This is a blog experiment, ladies and gentlemen. I’m trying to see whether I can get video from my Blackberry, shot at the pro-stimulus rally at the State House this evening, to post on the blog. I’ve never tried this before, so stand back, and remember, don’t try this at home. I’m sort of doing it blind, because the file would not play on my computer at all. So I e-mailed it to myself, then loaded it directly onto YouTube. What you should see and hear is the crowd singing this familiar song (which some of you will remember from Steve Miller’s “Your Saving Grace” album)…
Well dont you let nobody turn you round Turn you round, turn you round Well dont you let nobody turn you round You got to keep on walkin, keep on talkin Marchin to the freedom land
… only with “Mark Sanford” substituted for “nobody.” It was that kind of rally. And I’d tell you more about it, except that I’m really tired, so I’m just going to post this experiment for now. Let me know how it works.
Related Posts
How wonderful! People getting together to demand that someone else pay for what they want! I am so upset that I’ve been out of town and could not join in.
Wait a minute, I’m going to be one of those paying the bills!
“Marchin’ to the Freedom Land”. . . Isn’t that just a bit much?
Um, Mike… these people will be paying for it, too. And the problem they have with the governor is that he doesn’t want them to get any benefit for the stimulus that they will be paying for. So your comment is rather odd.
It strikes me as REALLY odd that people, such as the governor, keep making arguments against the stimulus as though that were still something being debated. That’s over. It passed, and was signed into law. The only issue now is whether South Carolinians — who will be paying for this for a long time to come, along with all Americans — get their share of it.
It’s just really not that complicated.
If you want to see a real rally by Real Americans, come back April 15th for the Tea Party.
I agree with Mike Cakora – it is bad enough to be a sniveling government mooch, but to demand it in public is really shameful.
What’s really a shame about this rally is that there was NO Republican participation — except Jake Knotts, who doesn’t count. I don’t know why, but I suspect that the organizers didn’t try to get Republicans involved. In fact, I suspect some Democrats stayed away because of the involvement of such renowned agitators as Brett Bursey.
But you know, the basic message the rally was built around was one embraced by the Republican leadership in the Legislature.
This is the way things always go. Even on issues on which there is bipartisan agreement, it is very rare to see any significant numbers of prominent members of both parties at gatherings of this kind. And after all the organizers’ efforts, and however “successful” the rally — and this one was more numerous and energetic than most — those who WANT to disagree with the message will just say, “Well look, it’s just THOSE people, so what do you expect?”
And no progress is made toward a rational consensus…
Oh, and in case you wonder why Jake doesn’t count — he’s really a Huey Long-style Democrat, despite the label he wears.
I agree with your characterization of Knotts, but Leatherman is hardly a true philosophical Republican either, is he?
This rally was organized by Brett Bursey and ACORN.
That might explain the absence of Republicans.
ACORN is supposed to get billions of dollars in this pork package. OF course they would rally for the money from Mr. ACORN Obama to themselves.
And Hugh Leatherman is a Democrat, who switched parties to stay in office. The same local Democrats still support him.
Brad,
What would you guess the percentage of South Carolina voters who support Sanford in his principled stand might be? I think you try to portray that group as some sort of fringe element when in fact it is probably closer to 50%. Maybe I travel in different circles than you do but I can’t name a single person I know who says Sanford is wrong. A surgeon who I had dinner with tonight said it best – “How can anyone with an IQ over 50 think that borrowing more money to fix a problem created by borrowing too much money is a good idea?”
Take the $700M, use it to pay down debt, and take the net savings on interest payments combined with a huge shift in NON-ESSENTIAL government spending to help people in need. Everybody wins. Except the politicians who prosper off the work of others.
Looks to me that your experiment worked well. While I agree with Gov Sanford on this issue, I like that The state house allows for peaceful protests.
Governor Sanford did not write the law. His job is to carry out the intent of the law. He has been told by the executive branch charged with carrying it out that he can not rewrite it. Reminds me of the employees I’ve worked with who always tried to do it their way even when the agency or company decided to do something they didn’t support. The purpose of stimulus is to stimulate by increasing aggregate demand by preventing layoffs and pumping 670+ million dollars into local economies (with multiplier effect) over thge next two years. This is about more than education spending (although that is his usual whipping boy). It is about the demand needed to support local businesses and the state’s economy. Some of us never notice the waitress who isn’t unemployed, but whose earnings have dropped to little more than the $2.17 most are paid, or the sales clerk who is cut to 24 hours a week, or the pharmacy tech cut to 20 hours. If we don’t rev up this economy, more will be financially devastated without losing their jobs. More businesses will close. Our government had decided on a strategy to reverse this, and Sanford wants to undermine it in his usual fashion. This economy will recover with or without him; the issue is how fast and with what damage to peoples lives and to future possibilities.
The government has no money of its own, with which to “stimulate” the economy.
Every dollar spent by government has to be first removed from the private sector in taxes, or later by debasing the currency.
Money left in the hands of those who created it and earned it goes 100% into the economy by remaining there. Government spending is siphoned off along its path by bureaucrats, cronies and thieves. It arrives months or years later than needed.
That fraud and inefficiency of the State why the “multiplier effect” is always greater for private spending and tax cuts than it is for public works projects.
Doug,
WCSC conducted a survey concerning the public’s opinion on Sanford’s position. 52% opposed the governor, 38% supported the governor, and 9% were unsure. The survey (including other questions that seem to reflect similar feelings) is located here:
Stimulus Poll.
Remember that we have selected representative democracy and not government by poll. We elect the leaders and then allow them to lead. We then show our approval or disapproval of their leadership at the ballot box.
National polls last week show only 38% support the $787 billion stimulus bill, or any other stimulus spending. 38% is the number who also are core Democrats, so that is probably not a coincidence.
Wonder what the polling would be for those who will benefit from the stimulus versus those who will pay for it?
And before you say “Everyone will pay for it” remember that most taxes are paid by a minority of citizens.
James Clyburn and his ilk know that their constituency have no intenions of paying back his stimulus loan. They intend to be tax eaters.