What happens next?
Five years ago, Jonathan Chait said this in TNR:
I hate President George W. Bush. There, I said it. I think his policies rank him among the worst presidents in U.S. history. And, while I’m tempted to leave it at that, the truth is that I hate him for less substantive reasons, too. I hate the inequitable way he has come to his economic and political achievements and his utter lack of humility (disguised behind transparently false modesty) at having done so. His favorite answer to the question of nepotism — “I inherited half my father’s friends and all his enemies” — conveys the laughable implication that his birth bestowed more disadvantage than advantage.
He reminds me of a certain type I knew in high school — the kid who was given a fancy sports car for his sixteenth birthday and believed that he had somehow earned it. I hate the way he walks — shoulders flexed, elbows splayed out from his sides like a teenage boy feigning machismo. I hate the way he talks — blustery self-assurance masked by a pseudo-populist twang. I even hate the things that everybody seems to like about him. I hate his lame nickname-bestowing — a way to establish one’s social superiority beneath a veneer of chumminess…
I have friends who have a viscerally hostile reaction to the sound of his voice or describe his existence as a constant oppressive force in their daily psyche. Nor is this phenomenon limited to my personal experience: Pollster Geoff Garin, speaking to The New York Times, called Bush hatred “as strong as anything I’ve experienced in 25 years now of polling”…
Bush is a far more radical president than Clinton was…Bush crusaded for an enormous supply-side tax cut that was anathema to liberals. But, where Reagan followed his cuts with subsequent measures to reduce revenue loss and restore some progressivity to the tax code, Bush proceeded to execute two additional regressive tax cuts. Combined with his stated desire to eliminate virtually all taxes on capital income and to privatize Medicare and Social Security, it’s not much of an exaggeration to say that Bush would like to roll back the federal government to something resembling its pre-New Deal state…
Bush’s foreign policy…the way Bush sold it — by playing upon the public’s erroneous belief that Saddam had some role in the September 11 attacks — hearkened back to the deceit that preceded the Spanish-American War. Bush’s doctrine of preemption, which reserved the right to invade just about any nation we desired, was far broader than anything he needed to validate invading a country that had flouted its truce agreements for more than a decade…
Bush has governed as the most partisan president in modern U.S. history. The pillars of his compassionate-conservative agenda — the faith-based initiative, charitable tax credits, additional spending on education — have been abandoned or absurdly underfunded. Instead, Bush’s legislative strategy has revolved around wringing out narrow, party-line votes for conservative priorities by applying relentless pressure to GOP moderates…
The other day, Mark Hyman said this in the American Spectator:
Barack Obama despises America. When people who voted for Obama in 2008 — including registered Democrats — start speaking in normal conversational voices at dinner parties, neighborhood gatherings and PTA meetings that the over-inflated ego from Chicago has it “in for America,” then it’s clear most reasonable people have reached the same conclusion…Consider these facts.
The 30-years of Obama’s post-adolescent life are radical by any measure. First, he grew up listening to the ramblings of committed Communist Frank Marshall Davis. It had such a profound effect on him that he wrote fondly of Davis in his first book. In fact, that book is replete with statement after statement about how the U.S. is deeply flawed. Most Americans believe in American exceptionalism. Not so with Obama.
Patriotic Americans would not have listened to the bigoted, anti-Semitic, hate-America rants of a fringe religious leader for 20 seconds let alone for 20 years. Yet, Obama who admitted he attended services at Trinity United Church at least twice a month for two decades called Jeremiah Wright his mentor and his moral sounding board. Nor would most Americans cultivate a close friendship with an admitted domestic terrorist…
In his speech before the Muslim world, Obama made the patently absurd claim of equivalency between the status of displaced Palestinians and the slaughter of millions of Jews during the Holocaust. His claim that 7 million Muslims live in the U.S. is a figure inflated by as much as 700%…Obama claimed that the U.S. is not a Christian nation, which is at odds with the fact that 79% of Americans self-identify as Christians…
the door to greater individual freedoms in Iran was firmly closed shut when Obama announced the U.S would not meddle in Iran’s election and he offered no encouragement to democracy activists who protested the obviously stolen elections. His silence was deafening when regime security agents savagely attacked and killed countless Iranians who took to the streets…
Obama’s disagreement with American values and institutions is evident in domestic issues. He has stocked his administration with wild-eyed radicals who believe foreign law trumps the U.S. Constitution (Harold Koh); include an avowed Marxist and “truther” who believes George Bush was complicit in the 9/11 attack and is also an ardent supporter of cop-killer Mumia Abu Jamal (Van Jones); and include a devoted admirer of Mao Tse-tung who slaughtered as many as 75 million people (Anita Dunn). (In contrast, George W. Bush’s Attorney-General nominee John Ashcroft was savaged by the news media for being an Evangelical Christian.) Three weeks after America’s first black president was sworn in, the nation’s first black Attorney-General who was hand-picked by Obama, called America “a nation of cowards”…
In May, Obama immediately issued a statement that he was “shocked and outraged by the murder” of a Kansas doctor specializing in partial-birth abortions. He called it a “heinous act of violence.” Attorney-General Holder mobilized U.S. Marshals nationwide to provide protection to abortion clinics. But Obama remained silent the very next day when two U.S. soldiers were gunned down by a Muslim extremist outside a Little Rock recruiting station…
Five months later, another Muslim fanatic gunned down nearly four dozen Americans, killing 13, at the Ft. Hood army base. It was an act that demanded the most serious demeanor of the military’s Commander-in-Chief. Yet, Obama referenced the massacre in the most insincere fashion just seconds after a jocular shout-out to an audience member during a public speaking engagement.
We live in a profoundly divided country today. It seems to us unlikely that the republic can long endure this state. What would it take, if anything, to unite the country again? If the country does come together, will it be under the Left, the Right, or something else?
November 13th, 2009 at 8:11 am
RE what will it take to unite the country? I don’t know. I don’t see any internal or external threat to the USA that will bring Left and Right together, no matter how severe. I fear we will blunder along as we have until the wealth transfer checks bounce, and then we come apart at the seams. And I fear if that happens we face either secession or Civil War. There is no guarantee that the outcomes of either would be better than what we have now. Am I being overly pessimistic?
November 13th, 2009 at 10:38 am
I think this country will be united for us although we may not know it at the time. I’ve never been one of those who see danger around every corner but I see far too many examples of how people in this administration are trying to use or create chaos to further their own agenda. My watchword: Question everything! Nothing is what it seems.
November 13th, 2009 at 10:59 am
The US will be united once the majority of voters identify themselves as independents. The US is well on it’s way to becoming united.
This economic mess will pull people together once they have tried all the “This won’t hurt a bit” schemes. The continuum of the extremes of the left and right will be seen as a discussion be those that like vanilla, and those that like French Vanilla. The continuum is a circle.
I wouldn’t worry about the US being united. Nobody is watching TV (look at the shows being offered). The average person knows what is wrong or right. Once things get ‘tough’ they will move to the middle. Neighbour will help neighbour just so long as the neighbour isn’t a jackaxe or follows a hammerhead Imam.
November 13th, 2009 at 11:09 am
We do live in a divided country but the division is more commonly over which road to take and not over the underlying goal. Both parties and from most accounts nearly everyone in the country wishes to reduce poverty. It is not the goal, but the road to poverty reduction that causes contention. In a minority of the time it is the underlying goal, which is in contention, for example abortion. Even with war the issue is seldom the ultimate goal but whether the road – warfare is appropriate.
This is a much less serious issue than contention over the underlying goal or issue. Usually one side will be given some time to address these issues then the other side. The problem today is we are all conditioned to expect immediate results and we are all entitled to our way. The result is wailing and gnashing of teeth from both sides. When the R is in power the D has no patience for results and so spends there time screaming about incompetence. The R complains they are not given enough time to craft solutions. And so it goes.
The process is in major part self-correcting, although the white noise is frequently deafening. We will survive this period of strife.
I would also suggest that the white noise during these periods of stress is exacerbated if the society is undergoing a period of rapid technological change.
The problem where the contention is over the underlying goal is much more dangerous. But it also has a natural relief valve. (Note sometimes the relief is worst that the initiating pressure).
Eric Hoffer noted in the True Believer that mass, revolutionary, religious, nationalistic, political and other movements appeal to individuals for reasons, which include, amelioration of self-hatred, and sudden and spectacular change in the individual’s life. Those who have no faith in themselves find faith in leaders and causes outside of themselves. Those who have no justification of excellence in themselves find such excellence in a cause or movement. Hoffer wryly noted, “A man is likely to mind his own business when it is worth minding. When it is not, he takes his mink off his own meaningless affairs by minding other people’s business.”
Today such movements exist more commonly on the left and account for the strong anti Bush and anti Republican feelings, and the nearly overwhelming desire on the left to mind everyone else’s business. I suspect this is primarily due to the fact that the left has abandoned god-based religions and now adheres to numerous secular humanist religions.
This would be tragic if not for the relief valve. The individual’s receptivity to mass movement does not stop upon finding one movement. Saul of Tarsus sublimated to the diametrically opposite Paul. Yesterdays devout religious convert is today’s global warming adherent and tomorrows animal rights fanatic.
Thus we should expect rapid change from the current radical movements towards other movements. This happens, as the movement is unable to offer the adherents the same level of benefit that other movements offer.
Remember the acid rain movement? Me neither but in the 1980’s people worried about acid rain and worked themselves into a fevered pitch. The mass movement offered the individual adherent many of the benefits discussed above. But after a while the average person became inured to the constant fear mongering and the power of the acid rain movement waned. The next morning it vanished, never to be seen from again, well almost never.
Expect this sudden change to occur in many of the mass movements we see today and replacement by new and sexier movements. Sadly this is a great waste of time churning these millions of people and diverting time, talent, and resources away from real problems.
It is possible that your fears will be realized and the Union will fracture. It did in the 1860’s but the issues then were very deeply held. Today the issues are so shallow they nearly all have that beautiful rainbow oil sheen, which is the hallmark of shallowness. Regardless it will be a wild ride. Buckle up. And keep a written scorecard. Once gone even the most observant acolyte will forget he ever knew about the movement let alone was a mover and shaker.
Mark Sherman
November 13th, 2009 at 11:37 am
comrade obama is uniting the middle with the right.
that;’s good enough for me.
November 14th, 2009 at 1:44 am
Friday morning links…
Photos from Cassini (as is this photo)
For history buffs, two books via Theo:
Greek And Roman Artillery, Technical TreatiesE. W. MarsdenAndGreek and Roman Artillery. Historical DevelopmentE. W. Marsden
Prayer is ruining me for blogging. Anc…
November 14th, 2009 at 3:40 am
The word is tolerance, so good luck with that. The religious right, for want of a better description are hell bent on forcing their morals on everyone. The Democrats are hell bent on extending the power of the state. Those who want a fiscally sound, limited government that sticks to its enumerated powers have nowhere to go.
I’d prefer not to see people destroy their lives with drugs, but the war on drugs is a disaster. I’d prefer people have health insurance, but where does a state get off mandating that, or what will and will not be covered? Or thatcitizens must pay so illegal aliens will be covered?
If I’m not harming you, what I do is none of your business. Nobody in government believes that. Your property is not your property. Your life is not your life. Not when some fool in government or in a black robe decides otherwise. What we have now will only get worse, until the people revolt. It won’t happen in my lifetime, but it will happen. This government won’t last 400 years. It may not make 300.
November 14th, 2009 at 5:35 am
It is unlikely that anything short of a complete collapse of civilization will generate actual unity, and that unity will be limited to those with the grit to survive.
If we were physically invaded the folks on the left would either (a) celebrate the U.S. finally getting what it deserved, (b) apologize for inconveniencing the invaders, (c) wonder what we did wrong to inspire the invaders, (d) make a deal for a cushy place in the prospective new regime – (a), (b), (c), and (d) are all facets of the same worldview.
Toynbee was right – civilizations don’t die by murder, they die by suicide.
November 14th, 2009 at 6:40 am
The Left has proven (to my satisfaction) that they have such a different and opposite world-view or reality-view than I do that I have no desire to be “united” with them. The Religious Right are just as bad when it comes to certain social issues, though frankly they at least seem to accept the concept of personal responsibility.
It isn’t just that I disagree with these groups about a wide varety of issues, but that they seem to be determined to ram their views through via law and regulation, essentially trying to make my viewpoints illegal. We can’t just disagree, but they have to pose that disagreement as some kind of moral, ethical, or legal failing on my part. They have made it impossible to just agree to disagree. And to add insult to injury, they use the power of taxation to try and make me pay for my own destruction. (Reminds me of the Communist Chinese charging the people they were about to execute for the cost of the bullet they were about to shoot them with.)
I think many of the Leftist policies and viewpoints are self-destructive, as soon as they can’t find someone else to pay the bills. I’m looking forward to the day when it all hits the fan, they come crying about unity and how we’re all in it together. I wouldn’t piss on them if they were on fire. That day can’t come soon enough.
Who wants “united”?
November 15th, 2009 at 1:46 am
Isn’t corruption the biggest problem?
Even though there are many problems with political correctness misdirecting US efforts, the huge problems stemmed from shadow banking and bailouts for the rich, from the savings and loan “crisis” to LTCM in Clinton’s day; then Fannie and Freddie and gang built up to our latest group of bailouts and even government takeovers (with some pigs more equal than others).
These were all foreseeable (and many screamed but were ignored), and the failure was not lack of regulation so much as lack of prosecution and oversight. These shadow bankers were allowed to leverage themselves 300:1 and dream up derivatives with underlying promises in the hundreds of trillions.
Government went off the deep end when they allowed these to leak into our financial system, and then became the underwriter for their failures. Profit was private, now the risk is socialized and these private party scoundrels have safely parked their billions in profits away, even as some continue to profit from the clean up.
Goldman and others have men in place to direct US policy toward their financial ends, and they can window dress damaging policy with grand ideas like social justice, or managed economy. But the latest spike in borrowing is our undoing, and the amateur Obama seems just a show for “the masses” while our financial system is ruined.
Bush dealt with Enron, and at least warned of the Fannie Freddie storm brewing, as Democrats used class warfare to make matters worse. Our deepest problems are financial, and it is Democrats that are now pushing not just higher taxes, but redistribution of wealth, even as unemployment climbs. The continued fleecing of America seems at the root of our problems.
The left has been on a march to fundamentally change us toward socialism or Marxism since the 60′s, and Republicans have been swayed their way. But corruption is at the heart of the problem of BigGov, and we are seeing that in spades right now. (no racial intent intended, though race baiting has become a favorite tool for distraction).
Real solutions are being ignored … this is about power and takeover. Soaring rhetoric about a brave new world is merely distraction, as it is for tin horn dictator types. If 2010 isn’t a major change, something Orwellian (or Huxleyan) is heading our way.
The biggest division is between our public servants in DC, and their constituents. Left and right is largely just their game of distraction from all the corruption, and “less BigGov, more prosecution”, is my solution for less corruption.