SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Sully- who wrote (70605)3/28/2009 8:48:35 PM
From: Sully-3 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 90947
 
Missing the point

Mark Steyn
The Corner

The Economist is the latest of the smart guys to notice that President Obama is proving strangely unlike the guy they told us he was back in late October:


<<< His performance has been weaker than those who endorsed his candidacy, including this newspaper, had hoped. Many of his strongest supporters—liberal columnists, prominent donors, Democratic Party stalwarts—have started to question him. As for those not so beholden, polls show that independent voters again prefer Republicans to Democrats, a startling reversal of fortune in just a few weeks. Mr Obama’s once-celestial approval ratings are about where George Bush’s were at this stage in his awful presidency. Despite his resounding electoral victory, his solid majorities in both chambers of Congress and the obvious goodwill of the bulk of the electorate, Mr Obama has seemed curiously feeble. >>>

The geniuses then go on to explain why this is: first, he hasn't "grappled" with the economy as singlemindedly as he should; second, he hasn't managed his relations with Congress very well. Jennifer Rubin gently explains what the smart guys have missed:


<<< The Economist had Obama pegged wrong. Yes, there is an element of managerial incompetence, but the real issue is that the Right was correct about Obama: he’s an ultra-liberal at least on domestic policy, not a pragmatic centrist either on policy or in style. His mode of governance — denigrate the opposition, engage in ad hominem attacks, refuse to compromise on substantive policy, disguise radical policy intentions with a haze of meaningless rhetoric — bespeaks someone supremely confident in his ideological views... >>>


This is the point: The nuancey boys were wrong on Obama, and the knuckledragging morons were right. There is no post-partisan centrist "grappling" with the economy, only a transformative radical willing to make Americans poorer in the cause of massive government expansion. At some point, The Economist, Messrs Brooks, Buckley & Co are going to have to acknowledge this.
If they're planning on spending the rest of his term tutting that his management style is obstructing the effective implementation of his centrist agenda, it's going to be a long four years.

And how about this?

<<< In an accomplished press conference this week, Mr Obama reminded the world what an impressive politician he can be. He has a capacity to inspire that is unmatched abroad or at home. >>>

Oh, dear. That's so January 20th it makes these toffee-nosed Brits sound like straw-sucking hayseeds. Here's Gail Collins in The New York Times:


<<< National Consensus Update...

Barack Obama — Kinda boring. Did you see the news conference? Same thing over and over again. Not that we mind. In these troubled times, we like stability. Thank God we didn’t elect somebody who was all charisma and exciting speeches... >>>

corner.nationalreview.com



To: Sully- who wrote (70605)4/2/2009 12:38:05 PM
From: TimF3 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 90947
 
What did they expect?

The murders of four police officers in Oakland, California by a wanted parole violator with a long record has generated predictable reactions.

Naturally, there are calls for more gun control, like this plea for passage of a renewed ban on "assault weapons." (California already has a draconian ban on "assault weapons" as well as strict laws making it a crime for an ex felon to be in possession of any gun. Advocates of tougher laws can't seem to get it through their heads that laws are lost on lawless people.)

Another approach is to advance arguments like this that ex-felons are "desperate" -- so employers must be made to hire them.

If you think this view is laughable (or hard core leftist fringe), think again. Oakland's current Mayor Ron Dellums ran and was elected on such a platform. Many cities are busily implementing policies which amount to affirmative action hiring for felons, and there have been legislative attempts to make "discrimination" against people with criminal records illegal. Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter pushed a plan promoting the hiring of felons, and President Obama is described as sympathetic to their plight.

I realize that no rule is right all the time, but isn't it possible that not all of these felons are good people? I mean, what if some of them are just downright bad? Or is that not considered possible by the John Lennon Imagine crowd?

The problem here for me is that there's nothing to debate. Some people think that there are bad people who should be locked up, while others don't think there is such a thing as a bad person, and that prison is immoral. (In the words of the prison abolition group "Critical Resistance" the idea is to end "society's use of prisons and policing as an answer to social problems." Sorry, but if someone wants to break into my house to rob me, that is not merely a "social problem.")

Oakland's deliberate policy of not making arrests has only caused crime to go up.

My reaction (then and now) is along the lines of "What did they expect?"

There's no real room for rational argument, though, between people who think the evil actions of an evil individual are society's fault and those who think it is the blame and fault lie with the individual wrongdoer. Something like this happens, and it only causes them to re-emphasize and re-assert their beliefs.

Maybe a threshold question could be along the lines of whether there are bad people in the world.

classicalvalues.com