America’s politics are more and more resembling those of the Soviet Union, where very little is at stake, 90% of the issues are off the table and decided by committees of connected elites, and the theater of politics, including elections, are there mostly to cover up the reality.
Last week we observed vitriolic denunciations and counter-denunciations of Republicans and Democrats in the run-up to the budget funding bill, but in the end only $60B (and possibly less) was ultimately cut. These cuts only affected the small sliver of discretionary spending. This is chump change when we have a $1T yearly deficit and tens of trillions(!) of unfunded liabilities in the decades ahead.
Obama this week in a highly partisan speech denounced the Republican proposals, in particular those of the fairly serious Paul Ryan, as mean-spirited and violative of the American “social compact.” His liberal supporters swooned at his passionate defense of the welfare state, but in doing so he and they as well remind us that they are not serious people and are not taking seriously the unfunded liabilities that cannot be sustained in the decades ahead. Something must give.
Republicans may not be terribly serious or courageous on average, but a few of them are very serious and are saying what needs to be said about the budget problems. Of course, sacred cows like our bloated defense budget, bailouts for banks, various forms of corporate welfare such as farm subsidies, and much else should be on the table. But at least the topic of our fiscal problems is on the table among Republicans and not dealt with through magical thinking, as in the mind of Obama. Much of the credit belongs to the Tea Party, the amorphous collection of grass roots conservative activists who were not terribly impressed with W’s spending spree and were jolted into action by Obama Care. This movement, while containing many unserious people, has at its core a very serious point: we are spending ourselves into oblivion and must get a handle on it or our country will destroy itself.
Obama is no leader. I believe he knows the fiscal crisis to be a reality, but he also knows that it would be very costly politically to do something about it. He has been willing to expend this capital to grow the welfare state into a permanent institution that makes everyone a welfare case through Obamacare, but he has not done what is necessary to preserve (or sensibly reduce) the commitments already made in the form of Medicare, Social Security, and much else. This reveals him as what I always thought he was: a coward, a mouthpiece for conventional Democratic Party talking points, and someone indifferent about America’s strength and prosperity.
Subscribe To This Feed

“a coward, a mouthpiece for conventional Democratic Party talking points, and someone indifferent about America’s strength and prosperity.”
One would have thought that this would have been obvious four years ago, but I guess that it wasn’t, at least not to 53% of the American People. Obama may be the most unqualified president in U.S. history, but hey, “BUSH LIED!!!” and Sarah Palin is a snake-handler, or something, so I guess that’s OK…
The American People put this buffoon in, and McCain gave him a free pass. I hope everyone is happy now.
I called bs on him, and so did millions of others. Is it any wonder with our corrupt education system, propaganda-laden media, and multigenerational guilt-tripping he had a fighting chance. Plus McCain was a horrible candidate and had all the defects of Bush times ten.
Yes, McCain was a horrible candidate, but I have to love those pious, canting alleged Paleo-cons who told me that they were voting for Obama because he’d almost certainly govern from the center, and besides, at least Obama wouldn’t get us involved in any more “Neocon Wars”. Hope the’re enjoying Libya…
Yes, McCain was a horrible candidate, but I have to love those pious, canting alleged Paleo-cons who told me that they were voting for Obama because he’d almost certainly govern from the center, and besides, at least Obama wouldn’t get us involved in any more “Neocon Wars”. Hope the’re enjoying Libya…
First, what paleocons voted Obama? The ones I know supported Ron Paul during the primaries, then closed their eyes and voted McCain in the general.
Second, what makes you think McCain would not be involved in Libya, and probably Iran too?
I don’t know if you are a card carrying republican, but I hate it when I hear republicans ask, “how’s that hope and change working for you?” Nominate a decent candidate, adhere to basic conservative principles, attack the democrat when necessary, and you won’t have to pout about losing the next election.
I know several alleged paleocons who voted for Obama, although they were not happy about it – but they seriously seemed to think that he would be “better” than McCain when it came to interventions overseas. How anyone even remotely sane could believe this, I have no idea – I personally think that they just thought that Obama would be more anti-Israel, which is pretty lame, when it gets right down to it. And yes, I gritted my teeth and voted for McCain, and I would again, and I wish that he would have won. It would certainly be better than what we have now, as bad as he would have been. No, I didn’t vote for McCain in the primary, but you don’t advance the right by voting left. There are a lot of “the worse, the better” type “conservatives” who have a lot to answer for.
Whether the final two candidates were pro or less pro Israel did not drive the paleos. Everybody knew whoever won would support Israel. Paleos were rightly afraid of McCain for both his interventionism, and more importantly, his immigration stance. He’d have pushed amnesty big time. Third world immigration is the biggest problem we face, even bigger than stupid interventions.
If Obama pushes for amnesty, it will be much easier for the right to oppose. But with McCain the establishment would pressure the members to support it since not doing so would make a president with an ‘R” behind his name look bad.
The problem with the election in 2008 was not that Obama won. It was that he received a super majority in both houses of Congress. As a paleo, I got my taste of opposing most of the policies of a republican president for eight years. And too many times the republicans in Congress sided with his disastrous policies out of party, not country, loyalty. Given that either candidate was a disaster, I’d take Obama over McCain SO LONG as we’d have control over one or both chambers. It makes opposing a shitty president a lot easier.