« The Knucklehead of the Day award | Main | Oklahoma Tea Party »

Larry Kudlow for Senate?

K-Lo at The Corner tells us that there is a possibility Larry Kudlow is considering a run against Chris Dodd in Connecticut for the Senate. I pray he does. We need more men and women like Kudlow, people who truly understand economics and business, in our government. Senator Kudlow has a wonderful ring to it.

Jennifer Rubin at Commentary Magazine's blog has more:

Kudlow would bring instant name recognition and plenty of funding, but more importantly a wealth of economic knowledge. A debate between the two over the management of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae would be a thing to behold. Kudlow has been approached and is considering the possibilities. Also on the horizon is former Congressman Rob Simmons. So stay tuned: we might just have the most entertaining and most educational senate race in a long time.

How much fun would that be!


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments (12)

Ooh, that would be fun. I'... (Below threshold)

Ooh, that would be fun. I'd love to hear Kudlow's thoughts about this, in hindsight:

President George W. Bush may turn out to be the top economic forecaster in the country.

About a month ago he told reporters, "We're not in a recession, we're in a slowdown."


Interesting -- isn't it? -- just how durable and resilient our low-tax, free-market, capitalist economy truly is.

Very interesting, economist man.

Interesting -- isn't it?... (Below threshold)

Interesting -- isn't it? -- just how durable and resilient our low-tax, free-market, capitalist economy truly is.

Oh please. Larry Kudlow wouldn't know a capitalist economy if it bit him in the ass. Doesn't anybody else see the intellectual bankruptcy that conservatism has become? The conservative, "intellectual" economists of today are nothing more than Keynesian hacks.

Kudlow is so bereft of principles that Kudlow doesn't even know what Kudlow believes. Back in mid-September he was explaining why we needed to stop bailing out firms, because of the problem of moral hazard. Then, after the bailout was rejected by the House and the leaders were putting in "sweeteners", Kudlow said he couldn't support any plan that contained limits on executive pay. Then he came out saying how great the bailout would be for taxpayers. The fact that the plan still contained limits on executive pay apparently didn't bother him anymore. Then Kudlow explained that Paulson needed to "recapitalize" the banks without punishing shareholders. i.e., the talk about moral hazard was out the window.

The Republicans. I doubt they'll ever wake up. Can anybody tell me how they differentiate themselves from the Democrats anymore? They've become a party hijacked by unintelligent neocons.

This is exciting? This is disgusting.

While your taking the time ... (Below threshold)

While your taking the time to vote me down, maybe you could take the time to answer my questions. What differentiates the Republicans from the Democrats these days? I mean besides just being the shadows of the Democrats. Anyone?

Clay,Sometimes, I ... (Below threshold)


Sometimes, I wonder myself. The only difference I can find so far is that Republicans at least read the stimulus bill. Of course, three Senators voted for it anyway - they are (and have been) indistinguishable from Democrats. 3rd party options are even less viable so...

And who is Larry Kudlow?

I hope that Larry Kudlow ru... (Below threshold)

I hope that Larry Kudlow runs! Fantastic!

For those of you who don't know him, Larry Kudlow has a show on CNBC where he discusses the economy and the financial markets. He was part of the economic team for President Reagan.

Kudlow really does know economics and he would be an outstanding national spokesperson, too, for Republicans on this matter.

I really hope that Larry Kudlow runs because he is not only knowledgeable about economics but also he is a Ronald Reagan type conservative. We need more Reagan-type Republicans in office - loves America, fiscally conservative and believes in smaller government.

And who is Larry Kudlow?... (Below threshold)

And who is Larry Kudlow?

Here's Larry Kudlow's bio at CNBC: http://www.cnbc.com/id/15838083/
He's a supply-side 'economist' who contributes to the anti-intellectual arm of the neoconservatives.

3rd party options are even less viable so...

Sun-Tzu is considered one of the greatest military tacticians of all time. I have learned much from studying his strategies. The herding technique is one of the most effective methods of manipulating those to be conquered into the right direction. This is how it works as applied to our two-party system:

The power brokers behind the scenes make sure their puppet candidate is the only one offered up to the voters on a party ticket. The voters of either party (Democrat or Republican) don't want that candidate, but feel they have no choice. Then comes the pressure about party loyalty and in the end, the people are manipulated into voting against their principles and for a candidate they don't want. In the end, the power brokers got exactly what they wanted.

They exclaim, "Voting a third party will give us Obama - don't waste your vote!" Or "Voting a third party will give us McCain - don't waste your vote!" The same old guilt trip laid on Americans who dare to think and will stand firm in their convictions. This is the herding technique at its finest: make individuals who want to stand up and vote their conscious feel guilty because their vote might be the one that returns one of these corrupted politicians to office.

When a nation whose people will no longer stand up for principle, values and what's right because of money, that nation has lost its soul.

Voting for the lesser of two evils won't save this country, it will only hasten a total collapse. If you are so afraid that to vote your conscious will put the lesser of the two evils in office, then I say you have already lost the right to be free and I am ashamed to call you my fellow countryman.

What is the difference betw... (Below threshold)

What is the difference between Republicans and Democrats?

Democrats believe that everyone will be better off if we get rid of the rich people. In other words, tear them down in order to lift everyone else up. Their way of doing this is by making the government the daddy of the country.

Republicans believe that the country is better off if we lift people up and raise the standard of living for everyone. How? 1. By not burdening people with a big government that they have to support with taxes. 2. By creating an environment where individual initiative and entrepreneurship can thrive. Government is not the answer, people who make businesses and create jobs are.

Do you think that all of the technology startups in Silicon Valley could have come out of government? No. Government by nature does not foster entrepreneurship because risk-taking is not in its nature.

New jobs come from new ideas and people willing to take risks. This can only happen in the private sector, not in government. For example, Federal Express came from a person who had an idea and took a risk on it. The government for years had been delivering mail. Why didn't the government create a Federal Express before an individual did?

The move towards bigger government and the control of our country is a move away from the entrepreneurial spirit that has helped make our country great.

Big government is not the solution.

Do you think that all of... (Below threshold)

Do you think that all of the technology startups in Silicon Valley could have come out of government? No. Government by nature does not foster entrepreneurship because risk-taking is not in its nature.

Compare NASA now to NASA in the early days. It's become MUCH more risk-adverse and less innovative on a large scale. There's still pockets where slightly risky activity is okay - creating probes and the like - but if you told someone in the 1960s that not only would we NOT have an outpost on the moon, but we'd barely have a space station in 2009, served by a 30-year old space transport system, they'd have thought you were nuts. Why would we EVER go so slowly?

Or nuclear power. We've got the various big fusion projects going on - consuming billions with a 50 year projected payout... and it's been 50 years for the last, oh, 50 years? Big government projects, turned into long-term PhD jobs programs, with no real usuable results expected.

Then you've got the shoestring-funded (actually, at $1.8 million - that's right, MILLION - it's more like frayed sewing thread...) Polywell fusion project going... which has had very promising results. Think that'd be good enough to throw a half-billion at to see if it really scales up? The government doesn't think so. It's too risky to spend that sort of money on it.

Look at energy. 50 years back, even if fusion was still a pipe dream fission plants were still quite doable, and relatively safe. (Especially compared to coal - the uranium and thorium emitted by your standard coal-burning plants dwarfs what got out of Three Mile Island, and we won't even talk about the fly ash problem.) But with the 'help' of environmentalists, THAT tech has pretty well been roadblocked by government regulations ostensibly designed for 'safety' considerations - but with a practical effect of building absolutely nothing anywhere near anything. There's even groups looking to block windmills due to bird safety, and concern over NOISE issues.

The risk vs reward assessment has skewed so far in the direction of NO risk at all being the only acceptable level that it's not even funny.

How long will it be until private sector entrepreneurial risk is discouraged?

Democrats believe that e... (Below threshold)

Democrats believe that everyone will be better off if we get rid of the rich people.

You're an idiot.

You're an idiot.9.... (Below threshold)

You're an idiot.

9. Posted by hyperbolist

And you are a Canadian.

You ever notice how we're s... (Below threshold)

You ever notice how we're supposed to completely ignore the advice of folks in the financial industry, yet completely believe everything Congress tells us as far as financially running the country goes? Yet Congress is primarily made up of lawyers - which generically see reality and truth as being subservient to the needs of their client.

Best ask yourself - who do they see as the client? It might be a real good idea to figure that out before we trust them with MORE of our money.

Then again - it may well be too late.

TFS,You've describ... (Below threshold)


You've described what Republicans say they believe. I say that talk is cheap. Tell me what the Republicans have done in the last decade to demonstrate their heartfelt beliefs. I'm confident after such an exercise you'll see that there is little difference between the two parties.

True patriots examine the evidence and execute for good of the country, not the party. The revolution should be as much against what's wrong with the Republicans as the Democrats.

Sheep respond to the party's voice. Think about a higher calling.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy