So easy to forget
The amnesia sticks are kicking in. Already the distant past is lost to me, the recent past no more than a blur.
It’s probably better that way: I’m watching the candidates, and I’m reading the news.
The candidates are complaining about the government. The candidates, who want more than anything else to lead the government, are complaining about how big the government is. And how incompetent it is. And how it’s always getting in the way.
So they want to shut down this agency, and that agency, too. They want to get rid of this rule, and that regulation, and lots of those other rules and regulations, too. All they know how to do -- the agencies, the rules, the regulations -- is get in the way.
Get in the way of business.
Without all those rules and regulations, the candidates insist, business would be free to grow again. The economy would be back on track again, instead of stuck in the ditch. (I’ve got some vague memory of the economy going into the ditch -- it was a while ago, wasn’t it? -- but the details are so fuzzy, it’s hard to be sure.)
That’s what the candidates are saying.
I hear the very same thing when I read the news. The titans of Wall Street and the Chamber of Commerce are singing from the very same hymnal: Government is the problem. Too much oversight. Too many rules and regulations. Get government out of way, they’re saying.
You want more growth? Give us fewer rules!
You want more jobs? Give us fewer regulations!
(I can nearly remember a time when there was growth, when there were jobs. But for the life of me -- it’s the amnesia sticks, still working their magic -- I can’t remember how many rules and regulations there were back then. I’m sort of thinking there were more rules and regulations back then -- or at least more than the titans and the Chamber ever wanted -- and the economy was humming along anyway. But how can that be? Did they junk some of the rules between then and now?
Some of the regulations? Is that how we wound up the ditch? I can’t remember.)
There are congressmen on my television now, and they sound just like the candidates and the titans and the Chamber: Get rid of the rules, they say. Don’t appoint anyone who’ll enforce the rules. Strangle the agencies that make the rules. Cut their staffing. Cut their funding. That’ll make things better again -- they all agree about that. Government keeps getting in the way, they say. Government keeps --
I’ve got this tiny buzzing sensation, right behind my forehead. Sometimes it happens when I watch too many candidates, or too much news. Sometimes it just happens.
There’s something not right. Something I’m hearing or seeing now -- from the congressmen or the candidates or the titans or the Chamber -- isn’t fitting in with other things I used to hear, or used to see. With things I used to know.
I’m trying to picture the home buyers running roughshod over the lending firms when it came time to take out a mortgage. I’m trying to remember consumers pulling the wool over the eyes of the credit-card companies. Or hedge funds so tied up in regulatory knots that they couldn’t rake in their billions.
I’m almost thinking it was the other way around!
Rick Horowitz is a syndicated columnist. You can write to him at rickhoro@execpc.com.
Jun 16, 2011 at 3:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
True Right Opposing Liberal Liars
Jun 15, 2011 at 11:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Every comment posted under a Rick Horowitz column prolongs his stay in the Janesville Gazette because it proves how many people are reading the column. If you want him gone stop posting. Can you resist? I don't think you can. I'm looking at you Patriotroll.
Jun 15, 2011 at 5:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
Ronald Reagan...just the name makes me want to throw up. Anyone who worships Reagan either never had to endure his presidency or is a millionaire. The guy gave this country away to foreign business. The Japanese didn't pay him $3 million for a speech because he was smart. It was payback for the billions they got.
Jun 15, 2011 at 4:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
Frank and Dodd and Fannie and Freddie twisted arms and made the banks and mortgage lenders borrow to buyers who could not afford the homes. That is the Big Lie. What is stopping mortgage lenders and banks from lending to buyers who cannot afford to buy homes today? There was no mortgage or Fannie/Freddie reform since the collapse in 2008. All the rules are the same - what's stopping the banks now?
Jun 15, 2011 at 4:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
From watching FOX News, common sense tells me conservatives are bigoted, small minded individuals that constantly whine about being persecuted as they, in turn, persecute anyone who doesn't share their view.
From living through the Reagan and Bush presidencies I have discovered that as a means of governing, conservatism is another name for economical disaster.
The following link contains the quote, “conservatives…expanding government for political gain, but always in ways that validate their disregard for the very thing they are expanding. The end result is not just bigger government, but more incompetent government.”
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/feature...
As Rick claims, "so easy to forget". Well, maybe for some.
Jun 15, 2011 at 4:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
2008 tank was the Democrats fault starting with the housing act of Clinton and sub prime mortgage that reached a end that Frank and Dodd wouldn't allow Bush to regulate.
"Reckless Endangerment" liberal writer exposing the big liberal lie.
Jun 15, 2011 at 3:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
okay CP - now you're just being desperate - and it's history now that FDR prolonged the depression with his socialist agenda just like Obama. GET OUT OF THE WAY
Jun 15, 2011 at 3:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Sure is interesting when the economy tanked in 1929, it was a Republican in charge. In 2008, when the economy tanked, it was another Republican in charge. It seems the Democrats have to come in and try to clean things up every time.
Jun 15, 2011 at 3:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
Because he compromised with the Republicans. Something Republicans don't seem to understand.
Jun 15, 2011 at 1:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
*You can't cut taxes and then start a war that you can't pay for.*
Gosh, great point...but then, why did the current administration start another war and extend Bush's tax cuts?
Jun 15, 2011 at 1:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
CP the prove it liberal but can't herself from a simple channel 3 story
Big donors get jobs too.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-20...
Jun 15, 2011 at 1:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
Kaysbrew: Where is this report?
Jun 15, 2011 at 1:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
Big report just out.
Obama's Big donors got millions in stimulus.
Liberals who complain about Walker should look to Obama first. The Big liberal lie continues.
Jun 15, 2011 at 12:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
And Bush's stimulus came directly to me the taxpayer ($400.00 per person)
not Obama's unions and banks and takeovers.
Jun 15, 2011 at 12:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
CP liberals don't listen either. Bush was a big spender and a RINO. But still better then Al Gore or John Kerry.
Obama is Bush the liberal version. More and more and more government and spending.
Jun 15, 2011 at 12:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
Kay: If Obama is really a third Bush term, why do you complain about him then, since Bush was your man? You make absolutely no sense now.
Jun 15, 2011 at 11:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
Hmm... I sort of remember reading this... er... essay, but it's fading fast. Nothing memorable to see here, folks. Move along. :D
Jun 15, 2011 at 11:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
I see the resident Republi-bagger apologists are out. Don't you people have something better to do? Do you really think posting the same partisan tripe over and over again is going to change anybody's mind?
Horowtiz is spot on.
Jun 15, 2011 at 10:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
CP - this works for you too I posted on other site.
How did Bush screw us up? Big Spending? Yes, but Obama 10X that. War? Obama is in 2 more and Gitmo is still open. Gas? Obama!
Transparency? Hello Obama. Stimulus? Obama doubled that. Jobs? Bush under 7% Obama 9.1%
Is Obama really a third Bush term??????
Jun 15, 2011 at 10:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
Bush cut taxes early in his first term. The Iraq war was a couple years after that. Approved by the congress.
Anything else concerned.
Obama is Bush with speed pills.
Jun 15, 2011 at 10:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
Bush was also lied to, remember? He cut taxes when they should have been raised to PAY FOR HIS WAR. Exactly why the country is in the mess it is in today. You can't cut taxes and then start a war that you can't pay for. And then after the Republican debates the other night, the Republicans want to continue on the same track THAT GETS US NOWHERE.
Jun 15, 2011 at 10:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
Obama, No money for War and no approval. Bush got approval.
Jun 15, 2011 at 10:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
Why did Obama do the same thing concerned?
Jun 15, 2011 at 10:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
Kay: Read the documentary "Inside Job."
Jun 15, 2011 at 10:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
Kaysbrew: Why did George W. Bush start two wars and then NOT PAY FOR THEM then? Other presidents in past history knew that if a war was started it had to be paid for.
Jun 15, 2011 at 9:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
A good conservative President along with independents and moderate Democrats reading the book "Reckless Endangerment". GOP didn't drive the bus in the ditch- it was the Liberals starting with the Clinton Housing Act and ACORN storming banks demanding them to lend money to people who can not afford houses.
Remember? Bush tried to get regulation passed on the sub prime madoff type practices and Barney Frank and Dodd and Co. eat him up for dinner and lied again to the unsuspecting public "Republicans don't want the poor to own homes?" Bush dropped it.
Economy collapses and liberals lie again to get into the White House.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.