Archive for October, 2008
American-European Relations Won’t Change No Matter Who Becomes President
Thursday, October 30th, 2008Dr. James Joyner has an excellent piece at The New Atlanticist. He rightly notes that circumstance dictates relations more than personality. Personal interest and state interest will trump even the most obnoxious personality.
I would note this, however. Dr. Joyner quotes Sir Christopher Meyer who makes the comment that Obama would be considered more conservative in Britain than the most conservative over there because even Obama isn’t calling for nationalized medicine while nationalized medicine is a given in Britain. The problem with using this example is that health care is already nationalized in Britain. Socialism is stubborn. Once a “benefit” is given, it isn’t taken away. It’s “reformed”. So, Obama, were he in Britain would be for expanding services and protecting bureaucracy. So I beg to differ: Obama would most certainly not be a Tory if he were in Britain.
The main substance of the argument, though, is a good one.
What Americans Want: Save Me!
Thursday, October 30th, 2008This election means change, alright, but it’s not the changes that seem evident at first blush.The Wall Street Journal’s Daniel Henniger gets down to what this election means for America:
Push past the historic candidacy, however, and one sees something even larger at stake in this vote. One sees what Joe (The Plumber) Wurzelbacher saw. The real “change” being put to a vote for the American people in 2008 is not simply a break from the economic policies of “the past eight years” but with the American economic philosophy of the past 200 years. This election is about a long-term change in America’s idea of itself.
I don’t agree with the argument that an Obama-Pelosi-Reid government is a one-off, that good old nonideological American pragmatism will temper their ambitions. Not true. With this election, the U.S. is at a philosophical tipping point.
The goal of Sen. Obama and the modern, “progressive” Democratic Party is to move the U.S. in the direction of Western Europe, the so-called German model and its “social market economy.” Under this notion, business is highly regulated, as it would be in the next Congress under Democratic House committee chairmen Markey, Frank and Waxman. Business is allowed to create “wealth” so long as its utility is not primarily to create new jobs or economic growth but to support a deep welfare system.
An Obama presidency would lead America towards a European “social market economy.” (Oct. 30)
The political planets are aligned to make this achievable. In the aftermath of the financial crisis, prominent Democrats, European leaders in France and Germany and more U.S. newspaper articles than one can count have said that the crisis proves the need to permanently tame the American “free-market” model. P.O.W. Alan Greenspan is broadcasting confessions. The question is: Are the American people of a mind to throw in the towel on the system that got them here?
While Europeans seem eager to for Americans to follow them into mediocrity, they ignore what that will mean for them personally. They have had the luxury of depending on American magnanimity for security so they could have universal health care and long vacations. That will likely soon change.
Americans, many of them, see these realities:
We put all this money towards AIDS in Africa, peace in the Middle East, safety in Europe and it seems like we work harder to make ends meet. Protectionism favors Democrats.
All politicians are self-involved, lying, cheating, money-grubbing, above-the-law scumbags. Cynicism favors Democrats.
We used to be able to count on loyalty from our company, a good job that didn’t require much but kept me busy and wage increases that at least met or beat inflation. Job security is a thing of the past. Fear favors Democrats.
The world seems increasingly beyond everyone’s control. Part of the reason that George W. Bush backed the Paulson Plan is because he knows that world-wide panic can cause economic and social chaos. Too many moving parts, too many decisions, too much confusing information.
State control saves a person the trouble of having to think or having to be uncomfortable. Well, that’s the idea anyway.
Americans have traditionally chosen the vicissitudes of a free market because they could see the personal benefit. There is less security, but there is much more reward. When people feel that the reward is out of reach or impossible, they turn to guaranteed not-too-awfulness–socialism. It’s better than destitution or the fear that one may end up destitute. Venezuela is Exhibit “A”, at the moment.
MaxedOutMama, wrote an excellent post in this regard. There is a WHY here and Republicans are not blameless. In fact, a whole host of uncomfortable economic information points to why Americans are where they are at. She says:
I’ll tell you what’s so insane about this election. First, neither candidate is addressing the real US problem, which are policies that have driven the bottom 60% of the US income pyramid into financial difficulty. The 80-90% segment of the pyramid is a derivative of the bottom 60%. The 90-95% segment is a derivative of the 80-90%. The 60-80% plus the 95-100% wedges are too little to carry the rest. What we need to do is subsidize the bottom 5-15%, take some of the tax load off the 15-30%, and increase taxation on the 80% – 100%. The best way to stimulate the middle is to spark corporate growth, which can best be done by going to a moderate flat tax on corporations. I’d suggest 18%.
Those destructive policies are policies of energy starvation, which destroys economies, and industrial starvation, which destroys economies, and a regressive taxation policy which increases the relative load on the bottom of the pyramid. Second, neither candidate is willing to really address the future compounding of our current problems, which is the coming retirement boom. Third, neither candidate is willing to address the nearly global changes in the business climate, which have combined to decrease US ability to compete. Fourth, both candidates advocate a carbon cap and trade policy which would be economic suicide if applied mainly to the US, and global economic suicide if applied fairly.
The bozo election will not end well. It is true that Obama is worse, because McCain’s energy policy is a lot more realistic.
When the bottom 60% feel unstable, even when they have a job, even a regular paycheck, but they live precariously, socialist policies–which would be the exact worst thing for them ultimately but sound good in the short term–become appealing.
The problem with this socialistic impulse: America just can’t do it. With Baby Boomers who have never known a challenging economic moment retiring, there are going to have to be cuts not expansion of the government. But I fear that’s exactly what both candidate will attempt.
These next four years, the next fifteen, are going to be challenging. Looking at all this, the words of Mr. T come to mind: “I pity the fool” who will be facing this mess.
Cross-posted at RightWingNews
Rebuilding The Right Whether McCain Wins Or Loses
Thursday, October 30th, 2008My co-blogger at Right Wing News, John Hawkins has been thinking about this topic. So has Jon Henke. Really, many of us have been pondering the direction of the Right on-line politically. Patrick Ruffini comments about John’s idea to pay bloggers so they could make a living at this business:
But here’s the caveat to Hawkins’s idea: the money would need to go to bloggers committed to making a difference in the political process, not someone who is going to provide the 256th (and wittiest!) insta-reaction to Sarah Palin’s wardrobe on Memeorandum. These people would have to be willing to find races, travel to them, and self-consciously think of themselves as full-time political activists who happen to blog, not mere bloggers.
Here’s the problem:
Bloggers on the Left may well be content to make $30K a year blogging. Many prominent bloggers on the Right have day jobs–this blogger included. And the notion of giving up my job, which I love by the way, to blog for much less money for much more effort, is not exactly appealing.
In addition, my contact with people gives me a perspective. It’s real world. It keeps me grounded. It broadens my perspective. Not to mention, it’s a business where I get a feedback, like right now, about how government health care, insurance, tax, and privacy policies practically apply.
I’m thinking of influential bloggers on the Right and most of them have a profession which is also why they are writing smarter takes:
Lawyers: Glenn Reynolds, Ann Althouse, the guys at Powerline, Gina Cobb, Stephen Bainbridge
Economists: Maxed Out Mama, Megan McArdle
Doctors/Psychologists: Dr. Helen, Dr. Pat Santy
Teachers/Professors: Dr. Sanity, Betsy Newmark, Jeff Goldstein, Glenn Reynolds
Soldiers: Too many to list
Writers: Lileks, The Anchoress, Kaus
There are a whole host of bloggers making a living blogging–Michelle Malkin and her guys at HotAir, Ace (I’m guessing), Charles Johnson of LGF, Jim Hoft aka Gateway Pundit and even John Hawkins.
Still, everyone listed seem to be informed commentators who are increasingly serving as investigators, fact-checkers, and journalists. Patrick Ruffini himself mentions that he’s employed elsewhere.
It seems to me, this falls to the younger generation then–college students, recent grads and young people who would like to be in politics or journalists but do not want to be part of the MSM ideological milieu. How do they become more cohesive and active? How do established bloggers help these younger people who may well make a career doing investigative journalism or political activism exclusively via the web?
Fox News has featured the work of two young women who are doing yeoman’s work investigating voter fraud in Ohio. Their work has bubbled up through the media but do they have a way to perhaps continue their mission after graduation–perhaps using new media as a tool for local activism. Additionally, is there a way for them to make a living doing it?
Money is at issue and organization. The second idea first: Republicans have a big tent. Big. Tent. And, those who choose to come in the tent are independent. Unlike the Borg-like monolith that is the on-line Left where ideological purity is valued and dissent is squelched, the online-Right has wide ranging opinions, nuance if you will, on nearly every topic. Many on the Right simply like being lone-guns. They are individualistic and resistant to group-think. (Thankfully!) It does make building a cohesive online coalition daunting.
And then, there’s money. Since many bloggers on the Right view their blogging as a hobby, they don’t think in terms of money–1) asking for it for themselves or 2) asking people to donate to campaigns. Many are concerned about the national stage and ignore the local political machinations. I know I have. But if this election has proven anything, politics is local, local, local. Republicans need a stronger bench and need to support the strength that waits in the wings. And there is strength there, but those people will need money and visibility and support to make it to the next level.
Bloggers can do this. Bloggers are doing this. The Right will have to use a different model for using new media to be the grassroots effort than the Left has used. I just don’t see a Kos-like cult building on the Right. Not the same way. Still, an organic, loose affiliation and information sharing network is a good start. Twitter has actually helped me in this regard. I’m keeping better track of many things political both locally and nationally via Twitter.
Ultimately, the answer is people. The answer to my way of thinking is finding a way to capture the imagination and energy of the youth and giving them a viable alternative to getting “real jobs”–at least for a time. And these people will need support and a structure..and money.
If Republicans face a Democratic House, Senate and Executive branch who will put three radical judges in the Supreme Court, that will focus their independent spirits. And out of desperation, the establishment may be willing, at long last, to try some new ideas.
A Reply To The Blue State Secession Craig’s List Entry
Wednesday, October 29th, 2008A Reply To The Blue State Secession Craig’s List Entry
Smell ya later, Blue Staters!
Feminists On “Heteronormative Dating”
Wednesday, October 29th, 2008Feminists On “Heteronormative Dating”
It’s the patriarchy’s fault.
Liveblogging Late Blogging Obama’s Video
Wednesday, October 29th, 2008
Sigh. I wonder if the Koz kids are sad Barack Obama broke his promise about public financing? Doubt it.
Wow, he’s Mr. America; the every man.
He’ll BUILD OUR MILITARY? Ha! And He’ll renew diplomacy.
Well, the idea is to make him look like the president already. So far it’s succeeding. This is propaganda done right. Powerful.
He’s for the working guy. They interview a third generation Ford guy who is afraid for his future.
Lot’s of pictures of Obama hugging average folks.
Now, he’s live from Florida.
It ends with soaring music. More thoughts in a minute.
Here’s my two cents about this: Overkill.
I’m wondering if the Obama campaign isn’t making a mistake by doing this. They have such overwhelmingly positive press coverage, I wonder if this sort of thing won’t backfire–as in the American people feel coerced and manipulated.
Not to mention, any sports fan will be irritated by having the game disrupted by politics.
$3 million dollars in this advertising buy. I can’t help but thinking that if a Republican did this there’d be talk that he was buying the election.
Barack’s Other Woman?
Wednesday, October 29th, 2008Barack’s Other Woman?
I don’t know that his voters would care if he had a harem.
Even Businesses Foist Their Bias–UPDATED
Wednesday, October 29th, 2008When I was in Destin a week or so ago, I stopped by the Barnes-n-Noble to pick up, hopefully, Jonah Goldberg’s book Liberal Fascism (a must read, by the way).
Here is what I saw:
To calm down from the irritating book display: a walk on the beach.
And this picture I uploaded for my own amusement. Have you ever seen a more hideous lamp? This was the lamp that was in the house we rented. There is no accounting for taste, I’ll tell you that. That thing probably cost a lot of money. It’s more than a little frightening. Don’t you find monkeys as decorative objects freaky?
All photos taken with my 3G iPhone.
UPDATED: This B&N was located in Destin, Florida. There were few conservative books at all. I found one copy of “Liberal Fascism” and one copy of John Fund’s “Stealing Elections” nestled in the Current Events section. One would think, from a business perspective, that the goal would be to cater to the clientele–which in the panhandle is predominantly conservative. But, no.
I can safely guesstimate that the ratio of liberal to conservative books was at least 3:1, probably more like 4:1. That included the table displays (where a tiny corner of the other side of the table pictured had like four obscure–not best seller–books) and the book shelves.
Cross-posted at RightWingNews
