Is It a Party of Abstractions?

http://editors.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2013/02/is_it_a_party_of_abstractions.php?ref=fpblg

TPM Reader PT asks whether Rubio or Republicans at large are able to propose anything more than abstractions.

I don’t think that any of the commentary on the SOTU and its response has quite grasped the point which came home to me sometime this morning: that because of its ideology, the Republican Party is reduced to arguing against the Democratic Party policies, and for its own, entirely on the basis of abstractions.

In the SOTU, President Obama proposed an increase in the minimum wage, controls on greenhouse gases, gun control legislation, and increased spending on public works (amongst other things). Whether you agree with him or not, in each of these cases you can identify (a) the problem which President Obama is concerned about and (b) the way in which the proposed policy fixes addresses the problem. In most cases it’s easy to connect the problem and its solution to the lives of regular people (though not so much in the case of climate change, perhaps). 

all of the above are what they want us to disregard the scientific data that supports all of it in favor of their local republican following the talking point de jour and denying it, for some reason the Ghostbuster's theme just jumped in my mind thinking about when the first undeniable hit us, "who you gonna call", republicans?

Similarly, the Republican argument against Democratic Party policy proposals is generally that they will result in more harm than good, again as side-effects and in ways which are generally not specified. Increasing public works spending will “increase the deficit.” So what? The Republicans don’t say, but imply that it will cause economic problems. Raising the minimum wage will cause employers to hire fewer people and/or fire more people, offsetting its effect on improving the lives of people living with minimum wage jobs.

It’s not just Rubio or the response speech, either. Thinking back to the Presidential campaign, my recollection is that it was a similar situation: the President proposing policies which were at least designed to address real problems in a clearly-understandable way; Governor Romney responding by asserting that cutting taxes on high earners, cutting government spending, etc, would make everything better for everyone via some unspecified mechanism. 

bottom line; THEY ARE AND HAVE BEEN LYING TO US.   remember never any specifics from them while they tried to attach their guilt to him.  the worse type of liar is the one everybody knows is doing it, pathetic, when you have claim you have "values" but not enough humanity, or character to be elected,  only other avenue "lie baby lie".