11.19.08
The season of utter madness
I haven’t had much to say about where I stand regarding benefit of the doubt for the president-elect. Certainly it’s on my mind a lot. There’s no shortage of column space in this world devoted to the subject, that’s for sure.
After much swirling around of my thoughts and feelings on the matter, I’ve landed on something pretty close to what Michael Medved comes up with in his Townhall.com piece today. Barack Obama remains, in my estimation, a hardcore leftwinger with truly frightening policy proclivities and a majority of personality traits that I find off-putting if not disgusting. That said, there is no alternative universe to run to. He will take the oath of office on January 20. He is assembling his administration in the most precarious time I have personally ever witnessed. It would be foolish to wish him anything but the best – the most refined judgement he can muster, and the most favorable circumstances fate can bestow.
The unfortunate quality of Medved’s let’s-hold-off-and-see-what-he-puts-in-place stance is that, given the dizzying pace with which economic and security-related events are unfolding, as well as the aggressiveness with which Obama is pursuing his vision, it becomes more superceded hourly by developments that we must decry as alarming.
Today’s Wall Street Journal is full of articles, columns and editorial comment that make plain the madness of the FHer regime’s approach. Everything about it is the exact opposite of a real remedy for the ills of the day. On page A8, for instance, is a story about how the regulatory machine is gearing up. Top Obama aide Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-IL, crows that the “agenda is going to be bold.” “Activists” will run the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the EPA and the Department of Labor.
One can see it coming, like the next stage of a cancer: The very measures that have damaged and possibly killed our domestic auto industry – unsustainable UAW contracts, CAFE standards – are just the beginning of what the new regime wants to impose on the (formerly) Big Three. The editorial page of today’s WSJ features a required-reading alarm bell entitled “The Environmental Motor Company.”
Let’s continue to extend the benefit of the doubt where we can as much as we can, but let’s also plainly state things that become clear. One is the fact that the new administration is going to distort the notion of private ownership of business, base policy on a sham scientific concept (climate change), and seize more of citizens’ assets to pay for it. This, at a time when the economy is screaming for people to be able to keep more of what they are earning.
The American public voted for this to transpire. That may be the most disorientingly irrational aspect of our current juncture. These are not times to expect encouragement for proceeding in a sane and rigorously reasoned way. The kudos in post-modern America go to those who conduct their affairs in the opposite manner.
Mr. Dings said,
November 20, 2008 at 8:11 pm
Re this statement from your opening volley here: “the fact that the new administration is going to distort the notion of private ownership of business”
I think I am seeing snivveling suits on the tellie wimpily holding out their tin cups for a hand out from the government. You’re blaming that on an administration that has not even taken the reigns yet?
Bentnotesmanhisself said,
November 20, 2008 at 8:55 pm
No. I didn’t mention a thing about the tin-cup brigade in what I had to say about the agenda of the incoming FHer regime. But, believe me, the FHers dig the begfest. Their response is, “sure, we’ll cut you a check, and, now, here’s what kinds of cars you’re going to make.”
Mr. Dings said,
November 22, 2008 at 5:19 pm
OMG, blaming the freedom haters for the destruction wrought by the alleged freedom lovers and bearers of our common prosperity.
Mr. Dings said,
November 25, 2008 at 11:39 am
If the American taxpayer becomes the stockholders, damn right we’ll tell them what cars to make. Won’t that just be another split down the middle? Half or nearly half for the biggest and baddest machine on the road and the other half or nearly half for something like efficient and comfortable transportation for a reasonable cost. I know Rush likes Lincolns and Caddies and wants quick and easy loans for people who can dump down a big down payment. Cars are only status symbols if you have that mindset, but, good God, how can we avoid the mindset? The mavens of persuasion will get us sheep everytime. Not that I want to outlaw mass advertising for cars and other conspicuous consumption, but, hey, it’s been done before in this land of the free. By social conservatives.