About Me

Name: Josh Todd
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Search

Blog Roll

 

Re: Limbaugh Comment

Posted by Josh Todd on Sunday, January 25, 2009 7:10:45 PM
The following is a response to a commentary by Pulitzer Prizer winner Leonard Pitts, Jr., a columnist for the Miami Herald.
 
Dear Mr. Pitts,

Your commentary entitled “What Limbaugh comment says about Limbaugh” was published in the Dayton Daily News today, Sunday, January 25, 2009. As is typical from left-of-center columnists, your analysis is both ill-informed and a masquerade.

In your piece you dismiss the possibility that Rush Limbaugh was taken out of context with his controversial “I hope he fails” remark, which, of course, refers to the Obama presidency. You asked your readers, “But do you ever ‘hope’ [President Obama’s] fails? Knowing his failure is the country’s failure? Isn’t that, well…disloyal?” In this case, the answer is unequivocally No.

During his commentary, Limbaugh clearly stated that he felt Obama’s stated policies would only lead to more economic malaise; thus, if President Obama is successful in enacting his stated policies, then the United States of America would continue to suffer, which leads to “I hope he fails.” Either you did not bother to review the show’s transcripts, did not listen to the program, or intentionally omitted the context in order to write your scathing commentary, which is far more disingenuous than that which you lambaste.

Limbaugh’s other point in his commentary had to do with a noticeable lack of media cheerleading—your colleagues—in 2000 for the presidency of George W. Bush. Those policies led to swell economic times for the vast majority of his tenure. (Current economic maladies in the finance industry can easily be traced to policies that preceded the Bush Administration. The Iraq War, which one can argue has been won, is another matter.) Now, there is great pressure for pundits of all stripes to wish Obama the best, which, in the conservative’s case, really means “I hope the country succeeds.”

Recall 2000 and ask yourself if you hoped President Bush would succeed. The past eight years were filled with liberal after liberal practically wishing he would fail, and ne’er a peep out of so-called commentators.

Your piece also was a masquerade of independence. Included are slams at Republican presidents (Bush is “disastrous” and Nixon “crooked”) with less-pointed slights at Democrats (Clinton was merely “slimy” and Carter merely “inept” when the latter’s economic record was exponentially worse than our current predicament). Note the more extreme labels for the Republicans.

You also claim that Limbaugh is defaming conservatism: Limbaugh is one of those “self-promoting media clowns who defame conservatism by calling themselves conservative.” Based on your track record as a left-of-center commentator, I hardly think you couldn’t give one wit about conservatism, nor do I believe you understand it. Instead, it seems that you believe Bush, McCain, and Nixon represent conservatism, even when conservatives (National Review, Human Events, and others) openly criticized their lack thereof. Here, your concern for the state of the ideology you oppose is farcical.

The result: another unfair hit piece. The Dayton Daily News did its part by publishing a good photo of you and an unflattering photo of Limbaugh, all without offering another point of view. Do I believe that excessive spending and making the tax code more progressive will help America? Maybe for a brief period of time, but in the long haul, more Americans will get transfer payments and be net welfare recipients while making it impossible to give the successful people who make economic growth possible the economic liberty they deserve. Meanwhile, private charity will fade because common citizens don’t have to be charitable—instead, they only have to vote for Democrats to feel good about themselves. Likewise, citizens and business won’t have to account for their mistakes because government will do it for them, making the population as a whole less responsible. And it’s in this spirit that I, too, hope the president fails at implementing some of his policies. That’s what Limbaugh was saying, and you know it.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Speeches and Festivities

Posted by Josh Todd on Tuesday, January 20, 2009 9:29:14 PM
Congratulations to President Obama on his historic achievement. While I believe his presidency will prove otherwise, his election, in and of itself, is a positive development for this country. Having said all of that, the inauguration was an absolute spectacle.
 
Barack Obama is without doubt a compelling orator (the speech sounded good); however, the substance of his speech was vapid. Peggy Noonan once wrote that a speech about everything is a speech about nothing. And so was today's address. Rather than being Reaganesque--honestly appraising the day's challenges but dousing all with hope and reassurance--Obama's speech sounded more pessimistic than anything. Somehow "But know this, America--they will be met" doesn't stand up to Our economic ills "will not go away in days, weeks, or months, but they will go away." Perhaps it was tone. Obama's rousing oratory v. Reagan's grandfatherly reassurances.
 
At one point, the President said, "[W]e reject the false choice between our safety and our ideals." I don't recall anyone ever proclaiming that we must either, 100%, opt for security or follow the Constitution. If that's the case, then I don't believe the Founders would go for his ambitious list of programs. They have been okay with federal spending on a canal system, but probably not on the laundry list we already have plus the president's wishlist.
 
But the spectacle truly began when then-President Bush was snubbed of greetings, jeered, and pelted with insults. The crowd even sang "Na-na-na-nah, hey-hey-hey, good-bye." This blatant disrespect doesn't smell of unity and inclusion. In fact, this sort of blatant hatred is what pushed many conservatives to support him when he was wrong on certain issues. Still, President Bush was one of the most tolerant and tough-skinned presidents we have had--recall all of the insults, the shoe incident, etc. He never lashed out, but the Left, which has lashed out for years, did so again today, even in their moment of triumph. I guess humility is not for everyone.
 
Then came Joseph Lowery's "prayer." It was no "Our Father in heaven, hallowed be Thy name, forgive us our transgressions" type of prayer. In fact, here it is: "[W]e ask You to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get back, when brown can stick around; when yellow will be mellow; when the red man can get ahead, man; and when white would embrace what is right. Let all those who do justice and love mercy, say amen. Say amen." It sounds like African- and Native-Americans have gotten the shaft (courtesy of and) while Asian-Americans have achieved too much and whites have never done the right thing. This, too, does not seem inclusive, bipartisan, or any of the Left's supposed wishes of the past eight years.
 
I do not diminish the feat of having the country's first black president, but he is the president. Now that the inauguration/Bush roast is over and done, President Obama should be President Obama, not African-American President Obama. Hopefully he can move beyond today's spectacle, which was, frankly, an insult to the political faction he just defeated.
 
Not a good start for u-n-i-t-y.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

As Predicted

Posted by Josh Todd on Monday, January 19, 2009 8:45:30 PM

Conservative commentators everywhere--including here--have predicted over the past two years of coming tax hikes. Here in Ohio, the foundations are in place and, in some localities, the increases have already come.

In Montgomery County, as well as in Hamilton County, the County Auditor has saw fit to raise taxes by fiat through property tax appraisals. Somehow, properties all over the county have increased in value by as much as 25%, and all in a the worst housing value decline in memory.

An Ohio commission has recommended increases in vehicle registration and driver license fees. The same commission is also pushing a $0.13/gallon gasoline tax hike. Ohio's current rate per gallon is $0.28, meaning that for your average 12-gallon tank of gas, Ohio gets $3.36, meaning that a $20 fill-up should really cost $16 and change. Under the proposed rate, the state will get almost $5 each time a Buckeye fills his or her tank. Fill up once each week and that's roughly $250/year in gasoline taxes.

Governor Ted Strickland, averse as always to any proposal that may carry controversey, has rightfully stated that such an idea isn't so hot in the middle of a recession.
I could hardly agree more. That liberal Democrats are suddenly espousing conservatism (budget cuts, in Strickland's case, and keeping taxes low or even advocating tax cuts) is onlypolitical and temporary, however, as they and their constituentces will soon pursue ambitious agendas that will ultimately cry out for tax hikes.
 
In localities like Dayton and Montgomery County, the 2008 election was filled with tax levies and ballot initiatives designed to raise more revenue. Then came Montgomery County Auditor Karl Keith's revenue grab that is the miraculous recovery of Miami Valley home values, at least according to the government. Should Ohio's Democrat-controlled legislature act according to the task force/commission and their recommendations, also designed to raise more revenue, Buckeyes will have less money.
 
One also needn't look far beyond the Democrat-controlled Congress, which has put forth an $850 billion stimulus bill. Such high levels of spending will make the aloof spending of the Bush-GOP Congress coalition of 2001-2006 look like pocket change. Unfortunately, the Republican Party will be in no position to credibly criticize the Democrats and the debt of later generations will only increase, even after tax rates are hiked significantly.

Source(s): http://www.newsnet5.com/money/18428159/detail.html?rss=nn5&psp=news, http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20090107/NEWS01/301070017/1056/COL02

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »