capable of producing and that Virginia starts putting the money it needs to into transportation without sacrificing core services.
I simply do not see how that's possible.
Comment by Dan Radmacher — November 9, 2009 @ 9:22 am
You know I just drove from NJ to PA this past weekend and guess what I had to pay at the state line? A toll. This is exactly what McDonnell suggested. I used the road, I should pay for it and I did. What other nutball criticism will come from the left?
If you want more money for roads, then cut government spending in other areas and pay for it. After all, isn't that what each and every one of us has to do when our priorities shift? Nahhh, that would be too rational for the liberals - they always want something for nothing. Taxes you say? There's only so much burden people will bear in taxes and government. Instead, cut government salaries, needle exchanges, welfare, and "social justice" programs, pet political projects, etc.
Comment by Jim — November 9, 2009 @ 9:59 am
Dan 35
"Chris, I am not hoping for McDonnell's failure, I am predicting, based on his plan and history, that no new source of transportation revenue will be developed - and lamenting the likely outcome of that result.
Just substitue 0bama for McDonnell and you'll get the message Rush and conservatives were conveying when the Democrats screamed that we "hope 0bama will fail". We were saying the socialist policies 0bama embraces have a history of failure.
Why do I have this nagging feeling Democrats don't give a flip about transportation?
Comment by Suzie — November 9, 2009 @ 10:22 am
Wrong, Suzie. I hope McDonnell succeeds. I don't see how it's possible. Rush said, unequivocally, "I hope Obama fails." Not that Rush thought he would, but that he hoped he would so it would be a defeat for liberalism. Rush would rather see an ideological defeat than American success.
As I said before, I'd love for McDonnell to succeed. I hope he proves this column completely wrong.
I just doubt it.
Comment by Dan Radmacher — November 9, 2009 @ 10:33 am
#37 Again ,your use of our President being a socialist is pure fear talking what fixed network gives to you 24 hrs. a day. I am sure if someone keeps hearing that stuff that they too might believe it but that's another reality that is not here on earth.
I have posted this before but here here some info you might not like.
Do you realize that the pledge of allegiance was wrote by a Christian socialist, Francis Bellamy in 1892?
Comment by Bill Hudson — November 9, 2009 @ 10:37 am
One thing you can count on....
Spending lots of dollars for front end wheel alignments and balancing of tires not to mention replacement of auto parts as a result of further deteriorating roads.
It may not be a tax but it sure bites into a personal budget.
Goes back to the old saying "you can pay me now or you can pay me later...it's all up to you."
Comment by Will — November 9, 2009 @ 10:40 am
#40: Of course, and you can properly inflate your tires and solve the energy "crisis".
#37: Did you know that socialist policies are responsible for many deaths as it destroys the means to provide food and medicine in sufficient quantities? Did you know that European countries are experiencing a brain drain toward more financially rewarding capitalist countries?
"Americans spend more on taxes than food, clothing, and housing combined." - The Tax Foundation. Save your fear tactics of harping that our infrastructure is in emergency status, etc. and realize we don't want anymore taxes.
It was Sarah Palin who said, "We eat, therefore we hunt." This truism can be applied to the left, "We spend, therefore we tax."
Comment by Jim — November 9, 2009 @ 11:56 am
#41 You quoting Palin is someone that have many facts on her side. So as they say we will take that with a grain of salt, then blow it out the window.
If you also look there are many county's socialist government is is getting along just fine. But your simplistic view of them killing folks is just plain wrong.
Comment by Bill Hudson — November 9, 2009 @ 12:22 pm
@41...
You can have a properly inflated tire and hit some of the pot holes I've seen around SW VA...it won't make a flip of difference when the alignment gets knocked out of wack.
I guess one way to look at it is that you're keeping the tire balancing and alignment folks in business and that's good for the economy.
Comment by Will — November 9, 2009 @ 12:28 pm
Dan @35
You can couch it anyway you like but Suzie's right. When conservatives express the concerns about Obama's policies and initiatives, the left immediately categorizes them as obstructionists, racists or right-wing extremists who are concerned with nothing other than seeing Obama fail and blind partisanship. But now, you express similar reluctance about McDonnell's plan and it should be received, not as a mere partisan attack but instead as legitmate concerns expressed in good faith?
So do tell, why do you think you are so much better than the rest of us?
Comment by Another Chris — November 9, 2009 @ 4:35 pm
@Another Chris#44: Sorry, Chris, but I reject your contention that merely expressing concerns about Obama's policies and initiatives is enough to get one labeled an obstructionist, much less a racist.
Again, Rush didn't say he had concerns about Obama's policies, he said he wanted Obama to fail because he didn't want liberal policies to succeed.
If you can't see the difference between that and what I wrote, I can't help you.
Comment by Dan Radmacher — November 9, 2009 @ 4:46 pm
The trouble that the GOP is having that yes the far right, Rush and fixed network is talking the party way far to the right. Mr. dito head and his followers want a slash and burn effect, win no matter what.
The good thing is that there numbers are not doing so great across the nation and they just might not pull in the independent voters in the next Presidential elections.
Keep going GOP your doing fine.
Comment by Bill Hudson — November 9, 2009 @ 4:52 pm
Bill, the wingnuts and Teabags are at about 23% from the information I have seen and decreasing. Once the economy rebounds, you will find the percentage in the teens. If the Republican Party does not stand up to them, it is toast.
Comment by Richard — November 9, 2009 @ 5:03 pm
As someone who doesn't believe that liberal policies are good for the country, why would Rush want Obama to succeed in implementing them?
I happen to agree with Rush. I have concerns with the direction 0bama's policies are taking America. Because of that, I don't want him to succeed in getting them passed.
There are many more of us. Our voices will be heard loud and clear next year, when a lot of Dem congressmen and Senators are sent packing. It took President Carter to wake Americans up in 1980...Obama will have the same effect in 2010 and 2012. Wait and see.
Comment by Rick — November 9, 2009 @ 5:16 pm
I want 0bama to fail miserably for the reasons mentioned above.
His personal success means failure and the downfall of America as we know and love it.
Comment by T Witten — November 9, 2009 @ 6:53 pm
Dan@45, I wasn't talking about Rush. I was talking about me and thousands of Americans like me who disagree wholeheartedly with Obama's proposals and agenda. You know, not the newscasters or talking heads, but the actual citizens who are concerned enough to actually attend a town hall meeting or a protest when they have never done so in the past. The media, you included, have been all too ready to dismiss the thoughts and concerns of these individuals as mere partisanship. Yet here, when you do the same thing with McDonnell, everyone should recognize what you perceive to be "the difference?"
Again, I'm not talking about Beck or Limbaugh, I'm talking about the citizen who is opposed to Obama's policies, not Obama the man, but his plan for governance. You are all too ready to dismiss their concerns and smugly call them "teabaggers" and pat yourself on the back at how witty you are. Yet your concerns should be received as legitimate and well-intentioned? You know I believe you were right in your closing line @45. With a double standard like that, I'm pretty sure you can't help me, or anyone else for that matter.
Comment by Another Chris — November 11, 2009 @ 12:20 pm
And, again, Chris, I reject your contention that merely expressing concern about Obama's policies is enough to get you labeled a racist, right-wing extremist or an obstructionist.
When you express that concern with photos of Dachau or of Obama with a Hitler mustache, or call Obama's plans "white slavery," or "Stand Idly By While Some Kenyan Tries to Destroy America? Homey Don't Play Dat!" (all signs seen at Tea Parties) - then, yes, you might have opened yourself up to some labeling.
I don't dismiss legitimate concerns about overspending and the nation's accumulating debt, but that's not all I see going on at some of these events.
Comment by Dan Radmacher — November 11, 2009 @ 12:29 pm
#51 Very good point and had said it many times but when you do point it out then some start on this rant. Just like yesterday I was at a library and this one guy started talking about what we should do with Obama. And then two or three joined in and I am not going to repeat what they said but it makes me wonder. I told all 3 of them I am outnumber here and then it got very loud. There is no talking to someone who does not want to listen but yell.
Comment by Bill Hudson — November 11, 2009 @ 12:43 pm
Dan, my point is that at no time in these threads have I or any number of other posters suggested anything "be done with Obama. Nor have I made any of the statements or posted any photos such as those you describe. However, I very distinctly remember a few days ago a poster who I will not name interjected in the middle of a discussion and completely out of the blue that it was obvious that what was really bothering those of us who don't like the helth care reform plan was that a black man was in the White House. The conservatives are not the only ones who throw the unsubstantiated, irrelevant insults around.
When you say,
"When you express that concern with photos of Dachau or of Obama with a Hitler mustache, or call Obama's plans "white slavery," or "Stand Idly By While Some Kenyan Tries to Destroy America? Homey Don't Play Dat!" (all signs seen at Tea Parties) - then, yes, you might have opened yourself up to some labeling."
would that reasoning also mean that a few months ago it was okay to label the protestors who called Bush a murderer as unpatriotic? Surely by making such statements they had opened themselves up to some labeling.
Comment by Another Chris — November 12, 2009 @ 9:42 am
Dan 38,
"Rush said, unequivocally, "I hope Obama fails." Not that Rush thought he would, but that he hoped he would so it would be a defeat for liberalism. Rush would rather see an ideological defeat than American success."
Not surprisingly, you misrepresented Rush's statement. Rush was clearly talking about not wanting 0bama to succeed in his plans to socialize the government. From the original "I hope he fails" broadcast:
"I don’t want – what he’s talking about is the absorption of as much of the private sector by the U.S. government as possible. From the banking business, the mortgage industry, the automobile business to the health care—I do not want the government in charge of all these things...I want him to fail."
It might help you, Dan, if you would occasionally check out the original source instead of taking Media Matters' word for it.
Comment by Suzie — November 12, 2009 @ 10:39 am
@Suzie #54: Limbaugh also said: "Why is it any different, what's new, what is unfair about my saying I hope liberalism fails? Liberalism is our problem. Liberalism is what's gotten us dangerously close to the precipice here. Why do I want more of it?"
When your desire to see "liberalism" fail is greater than your desire to see America succeed, then your letting ideology cloud your patriotism.
Comment by Dan Radmacher — November 12, 2009 @ 10:55 am
Dan 55,
Rush's meaning is clear Dan. Are you distorting it intentionally? He doesn't want America to fail; he wants 0bama's radical liberal policies to fail to be passed into law.
But don't let that get in the way of the left's smear-Rush agenda.
Comment by Suzie — November 12, 2009 @ 11:08 am
#56 Again you are getting it wrong along with your Mr.ditto head. If the fat guy wants the President (hint USA) to fail then he is saying he wants the USA to fail,simple.
But you are taking your points from your fixed network.
Keep this in mind, it's not radical, it's not in my opinion liberal enough and the left does not have to smear this guy...he does it all by himself.
Here's another good book that I use to love to ask for at the library, Russ Limbaugh is a big fat idiot. You should read it might help.
Comment by Bill Hudson — November 12, 2009 @ 11:41 am