x

Please Login




Register Here!

On Politics, We Can Always See the Whites of Their Eyes.

 Search:  
Login / Register   About Us   Advertise   Contact Us  
RSS Feed

The Patriot Room

The difference between the parties: Intentions v. Results

by: Clyde Middleton   posted: 2009-09-30 12:03:00
Viewed 226 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rely more on empirical and tangible observations and logic, the void of reason at the heart of Left-wing ideology has been replaced by emotions and intentions.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.

Continue reading here.

Related Articles


Links to this post

Trackback url: http://patriotroom.com/article/the-difference-between-the-parties-intentions-v-results/trackback


Comments 2

B. Johnson on 2009-09-30 13:07:43

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.


Track-A-'Crat on 2009-09-30 13:35:04

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...


Have an opinion?

 Name (required)
 Email (required)
 Website

If you were a member you wouldn't have to input that stuff!


What is 2 + 3 ? (seriously... for moderates the answer is 4 and for liberals the answer is cat)

Note: Your comment may be held for moderation.

blog advertising is good for you

blog advertising is good for you

Publius' Newsstand

  • NY23d: Hoffman makes it official: he'll run for...

    Douglas L. Hoffman rode a strong wave of conservative activism to a second-place finish in last fall's special election in the 23rd Congressional District. Now the Lake Placid accountant — and adopted son of the Tea Party movement — is back for a second try, but not without some competition. Mr. Hoffman formally entered the race for the Republican nomination Monday, telling his supporters in a letter posted to his Web site that he "will defeat Bill Owens" if there's a rematch. Listen to our interview with Doug on Liberty Pundits.

      Views: 81 Comments: 1

  • Smackdown time - The Hill: Alexander, Gregg thr...

    Senate Republican Conference Chairman Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and ranking Republican Finance Committee member Judd Gregg (N.H.) said they will force votes on virtually every sentence of the healthcare reform bill to overcome Democrats' parliamentary maneuver. Gregg said Republicans would force votes on a provision in the 1974 bill that says reconciliation can only be used to amend laws, plus another longstanding Senate rule that says reconciliation can only be used for budget-related issues, plus yet another Senate rule that says 60 votes are necessary to waive the budget-only rule. Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) sent a letter to Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) that insisted he had 41 votes for the last roadblock, thereby denying Democrats the magic 60.

      Views: 66 Comments: 0

  • Dems give up on flipping Stupak 12

    House leaders have concluded they cannot change a divisive abortion provision in President Barack Obama's health care bill and will try to pass the sweeping legislation without the support of ardent anti-abortion Democrats. A break on abortion would remove a major obstacle for Democratic leaders in the final throes of a yearlong effort to change health care in the United States. But it sets up a risky strategy of trying to round up enough Democrats to overcome, not appease, a small but possibly decisive group of Democratic lawmakers in the House.

      Views: 153 Comments: 1

  • Senate Parliamentarian: Obama must sign bill as...

    The Senate Parliamentarian has ruled that President Barack Obama must sign Congress’ original health care reform bill before the Senate can act on a companion reconciliation package, senior GOP sources said Thursday. The Senate Parliamentarian’s Office was responding to questions posed by the Republican leadership. The answers were provided verbally, sources said. House Democratic leaders have been searching for a way to ensure that any move they make to approve the Senate-passed $871 billion health care reform bill is followed by Senate action on a reconciliation package of adjustments to the original bill. One idea is to have the House and Senate act on reconciliation prior to House action on the Senate’s original health care bill.

      Views: 107 Comments: 0

  • House votes overwhelmingly to investigate Pelos...

    The House voted Thursday to open an ethics investigation into what and when House Democratic leaders knew of allegations of sexual harassment against former Rep. Eric Massa (D-N.Y.). The House overwhelmingly backed a privileged resolution offered by GOP Leader John Boehner (Ohio) that will have the Ethics Committee look into what House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), and other Democratic leaders and staffers knew about allegations of sexual harassment against Massa, and when they became aware of the situation. The Republican resolution came amid reports that members of Pelosi's staff had been allegedly been notified of the situation in Massa's office as early as last year.

      Views: 96 Comments: 1

  • House GOP votes to ban all earmarks

    This would be called leading while in the minority. The Dems only ban some earmarks. GOP bans 'em all.
    House Republicans approved a conference-wide moratorium on earmarks on Thursday one day after a House committee enacted a ban on for-profit earmarks. The Republican's moratorium is more extensive than the House Appropriations Committee's ban in that it applies to all earmarks for all members of their caucus. "For millions of Americans, the earmark process in Congress has become a symbol of a broken Washington," they said. "We believe the time has come for House Republicans to adopt an immediate, unilateral moratorium on all earmarks."

      Views: 67 Comments: 1

  • Gallup: Record number of people believe Global ...

    There is lots of good stuff in this poll. Support for the Warmists is dropping off a cliff (or off a melting glacier, if you prefer).
    Gallup's annual update on Americans' attitudes toward the environment shows a public that over the last two years has become less worried about the threat of global warming, less convinced that its effects are already happening, and more likely to believe that scientists themselves are uncertain about its occurrence. In response to one key question, 48% of Americans now believe that the seriousness of global warming is generally exaggerated, up from 41% in 2009 and 31% in 1997, when Gallup first asked the question.
    That increase to 48% is fully 7 points higher than last year, which was also a record high.

      Views: 90 Comments: 0

  • Dem Rep Holden (PA) - No

    The good part is the breadth of his No - read on: Holden, D-17, voted against the health care reform bill last year. However, another vote will likely be held soon, as the House appears set to pass the Senate's version of the bill. Johnson and others believe Holden is likely having "his arm twisted" by Democratic leaders eager to turn his "no" vote to a "yes" vote the second time around. However, in a telephone interview Wednesday night, Holden said his position will not change. "I will not vote for the Senate bill," Holden said. "It makes significant cuts to Medicare and Medicaid ... and the restrictions on (federal funding for) abortion are not as strong."

      Views: 69 Comments: 0

  • VA set to outlaw individual mandates - 34 more ...

    The Virginia General Assembly has given final approval to a bill that would make it illegal for the government to require individuals to purchase health insurance, a measure intended to conflict with Democratic efforts to reform health care in Washington. Thirty-four other states are weighing similar legislation to block the individual mandate, which is an element of bills that have passed both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives. But Virginia is the first state to complete legislative action on such a bill.

      Views: 516 Comments: 3

  • 0-3 Obama says a "yes" vote worth a presidentia...

    These people stop at nothing to buy what they want: "At the same time, Obama intends to lobby wavering House Democrats to vote for a Senate version of the legislation and to support the subsequent reconciliation process, which Republicans have characterized as an unjustified use of majority power. Among the rewards Obama is ready to offer, White House officials said, are election-year visits to competitive congressional districts, where a presidential appearance can bring in hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign funds."

      Views: 76 Comments: 1

Get Your PR Button!

Copyright © 2008-2009 Patriot Room Media, LLC
Privacy Policy  Terms Of Service