Saturday, September 18, 2021
HomePatriot DispatchesWSJ Follow-up Condemning Conservatives as Hobbits

WSJ Follow-up Condemning Conservatives as Hobbits

I swear, someone over at WSJ must be a glutton for punishment!

These columns drew much notice after John McCain quoted our July 27 “tea party hobbits” line on the Senate floor. Senator (sic) Sharron Angle responded that “it is the hobbits who are the heroes and save the land.” Well, okay, but our point was that there’s no such thing as a hobbit. Passing a balanced budget amendment this year is a similar fantasy. Yet outfits like the Club for Growth used the amendment as an excuse to flip from opposing the Boehner plan to supporting it. Maybe it should be the Club for Futile Fiscal Gestures.

The main result of this pointless crusade has been to damage Mr. Boehner’s leverage and push the final debt-limit increase in Mr. Reid’s direction. The Speaker may now have to seek the tender mercies of Nancy Pelosi to get a final bill through the House, and who knows what her price will be.

The debt-limit hobbits should also realize that at this point the Washington fracas they are prolonging isn’t helping their cause. Republicans are not looking like adults to whom voters can entrust the government.

Obviously, the author of these WSJ articles doesn’t comprehend that even though Hobbits were fictional characters created in Tolkien’s writing, comparing Conservatives and the Tea Party to Hobbits is something that we are more likely to take as a compliment rather than the back-handed insult that it was intended to be.

The biggest problem here is that for years on end, politicians have been able to take an attitude of “business as usual” within the realm of politics, while compromising for the sake of “bipartisanship” on things that have increased our debt, imposed up on our freedoms, and put our nation’s future at risk.  This kind of mentality is very much so entrenched in their minds, and at this point, more than anything else, they simply want to find a way to get back to “business as usual”.

For over two decades, no portion of our society has really challenged those in the realm of politics on how this mentality influenced their actions and how their actions affected the direction that our nation is moving in socially and economically.  These politicians saw this as becoming the “new norm” in our society and welcomed it gladly because it reduced and/or eliminated their responsibility to be held accountable to We the People of this nation.

But now, we have this uprising of sorts.  Citizens who have never been active in the realm of politics in the past are realizing that if we don’t take a stand and if we don’t push the issue, this nation WILL go the way of Greece, Ireland, Italy, etc.  Politicians find themselves being challenged now…challenged to change their own mindset, challenged to focus more on what is actually the wiser choice to make for the sake of our nation’s future than to take the path of least resistance by continuing to conform to the “business as usual” mentality.

It’s relatively obvious that those in the realm of politics and those in the media who want to just continue with the status quo of “business as usual”, which will only makes things worse than they are, somehow magically depend on a totally fictional and illusionary invisible benefactor of unknown source of their own to save our nation’s future somewhere down the road.  This is actually more of a delusional fantasy that they are accusing those of us on the right as presenting, but as long as it serves their purpose in justifying a return to the status quo, they are content with it.

They very seriously and bitterly resent any efforts being made by Conservatives and/or those in the Tea Party who want to see our elected officials stop acting like spendthrifts and stop wreaking havoc with our lives with their foolish and incredibly short-sighted political games that they have been accustomed to playing.

Now, changes have to be made regarding the spending behaviors of our government.  If that means Conservatives and folks in the Tea Party have to take on the roles of the remarkably persistent and determined Hobbits to make sure that we get the kind of people elected into office that will hold themselves accountable first and foremost to behave responsibly for the sake of preserving this nation, then so be it.  We’ll take this one on gladly with no regrets and no shame.

But the days of the status quo and politics as usual are over.  That era is now dead and gone.

The era of fiscal responsibility has begun.

19 COMMENTS

Leave a Reply

19 COMMENTS

  1. The Establishment hate uprisings. They want pain to be borne by later generations, and Wall Street in particular has become nothing but a den for crony capitalists. Business as usual, don’t rock the boat, everyone just go along and no one gets hurt.

    Thanks for the f/u article.

    • Jack, most of us on the conservative side of the fence don’t particularly like taking on confrontational roles either. We just want to live our lives in freedom and peace.

      But in this particular case, if these folks in the realm of politics aren’t willing to hold themselves accountable, then we have to take on this role.

  2. This piece seriously needs to be offered to WSJ as an ‘opposing view’ and they need to be dared to publish it.
    “These politicians saw this as becoming the “new norm” in our society and welcomed it gladly because it reduced and/or eliminated their responsibility to be held accountable to We the People of this nation.” This is spot-on analysis, folks. Thanks, Lineholder.

    • Thank you, bobmontgomery. It would simple enough if we could depend on them to keep the negative elements of this mindset in check (such as being too complacent, too compromising, etc.) But apparently, they either aren’t willing to take on that responsibility or they just don’t have the courage it would take to do it.

  3. The Wall Street Journal’s point, in a nutshell, was that believing in hope was as unrealistic as believing in hobbits. As someone who witnessed the Obama election, I know that Hope wins elections and political battles. It can work for our side too.

    • beaglescout, I think it can, too. But our hope in this case is to see some legitimate limitations on government spending and government intervention, whereas their hope lies more along the lines of…playing politics.

  4. Amen lineholder and the loathsome John McCains of the world have separated themselves and alienated true conservatives, but I wonder if you would join this gamecock debt ceiling flip-flopper in urging our tea partiers, tea partiers-sympathizers and conservatives to hold the line on general solidarity despite differences on the votes on this debt ceiling matter. Given the danger of a president that seems intent upon sabotaging his own nation’s credit standing for political expedience rightly gives many pause and justified fears not only of blame avoidance in the case of a financial crisis but also as being a perverted “cause” of the precipitation of same by a lunatic in the White House.

    For the record, back in April I warned against postponing the showdown over the government shutdown until this debt ceiling issue. I think I was right since we could have had the showdown back then with no foreign bondholders involved.

    But then I did a 180 and was and still do favor not increasing the debt ceiling. Rush said it best. The current debt ceiling imposes a 40% cut in the fed govt and that’s a good start.

    But then I did come to see the wisdom of Boehner given the recklessness of Obama and his threats of default etc.

    But now, today at 5:53pm EDT, I see that Moody’s has undercut the President re doomsday and has essentially endorsed the tea partier position!

    The problem was not caused by tea partier/GOP refusal to do a “clean” debt ceiling bill or any of the iterations Obama and Reid allude to behind the scenes or in their one bill that even they filibuster. The problem is the amount of the debt and lack of a plan to solve the problem going forward. Most of the 22 promise keeper tea partiers that voted no on Boehner’s bill cited the same problem as Moody’s, ie that none of the plans solves the problem. They are all too puny.

    I think the tea partiers have overcome the Boehner leadership and have now laid the foundation that reduces the risk of the no vote on the debt ceiling, ie they have made it quite possible that any crisis that occurs on or around Aug 2 will be seen as the fault of Obama and the Dems.

    My only reason for being for the compromise at this late hour was a fear that a crisis would affirm Obama’s lie given the incompetence of our leadership. I no longer think so.

    But I still say that conservatives should not split over differences on this matter. After all, we are having o protect America from its own President who seems intent on sabotaging his own country. Both sides of this debate have justifiable positions.

    Let us reason together and not split up over this.

    https://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/801-economy/174447-moodys-neither-plan-protects-the-nations-aaa-rating

    Both sides have defensible conservative arguments. We should respect both sides so long as they don’t go all John Hobbitt McCain on us.

    agree?

    • I agree with most of what you say here, GC. I’ve avoided applying RINO and other less-flattering labels to our leadership, because one of the balls we’ve got to keep our eyes on is the removal of Obama from the White House. But it is only one of the balls. There remains the more long-term threat to our national security posed by drunken-sailor spending and outsized federal government.

      What we hobbits objected to about the Boehner-bill-that-Reid-and-McConnel-wrote was that it sure seemed like we just threw down the one sword we had – the House’s power to refuse to raise the debt ceiling – without accomplishing the purported purpose of the exercise(protecting the credit rating).

      I am acutely conscious of my status as a novice political junkie, but I’m reasonably bright and I’ve followed this issue pretty closely. NOBODY has been able to explain to me why it accomplished ANYTHING for the House to pass this watered-down measure,which didn’t stand any better chance of passing the Senate than did CCB, and which also didn’t move us any further down the road toward protecting the credit rating. In other words, why was the “Boehner plan” any better than CCB? And if it was not any better, why pass it?

      Does it really help the GOP political position for 2012 that much to be able to say:

      “Our House majority passed CCB and another watered-down-bill-in-which-we-compromised-our-principles while the Senate and President didn’t do anything.”

      as opposed to:

      “Our House Majority passed CCB while the Senate and President didn’t do anything.”?

      Is anyone other than political junkies going to understand or even pay attention to the distinction between those two positions?

      Maybe there was a good reason for doing that, but if so, the GOP House leadership is doing a pretty lousy job of explaining it to us hobbits. Party over substance sticks in my craw, and doesn’t win us any independents in 2012.

      If they want solidarity and my support (which, again, I tend toward giving them), then they’ve got to explain to me why what they are doing is the right thing to do.

      Also, it would help if they didn’t sneer at me. Or figuratively pat me on the head while telling me that, “We’ve got this.” and “Everything’s going to be ok.” I’m inclined to trust, but would like to be able to verify.

      • By the Obama/Reid logic it is waste of time to pass anything that is not guaranteed beforehand to get enough votes to reach the President and be signed into law. I don’t accept that. The Boehner bill showed that we were willing to compromise while still rejecting tax cuts and still insisting on a balanced budget amendment be sent to the states. It also showed that we are not afraid to take public stands and are not afraid to take stands, plural, to try and protect the nation from a lunatic in the White House.

        We are leaving a paper trail of our reasonableness by any standard. The Dems have a mostly non-paper trail of cowardice, denial and class envy.

        Our paper trail also jibes with Moody’s!

        You shouldn’t, imho, impose such exacting requirements on the conservative/GOP side to win your solidarity. Look who we are up against? Not a perfect, non-existent side that could answer the motive question to your satisfaction. No. We face a putrid blood-sucking vampire Dem Party that needs a stake driven thru its heart. We don’t yet know what form that stake will take…so we try and in the process we make mistakes. But our motives are pure and our bills are SOOOOOO much better than theirs.

        I gave it my best shot gal. People are flawed. Sometimes our ideals have to yield to reality in the real world?

        God bless

        • Don’t misunderstand…I’m with you, GC. No 3rd-party kamikaze missions or anything like that, and I truly do believe that most, if not all, of our GOP leadership means well, even if the execution is sometimes flawed. Certainly what they are doing is better for the country than “putrid blood-sucking vampires” (LOL at that one). Governing is sometimes a matter of doing the best you can under adverse circumstances.

          Recognizing that doesn’t meant that we can’t keep pushing upwards on the bar of what “doing the best you can” means, while at the same time working to ameliorate the adversity of the circumstances.

          I’ll say this: you do a better job of speaking for House leadership than they do for themselves; they should consider hiring you to shape their talking points. 🙂

          Cheers!

  5. I do think that the debate has turned and that the tea party, esp thx to Moody’s, coupled with the inaction of the Dems, is winning the day and that the public gets it…esp when considered with the failed ObamaDem economy. And it helps our PR to have shown a willingness to take a few steps to the left.

    • Mike, I have no intention of being divisive amongst conservatives, only to speak the truth.

      We’re at a point where addressing and resolving the underlying issues regarding our financial situation is more important than conducting politics as usual, and the response on the part of Moody’s only emphasis how true this is.

      I think most of the general public does get it, because they’ve had to go back to old-fashioned kitchen table economics, living within their means, just to survive. Our people are hurting badly, GC. Politics as usual isn’t going to get it this time.

      It is amazing to watch, now that people are starting to work their way past some of the efforts of those on the left to try to control the narrative, but I think you are right in saying that the debate has turned a corner.

      Let me just say again, I have no intention of being divisive amongst conservatives. Fair enough?

    • “WE ARE NOT anymore”. That’s what is driving them nuts, Jaded. They want the status quo and business as usual to continue, because it makes things easier for them, let’s them maintain power, etc.

      If Conservatives want to find a good way to explain their stand to the general public, they might consider using C.S. Lewis’ quote on progress.

      “We all want progress, but if you’re on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road;
      in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive.”

      Conservatives realize this nation is on the wrong road. We’re trying to find a way to get back to the right road, with the best options possible so that our nation will survive.

      But we’re having to go against all these different factions who, even though they may realize that we are on the wrong road, they don’t want to acknowledge this because they either don’t want to lose the status quo of power that the road we’re on gives to them or they are afraid of progressing towards austerity and towards fiscal responsibility.

      So for now, rather than just owning up to the truth and telling the general public that the path we are on is the wrong one, they are trying to undermine and discredit conservatives. That’s why we’re seeing all this brouhaha about the stand conservatives are taking and all these really ridiculous attacks on conservatives, like this hobbit attack by WSJ

  6. The WSJ should really rethink their analogy, not only because the TEA party might, indeed, take it as a compliment but because the underlying implication of Washington D.C. representing Mordor and given the (fictional)fact that it was set as a simple hobbit’s task to break the power of Sauron and Mordor.

    Hmm, wouldn’t that make Obama, Sauron?

    Perhaps we should thank the WSJ, instead? (/sarcasm)

    • Steph, in my own mind, I’ve been equating the Ring of Power with the enticements and allurements of politics, how the process has becomes so corrupted, and the incredible amount of power that goes along with it.

      Since most of that goes on DC, it is our Mordor.

      And actually, all sarcasm aside, this little “hobbit” attack on the part of WSJ is backfiring on them while giving conservatives a chance to explain our viewpoint. Even though I may question the wisdom of the author at WSJ who started this up to begin with, that old saying about looking a gift horse in the mouth comes to mind, doesn’t it?

  1. The Establishment hate uprisings. They want pain to be borne by later generations, and Wall Street in particular has become nothing but a den for crony capitalists. Business as usual, don’t rock the boat, everyone just go along and no one gets hurt.

    Thanks for the f/u article.

    • Jack, most of us on the conservative side of the fence don’t particularly like taking on confrontational roles either. We just want to live our lives in freedom and peace.

      But in this particular case, if these folks in the realm of politics aren’t willing to hold themselves accountable, then we have to take on this role.

  2. This piece seriously needs to be offered to WSJ as an ‘opposing view’ and they need to be dared to publish it.
    “These politicians saw this as becoming the “new norm” in our society and welcomed it gladly because it reduced and/or eliminated their responsibility to be held accountable to We the People of this nation.” This is spot-on analysis, folks. Thanks, Lineholder.

    • Thank you, bobmontgomery. It would simple enough if we could depend on them to keep the negative elements of this mindset in check (such as being too complacent, too compromising, etc.) But apparently, they either aren’t willing to take on that responsibility or they just don’t have the courage it would take to do it.

  3. The Wall Street Journal’s point, in a nutshell, was that believing in hope was as unrealistic as believing in hobbits. As someone who witnessed the Obama election, I know that Hope wins elections and political battles. It can work for our side too.

    • beaglescout, I think it can, too. But our hope in this case is to see some legitimate limitations on government spending and government intervention, whereas their hope lies more along the lines of…playing politics.

  4. Amen lineholder and the loathsome John McCains of the world have separated themselves and alienated true conservatives, but I wonder if you would join this gamecock debt ceiling flip-flopper in urging our tea partiers, tea partiers-sympathizers and conservatives to hold the line on general solidarity despite differences on the votes on this debt ceiling matter. Given the danger of a president that seems intent upon sabotaging his own nation’s credit standing for political expedience rightly gives many pause and justified fears not only of blame avoidance in the case of a financial crisis but also as being a perverted “cause” of the precipitation of same by a lunatic in the White House.

    For the record, back in April I warned against postponing the showdown over the government shutdown until this debt ceiling issue. I think I was right since we could have had the showdown back then with no foreign bondholders involved.

    But then I did a 180 and was and still do favor not increasing the debt ceiling. Rush said it best. The current debt ceiling imposes a 40% cut in the fed govt and that’s a good start.

    But then I did come to see the wisdom of Boehner given the recklessness of Obama and his threats of default etc.

    But now, today at 5:53pm EDT, I see that Moody’s has undercut the President re doomsday and has essentially endorsed the tea partier position!

    The problem was not caused by tea partier/GOP refusal to do a “clean” debt ceiling bill or any of the iterations Obama and Reid allude to behind the scenes or in their one bill that even they filibuster. The problem is the amount of the debt and lack of a plan to solve the problem going forward. Most of the 22 promise keeper tea partiers that voted no on Boehner’s bill cited the same problem as Moody’s, ie that none of the plans solves the problem. They are all too puny.

    I think the tea partiers have overcome the Boehner leadership and have now laid the foundation that reduces the risk of the no vote on the debt ceiling, ie they have made it quite possible that any crisis that occurs on or around Aug 2 will be seen as the fault of Obama and the Dems.

    My only reason for being for the compromise at this late hour was a fear that a crisis would affirm Obama’s lie given the incompetence of our leadership. I no longer think so.

    But I still say that conservatives should not split over differences on this matter. After all, we are having o protect America from its own President who seems intent on sabotaging his own country. Both sides of this debate have justifiable positions.

    Let us reason together and not split up over this.

    https://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/801-economy/174447-moodys-neither-plan-protects-the-nations-aaa-rating

    Both sides have defensible conservative arguments. We should respect both sides so long as they don’t go all John Hobbitt McCain on us.

    agree?

    • I agree with most of what you say here, GC. I’ve avoided applying RINO and other less-flattering labels to our leadership, because one of the balls we’ve got to keep our eyes on is the removal of Obama from the White House. But it is only one of the balls. There remains the more long-term threat to our national security posed by drunken-sailor spending and outsized federal government.

      What we hobbits objected to about the Boehner-bill-that-Reid-and-McConnel-wrote was that it sure seemed like we just threw down the one sword we had – the House’s power to refuse to raise the debt ceiling – without accomplishing the purported purpose of the exercise(protecting the credit rating).

      I am acutely conscious of my status as a novice political junkie, but I’m reasonably bright and I’ve followed this issue pretty closely. NOBODY has been able to explain to me why it accomplished ANYTHING for the House to pass this watered-down measure,which didn’t stand any better chance of passing the Senate than did CCB, and which also didn’t move us any further down the road toward protecting the credit rating. In other words, why was the “Boehner plan” any better than CCB? And if it was not any better, why pass it?

      Does it really help the GOP political position for 2012 that much to be able to say:

      “Our House majority passed CCB and another watered-down-bill-in-which-we-compromised-our-principles while the Senate and President didn’t do anything.”

      as opposed to:

      “Our House Majority passed CCB while the Senate and President didn’t do anything.”?

      Is anyone other than political junkies going to understand or even pay attention to the distinction between those two positions?

      Maybe there was a good reason for doing that, but if so, the GOP House leadership is doing a pretty lousy job of explaining it to us hobbits. Party over substance sticks in my craw, and doesn’t win us any independents in 2012.

      If they want solidarity and my support (which, again, I tend toward giving them), then they’ve got to explain to me why what they are doing is the right thing to do.

      Also, it would help if they didn’t sneer at me. Or figuratively pat me on the head while telling me that, “We’ve got this.” and “Everything’s going to be ok.” I’m inclined to trust, but would like to be able to verify.

      • By the Obama/Reid logic it is waste of time to pass anything that is not guaranteed beforehand to get enough votes to reach the President and be signed into law. I don’t accept that. The Boehner bill showed that we were willing to compromise while still rejecting tax cuts and still insisting on a balanced budget amendment be sent to the states. It also showed that we are not afraid to take public stands and are not afraid to take stands, plural, to try and protect the nation from a lunatic in the White House.

        We are leaving a paper trail of our reasonableness by any standard. The Dems have a mostly non-paper trail of cowardice, denial and class envy.

        Our paper trail also jibes with Moody’s!

        You shouldn’t, imho, impose such exacting requirements on the conservative/GOP side to win your solidarity. Look who we are up against? Not a perfect, non-existent side that could answer the motive question to your satisfaction. No. We face a putrid blood-sucking vampire Dem Party that needs a stake driven thru its heart. We don’t yet know what form that stake will take…so we try and in the process we make mistakes. But our motives are pure and our bills are SOOOOOO much better than theirs.

        I gave it my best shot gal. People are flawed. Sometimes our ideals have to yield to reality in the real world?

        God bless

        • Don’t misunderstand…I’m with you, GC. No 3rd-party kamikaze missions or anything like that, and I truly do believe that most, if not all, of our GOP leadership means well, even if the execution is sometimes flawed. Certainly what they are doing is better for the country than “putrid blood-sucking vampires” (LOL at that one). Governing is sometimes a matter of doing the best you can under adverse circumstances.

          Recognizing that doesn’t meant that we can’t keep pushing upwards on the bar of what “doing the best you can” means, while at the same time working to ameliorate the adversity of the circumstances.

          I’ll say this: you do a better job of speaking for House leadership than they do for themselves; they should consider hiring you to shape their talking points. 🙂

          Cheers!

  5. I do think that the debate has turned and that the tea party, esp thx to Moody’s, coupled with the inaction of the Dems, is winning the day and that the public gets it…esp when considered with the failed ObamaDem economy. And it helps our PR to have shown a willingness to take a few steps to the left.

    • Mike, I have no intention of being divisive amongst conservatives, only to speak the truth.

      We’re at a point where addressing and resolving the underlying issues regarding our financial situation is more important than conducting politics as usual, and the response on the part of Moody’s only emphasis how true this is.

      I think most of the general public does get it, because they’ve had to go back to old-fashioned kitchen table economics, living within their means, just to survive. Our people are hurting badly, GC. Politics as usual isn’t going to get it this time.

      It is amazing to watch, now that people are starting to work their way past some of the efforts of those on the left to try to control the narrative, but I think you are right in saying that the debate has turned a corner.

      Let me just say again, I have no intention of being divisive amongst conservatives. Fair enough?

    • “WE ARE NOT anymore”. That’s what is driving them nuts, Jaded. They want the status quo and business as usual to continue, because it makes things easier for them, let’s them maintain power, etc.

      If Conservatives want to find a good way to explain their stand to the general public, they might consider using C.S. Lewis’ quote on progress.

      “We all want progress, but if you’re on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road;
      in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive.”

      Conservatives realize this nation is on the wrong road. We’re trying to find a way to get back to the right road, with the best options possible so that our nation will survive.

      But we’re having to go against all these different factions who, even though they may realize that we are on the wrong road, they don’t want to acknowledge this because they either don’t want to lose the status quo of power that the road we’re on gives to them or they are afraid of progressing towards austerity and towards fiscal responsibility.

      So for now, rather than just owning up to the truth and telling the general public that the path we are on is the wrong one, they are trying to undermine and discredit conservatives. That’s why we’re seeing all this brouhaha about the stand conservatives are taking and all these really ridiculous attacks on conservatives, like this hobbit attack by WSJ

  6. The WSJ should really rethink their analogy, not only because the TEA party might, indeed, take it as a compliment but because the underlying implication of Washington D.C. representing Mordor and given the (fictional)fact that it was set as a simple hobbit’s task to break the power of Sauron and Mordor.

    Hmm, wouldn’t that make Obama, Sauron?

    Perhaps we should thank the WSJ, instead? (/sarcasm)

    • Steph, in my own mind, I’ve been equating the Ring of Power with the enticements and allurements of politics, how the process has becomes so corrupted, and the incredible amount of power that goes along with it.

      Since most of that goes on DC, it is our Mordor.

      And actually, all sarcasm aside, this little “hobbit” attack on the part of WSJ is backfiring on them while giving conservatives a chance to explain our viewpoint. Even though I may question the wisdom of the author at WSJ who started this up to begin with, that old saying about looking a gift horse in the mouth comes to mind, doesn’t it?

Must Read