
by: Clyde Middleton posted: 2009-09-30 12:03:00
Viewed 211 times. 2 Comments.
Neither party can claim a monopoly on achieving results from legislation or public policy - however, a significant distinction can be seen between liberals and conservatives: Liberals legislate theory, hoping it will work (because their peer-reviewed research says it will); Conservatives look to past practices to try to learn, and craft legislation in a continuum of applied theories.
PR Friend Track-a-'crat explores this distinction. Here's the first half of his post - go here to read the rest.
With the fusing of political parties everywhere into one hideous amorphous mass (a process that’s reaching its apogee in Europe, where party names have long since ceased to provide anything but the merest hint as to that party’s alleged values), the choice facing the electorate increasingly appears to be that between big and bigger government, high and higher taxes, and little or no accountability. The traditional dividing lines have softened and blurred, leading to the rise of the independents and their king-making capacity. The decisions of voters are less than ever based on how much they agree with a given party’s platform, but rather on how little they disagree with it.
With one exception, that is.
One lonely boundary still splits the Left from the Right, and it has not only remained constant, but has strengthened with each passing day of the Obama administration: the division between intentions and results.
A central tenet of the Left is its slavish devotion to the tyranny of intentions. Whereas those on the Right characteristically rely more on empirical and tangible observations and logic, the void of reason at the heart of Left-wing ideology has been replaced by emotions and intentions. For them, results are mere side-effects of a stated policy: it is the intentions underlying any given policy that reveal its true worth.
Which is exactly the type of anti-logic to be expected of the Democratic Party. Intentions and results are not mutually exclusive concepts, unable to coexist simultaneously. The difference then becomes one of interpretation – Democrats are largely contented by the lingering warm thoughts that motivated the legislation in the first place, whereas conservatives are far more likely to turn to concrete results as proof (hopefully) of the new law’s worth.
Trackback url: http://patriotroom.com/article/the-difference-between-the-parties-intentions-v-results/trackback
B. Johnson - good point, although there is a simpler explanation behind the Democrats' collective addiction to spewing out meaningless laws: stupidity.
That, taken with what you say, makes for a truly wonderful combination every time...
Back in November, the House passed its health care bill by a narrow 220 to 215 margin, with 39 Democrats voting against it. Since then, the one Republican who voted for it — Joseph Cao — has indicated that he would not support the bill a second time around given the weaker language on abortion in the Senate version. In addition, Florida Rep. Robert Wexler already retired prematurely. Factor in Murtha’s death today, and Pelosi is down to 217 votes — one short of passage. To pass the bill at some point in the next few months, she’ll need to flip a Democrat who is already on record voting against the bill.
Views: 117 Comments: 0
Don't think that Republicans can't be sucked in when an anti-Wall Street lynch mob gets its blood up. Recall that Sarbanes-Oxley, the devastating antigrowth response in 2002 to the Enron and Worldcom scandals, was passed with virtually unanimous support by Republicans in Congress, and signed by a Republican president. Recall that last year 85 House Republicans voted for a 90% tax on bonuses for any employee of any bank that took more than $5 billion in TARP money. Investors got some good news last Friday. Stocks resisted following through on Thursday's sharp plunge after (Congress) reached an impasse on bank re-regulation. That's a nice down payment on what investors need a lot more of now: proof that the GOP won't join Democrats in a populist rush to seek revenge against Wall Street.
Views: 77 Comments: 3
Just two years after Mr. Obama helped his party pull in record Wall Street contributions — $89 million from the securities and investment business, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics — some of his biggest supporters, like Mr. Dimon, have become the industry’s chief lobbyists against his regulatory agenda. Republicans are rushing to capitalize on what they call Wall Street’s “buyer’s remorse” with the Democrats. And industry executives and lobbyists are warning Democrats that if Mr. Obama keeps attacking Wall Street “fat cats,” they may fight back by withholding their cash.
Views: 78 Comments: 2
The Dow, down almost 104 points, had its 10th triple-digit move in 16 trading days. Shares of big banks pulled the market lower, extending a slump that has led to four straight weekly losses.I can't, for the life of me, understand why bank stocks would be dropping. Inexplicable.
Views: 57 Comments: 2
Contrary to President Obama's promises, voters say special interests have more influence on the political process now than they did a year ago, according to a new poll. The poll, paid for by groups looking to curb the Supreme Court's recent campaign finance ruling, found that majorities of both Republicans and Democrats say special interests have increased their influence since the president took office, and they say Mr. Obama has not done enough to fight back.
Views: 59 Comments: 1
If the starting point for this meeting is the job-killing bills the American people have already soundly rejected, Republicans would rightly be reluctant to participate,” the pair explained in a letter to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. They also said President Barack Obama should remove reconciliation from the table. Using budget reconciliation rules to move healthcare reform in the Senate would mean Democrats would only need 51 votes on procedural measures instead of 60... On Sunday afternoon however, Obama refused to say he would start from scratch.
Views: 64 Comments: 2
An announcement from his office said Murtha died at 1:18 p.m. at the Virginia Hospital Center, where he had been admitted last week after having his gallbladder removed at Bethesda Naval Hospital.
Views: 165 Comments: 6
The scientist at the centre of the “climategate” email scandal has revealed that he was so traumatised by the global backlash against him that he contemplated suicide. Jones, 57, said he was unprepared for the scandal: “I am just a scientist. I have no training in PR or dealing with crises.”Actually, he's using the term "scientist" loosely there, given that real scientists don't do what he did. And while he may not have any training dealing with crises, he sure was good at generating one: it was called the global warming crisis.
Views: 146 Comments: 3
Views: 112 Comments: 3
Views: 124 Comments: 3
I beg to differ with the author's assertion that liberals legislate theory. As evidenced by the notoriously confusing Stimulus Package and Obamacare legislation, liberals deliberately make laws unreadable, fooling people into thinking their meaningless laws will cultivate a utopian society. And the reason that they make their laws unreadable is the following, IMO.
Unreadable laws give liberal, law-ignoring judges the license to interpret such laws in any way that they want to. In other words, liberal justices can easily cater to minority interests by simply interpreting unreadable laws in ways that promote minority interest agendas.