Sometimes A Rant Just Won't Do

My friend over at A Red Mind In A Blue State complained that Hillary Clinton's Christmas ad was a sure sign of the socialist apocalypse. A sign that Republicans believe in God and Democrats believe in Santa Clause.

I responded, with a most unmeasured rant, howling at the moon really, since virtually all of A Red Mind's readers (at least those who post responses) are even more conservative than A Red Mind.

I pointed out that no one has been more Santa Clause to more people who did not deserve it than Bush pere and Bush fils. Examples --

The Savings & Loan Bailout

The War In Iraq - with so much money going to Republican Contractors

The Medicaid Prescription Drug Plan -- with so much money going to the Insurance Industry

The Wall Street Bailout -- underreported -- but in August the Fed basically let the hedge funds who invested in Nationwide directly, and the ones who stuffed their portfolios with bad subprime mortgage paper off the hook (sort of) by basically pumping an infusion of cash into the stock market -- socializing the most capitalist of institutions.

Only after I posted the rant did I realize that Red Mind was just quoting Jonah Goldberg (son of Lucianne, the Benedict Arnold to Monica Lewinsky) who was in turn quoting P.J. O'Rourke. So Red Mind was basically quoting two humorists making a joke.

I, of course, took it seriously. Sorry.

I guess I'm overly protective of Hillary. But it was something more than that.

I would like to see Hillary get the nomination. I have a lot of reasons, but these two will have to suffice

(a) I agree with virtually all of the things she has said, and has voted for, as a Senator (although she has, admittedly, said some contradictory things as a Presidential candidate).

(b) The Clintons are the only Democrats venal enough to stand up to the Republicans in their attempts to swift boat. More importantly, the Clintons are the only Democrats who understand the election process well enough to be able to steal the election back from the Republicans after the Republicans try to steal it from them.

But what really yanked my chain is this notion that although the Republicans spent six years controlling all three branches of government -- and in those six years threw more money away, with less accountability, to more people who didn't need the money -- these Republicans would have you believe that the "real" Republican party is somewhat more responsible and more frugal.

The "real" Republican party likes to spend money just like every other political party does. And there is no Republican currently running (well, maybe Ron Paul) who is talking about shrinking government, or making the people less at the mercy of big government.

The only difference between Democrats and Republicans is who should get the government money.

Not surprisingly, the Democrats prefer to give money to poorer people. They tend to vote Democratic. Not surprisingly, the Republicans prefer to give money to richer people. They tend to vote Republican. And if either Huckabee or Romney get in, there would be more money given to people who believe in the establishment of an American religion that doesn't exist yet.