PDA

View Full Version : The Facade, Crumbling?



Kathianne
05-16-2009, 09:21 PM
Like Hanson or not, his analysis is very good. That and the word of the day:

Pentelic Pen*tel"ic\, Pentelican \Pen*tel"i*can\, a. Of or pertaining to Mount Pentelicus, near Athens, famous for its fine white marble quarries; obtained from Mount Pentelicus; as, the Pentelic marble of which the Parthenon is built.


http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/929/


Cracks in the Facade
Posted By Victor Davis Hanson On May 14, 2009 @ 8:33 am In Uncategorized | 170 Comments

Fissures in the Obama Totem

Oh, I know that President Obama’s approval ratings are still around 62%. But I also remember that George Bush’s at the end of 2001 got even higher — and stayed at or above 60% through most of 2002, explaining why he increased his congressional majority in the midterm elections.

Nevertheless, I think we are beginning — after less than four months — to see fissures in Obama’s Pentelic statuary. And the cracks will widen, because in about six areas he has taken on human nature itself, age-old logic, and common sense-opponents that even a Harvard Law degree and Chicago organizing are no match for.

1) The Rule of Law. We are on dangerous ground here with the reordering of the bankruptcy statutes with Chrysler and the UAW; with the strong-arming of stimulus money for California predicated on the protection of unions; with the serial disdain for paying taxes on the part of Geithner, Solis, Daschle and others; and with the selective release of CIA memos, to denigrate those out of office as veritable torturers (they should reread the transcript of Eric Holder’s 2002 CNN interview with Paula Zahn in which he grandly denies that the Gitmo detainees have any recourse to the Geneva Convention accords and can be held there for as long as we think the war lasts). What separates the U.S. from Mexico, Cuba, or Haiti is the rule of law, the protection of capital and property, the evenhanded treatment of investment, and the faith in a fair media to uncover abuse. I think that is now all in question, as the Utopian ends justify the tawdry means.

2) Energy. We are finding more natural gas than ever. There are billions of barrels of U.S. oil in Alaska, offshore, and in shale. Yet rigs sit idle and government leases are constricting rather than expanding — and for reasons other than the economy....

3) Debt. Obama has somehow already used the tax last resort. That is, his figures assume taking off FICA caps, watching the states increase their own tax rates, upping the federal rate to 40%, curbing deductions, and effectively increasing the total state and federal bite to above 65% on top incomes...

4) Security. Very schizophrenic. WE keep FISA, Patriot Act, rendition, military tribunals (Gitmo for now?), Predator attacks, Iraq and Afghanistan, while we trash their Bush origins, apologize abroad, and try to out CIA memos to embarrass the country between 2001-8....

5). Civil Discord. In just three months Obama has caused more disunity than most presidents in recent memory....

6). Race relations. Here I am worried. Far from bringing us together, I think Obama’s serial emphasis on race may achieve the unintended opposite of polarization. He should have learned in the campaign (Rev. Wright, Trinity Church, typical white person, clingers, call for reparations, his grandmother — the purported prejudicial stereotyper, etc.), the perils of seeing the world through skin color. ...

Missed opportunity? Obama could have had a one-time stimulus, then vowed to balance the budget. He might have praised wind and solar as he asked the carbon industry to ‘get us through.’ He could have politely disagreed with Bush, but framing differences in the tragic notion of no good choices. He might have cooled the overseas apologies, savvy that other nations have more to apologize for than his own. Obama should have established zero-tolerance for tax avoidance at a time of record tax increases. He could have remonstrated with Wall Street, and sought to rein in excess without Europeanizing the financial sector. He could have proactively reformed entitlements with bipartisan support, rather than, as will happen, drastically address them in the 11th hour. But then to do all that would be to assume he never went to Trinity Church, knew no Rev. Wright, Ayers, Khalidi, etc., did not run mysterious campaigns that eliminated opponents before the elections, was not the most partisan Senator in Congress, and avoided rather crude social and racial stereotyping while campaigning. Most who read this will not agree, given the mesmerizing effect of the Obama charisma. But in time, unless there are radical changes, I think the nation will come to learn that such talent was not put in service to our collective welfare.

There's lots more at the site, I just used the opening and closing. As I said, well thought out and each deals with issues discussed over and over again here. The real panic setting in for the liberals is they KNOW the conservatives are focused on the issues and decisions, not with name calling as they were for 8 long years....

Agnapostate
05-16-2009, 10:05 PM
A poor analysis, even for the typically nationalistic Hanson, considering that he is defined by little more than rhetorical emptiness. It would be better for him to have said that the financial class is on "dangerous ground," not "the rule of law." We have the potential for a peaceful means of extending democracy into the economic realm, though Obama evidently has little desire to exercise that potential.

As I've said, a transition to market socialism wouldn't be an especially difficult task at the moment. Significant components of the financial class are currently reeling as a result of the widespread failure of the banks and the auto industry. There's no need for violent expropriation by an angry proletariat to occur; the standard failure of capitalist financial markets have already ensured that the "owners" are now desperate and would be happy to receive anything close to fair market value. Therefore, all it would take is boring old nationalization of the failing industries and banks, followed by the establishment of democratic management of these industries by their workers, as well as the establishment of a progressive capital assets tax on these industries and the banks, and presto! We have market socialism!

The fact that Obama has refrained from such action illustrates the reality of his liberal democratic capitalism, IMO.

emmett
05-17-2009, 01:20 AM
Our financial markets have been strained due in part to a political agenda. This agenda was the leftist one that demanded businesses grant credit to unworthy citizens or succumb to laws that would prevent them from competing. Fanny and Freddie were prop jobs for the Democratic Party. Labor unions strangling the life out of an automobile industry so Democrats could get huge support from voters who were stupid enough to think they were being done some sort of service. TYhe fact is the left used Unions, Blacks, other minorities, illegals, the homeless, the needy and others to gain power at the expense of the free market.

When we began the very first "welfare" program we lit the fuse. Rewarding anyone a single thing unearned only serves to destroy a system such as America is built on.

Market Socialism isn't the answer. It has never worked on this planet yet and won't. It will only allow a more in depth opportunity to exploit the people's hard work by leaders unwilling to do anything but seek more and more power.

Agnapostate
05-17-2009, 02:52 AM
Market Socialism isn't the answer. It has never worked on this planet yet and won't. It will only allow a more in depth opportunity to exploit the people's hard work by leaders unwilling to do anything but seek more and more power.

Considering that there's not been an attempt to implement market socialism (one could arguably point to China, though I wouldn't), that's not exactly a "rebuttal."

Sitarro
05-17-2009, 03:04 AM
Considering that there's not been an attempt to implement market socialism (one could arguably point to China, though I wouldn't), that's not exactly a "rebuttal."

I can certainly understand why you wouldn't want to discuss China, after all, the only reason they have any success at all is their ridiculous amount of people that will work for almost nothing, 20 hours a day, building lousy crap that the world buys because it's so cheap....... hopefully we will all wake up to what a rip off China actually is. I will pay twice as much to not buy anything they produce.

Agnapostate
05-17-2009, 03:47 AM
I can certainly understand why you wouldn't want to discuss China, after all, the only reason they have any success at all is their ridiculous amount of people that will work for almost nothing, 20 hours a day, building lousy crap that the world buys because it's so cheap....... hopefully we will all wake up to what a rip off China actually is. I will pay twice as much to not buy anything they produce.

Actually, the reason that I wouldn't discuss China is because its authoritarian social arrangements under the coordinator class effectively render it a form of state capitalism rather than market socialism. Socialism necessitates legitimate collective ownership of the means of production.