My career as a pugilist was short and not sweet. As a relatively good athlete and generally tough guy I thought boxing would be a fun sport to pick up.
The ivy league-like school I attended frowned upon this type of boorish behavior. It was one of those kinds of colleges that didn't like ROTC on campus either. But there was one tough old coach who thought he'd teach us tassel-loafer types a little street smarts.
Alas, the enthusiasm and excitement from the training room did not transfer into the ring. Skipping rope, shadow boxing, working the speed and heavy bags seems all very glamorous in a rough and tumble sort of way. A group of white collar kids from the suburbs playing inner city thugs.
But the ring was a very different environment - basically moving from the training room to the ring was like moving from theory into reality. All five in our boxing class had to face the one true boxer in the group. A strapping 190 pounder that really did grow up in a tough Philly (really!) blue collar neighborhood. His athletic and pugilistic prowess gained him a golden glove, some money and a scholarship to our rather stuffy and pompous school.
He was told by the coach to go easy on us. Not to completely destroy our confidence in the first encounter. In fact, the first round we were allowed to hit away - body shots only - with him just on defense. The second round evolved into a more realistic situation, although it was more of a cat and mouse approach - he the cat toying with me the mouse. Third and final round the bell rang and it was a real match. I quickly discovered those boxing helmets don't do much to cushion the blows - it only kept our pretty faces from getting cut.
30 seconds into the third round I stepped squarely into a crushing roundhouse - leading all the way with my face. I had never been hit that hard before. Having played football I had had my bell rung on occasion, but that sport offered stout plastic helmets and the opportunity to come off the field after every play and gather your thoughts. I must say the blow did not transmit the level of pain I had anticipated. In fact, there was no attended pain - probably a result of my brain shutting down all synapses in a move of self preservation.
What occurred next was odd. An out of body experience of sorts. I was aware I had been dealt a stunning blow - but the warning indicator of searing pain was absent, something had obliterated the flight or fight response. My arms simply slumped to my sides, and I stood there staring directly at my opponent unable to react. As I watched, detached from my body, I saw several more blows land unimpeded around my head. After several more shots, a weak signal did emit from my brain to my legs suggesting they move away from the action. Unfortunately, the message to the legs was garbled - instead of demanding that they turn and run, or please God buckle and allow me to collapse to the canvas, they simply went into a slow reverse. My opponent , no doubt by now enjoying the chance to teach one of the soft suburban boys a lesson, pounded me into the corner. But alas, my legs would not give way and the bell was 90 seconds away from getting me out of this mess.
Fortunately the coach jumped in and stopped the fight. Checking my vision and asking a few basic questions it was clear to him - this fight was over. Maybe it was the fact that I kept staring at his second head that gave him that clue. Or that my response to his questions about days of the week or the number of digits on his hand was - "Mother would you please bring me my slippers" - that had him worried.
For the next two days I found it hard to study or concentrate on much - an annoying buzzing and cotton-headiness followed me around. The coach demoted me back down to just gym work after that. He told me he I deserved the one hour credit for the class due to the beating I absorbed, but he was worried another jaunt in the ring might reduce my future career options to selling pencils on a street corner.
So what does this story about my pathetic boxing career have to do with this blog that focuses on political and economic issues? Well let me say that after several months of the Obama administration I'm feeling the same sensations I did during my brief tour of the ring.
The election cycle leading up to Obama's victory was one of great confusion, disorientation and fear of what was happening in our country. Not just the concern of a socialist taking over as President, but the melt down of the economy, the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, mass governmental spending, stimulus and interjection into the economy by Congress and the previous administration had us all reeling. Then in the fall as the economy entered a free fall, the reality set in that this was not going to be an ordinary recession.
All this left us dazed, confused and worn out just as Obama entered office. With his activist approach and Rohm Emmanuel stating that we can't waste a good crisis the race to socialism and big government control has been stunning, swift and unrelenting - much like the blows that kept landing on my head many years ago in the ring. As a nation we seem to be experiencing the same out of body phenomenon - where we can see what is happening, realize the damage it is doing, but being so stunned that we can't seem to do anything about the beating.
Deficits tripling overnight to $1.8 trillion (and we know that will be revised upward), take overs of banks, insurance companies, auto makers, healthcare - boom, boom, boom - all in rapid succession. When is Obama going to let up? Who is left to stop him?
I keep hoping there is a wise old coach in the corner who is about to jump in and put a stop to this - because once again I don't think the bell is going to save us. Or when it finally rings, the damage will be irreparable and we will all be a nation of pencil sellers on the corner.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Arrogance, Hubris or a Man in over his Head?
As noted in a previous post Obama has exhibited a disturbing tendency to make fun of others, put people down and act in a way that is not becoming of a President. For now we will give him the benefit of the doubt - it must be hard to actually be President and not just play one on the campaign trail. And no doubt if every word we uttered was recorded we'd all have have egg on our face from time to time.
But someone has got to tell Obama that the President must be held to a higher standard and that protocol and decorum matter.
Obama reminds me of a cocky, immature ivy league kid who really thinks he is smarter and better than the rest of us. A guy who was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple. We know that isn't true with Obama, he started out with a lot of challenges, but it certainly appears he has adopted an east coast, ivy-league, blue blood demeanor.
Cheap shot #1 - Hitting an old lady while she is down - Making up stories about Nancy Reagan (Wasn't it Hillery Clinton that was speaking to Eleanor Roosevelt?)
Cheap shot #2 - Special Olympics/Special President
Cheap behavior #3 - Laughing at Others
Poor Protocol #4 - President's don't pick up lint
Poor Protocol #5 - Sure he trapped Obama with his ploy but Chavez played him like a fiddle, and Obama didn't have to grin like a freshman pledge. Where is the secret service when you need them?
But someone has got to tell Obama that the President must be held to a higher standard and that protocol and decorum matter.
Obama reminds me of a cocky, immature ivy league kid who really thinks he is smarter and better than the rest of us. A guy who was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple. We know that isn't true with Obama, he started out with a lot of challenges, but it certainly appears he has adopted an east coast, ivy-league, blue blood demeanor.
Cheap shot #1 - Hitting an old lady while she is down - Making up stories about Nancy Reagan (Wasn't it Hillery Clinton that was speaking to Eleanor Roosevelt?)
Cheap shot #2 - Special Olympics/Special President
Cheap behavior #3 - Laughing at Others
Poor Protocol #4 - President's don't pick up lint
Poor Protocol #5 - Sure he trapped Obama with his ploy but Chavez played him like a fiddle, and Obama didn't have to grin like a freshman pledge. Where is the secret service when you need them?
True Measure of the Man
Obama has been President long enough to give us insight into his thinking and character.
For those who were listening during the campaign he was clear about the policies he would pursue. In his defense we can't say he lied to us about his campaign promises.
But his race to the Presidency was a tightly choreographed branding campaign in which the new and improved politician's philosophy and temperament where carefully guarded. There were rarely any fax paus, although occasionally a glimpse of the real Obama slipped past his handlers - "clinging to guns and religion" were words that were uttered when he was among a comfortable group of San Francisco supporters and he thought there was no controlling recording authority, in the paraphrased words of Saint Al Gore.
Now as the scales are falling off the eyes of many a fuzzy picture of the man is starting to develop sharper edges.
Granted the Presidency is a large and weighty job. All new Presidents go through a learning curve, or at least an acclimation period. If we think back on the first two years of Clinton the parallels are similar. In fact, Time magazine had a cover showing the incredible shrinking President and asked if Clinton was even relevant.
Some Presidents came to the office with a great deal more experience, both politically and from a well-rounded life perspective. Ronald Reagan had a long career in another field, had been active in unions, spent time in the military and Governed our largest state. Bush #41 also had deep experience in business and politics before assuming the mantle. But even their early days required some necessary adjustments.
One hopes this newest President is waking up to the realization that every gesture (bowing to a Saudi Prince, laughing with a third world strong man, smirking and laughing at inappropriate humor), every word, every initiative will be watched closely, given intense scrutiny and will have tangible impact - negative and positive.
We pray that he grasps the fact that at the extremes he holds the power of life and death in his hands. With his word three pirates are dead in milliseconds. With his words our best and brightest throw themselves into harms way in Iraq, Afghanistan and other hot spots across the globe. Certainly at an intellectual level he understands his words mean things and that he wields incredible power. But what is not clear is that at a deep emotional and visceral level these realities have sunk in. They will. At that time we will see the true character and mettle of the man. He will age quickly like all Presidents do as the weight and responsibility of the job places a a heavy burden on his shoulders.
But until that day it is disconcerting to see him basking in the celebrity and coolness of the job. Sure he was funny and hip and cool on the Jay Leno show, but in these times we need more from our President than to be an entertaining guest on a late night show.
One greatness of America is that people from humble beginnings and challenged circumstances can latch on to the American promise of equal opportunity (not equal results) and rise to the top in their chosen field. When men like Clinton and Obama beats the odds we should give them a moment to laugh, pinch themselves and luxuriate in the perks of the job (think Air Force One). But then it is time to buckle down and focus on the job of preserving America as the great beacon of hope in a tough world.
Clinton was a lucky man. When he took office it was a rare time of peace and prosperity. He had the wind at his back with the dividend from the end of the cold war. The economy had gone through a small dip, but was gearing up for a strong run, and he was fortunate to have worthy opponents in Congress that kept in check many of his most damaging policies. As a country we had the good fortune that a rookie, good old boy bubba president came into power during a hiatis from major chaos - under the surface problems were brewing, but for the average citizen the world was not so dangerous and daily life was not dire.
In 2009 we don't have any margin for error.
Physically Obama is thin - probably from playing basketball and smoking cigarettes. But he is also thin in terms of experience: Life, work and politically. If one goes to the business social network LinkedIn you can find his resume. Not only does he have large gaps in his work tenure, but it is striking how limited his span of experience is and how narrow the focus. His world view is skewed by ivy league schools and political involvement.
What has been disconcerting are the number of social blunders, missteps and inappropriate cheap shots he has exhibited since he came out of the campaign bubble and has to operate in the unscripted real world. If you think he got an anxiety attack when secret service threatened to take away his blackberry (aka crackberry) - take a look at the panic in his eyes when the teleprompter goes on the fritz.
A condescending attitude, sense of arrogance and know-it-all hubris has cropped up too many times since his victory in November. Maybe these episodes are just early inning jitters, youthful exuberance (and it's attendant cockiness) from pulling off an unbelievable upset, or a man who is in over his head trying to pretend he knows what he is doing.
Time will reveal if this is the true character of the man or someone finding their sea-legs. But please someone whisper into Obama's ear and let him know we don't have time to spare - this ship is rocking badly.
For those who were listening during the campaign he was clear about the policies he would pursue. In his defense we can't say he lied to us about his campaign promises.
But his race to the Presidency was a tightly choreographed branding campaign in which the new and improved politician's philosophy and temperament where carefully guarded. There were rarely any fax paus, although occasionally a glimpse of the real Obama slipped past his handlers - "clinging to guns and religion" were words that were uttered when he was among a comfortable group of San Francisco supporters and he thought there was no controlling recording authority, in the paraphrased words of Saint Al Gore.
Now as the scales are falling off the eyes of many a fuzzy picture of the man is starting to develop sharper edges.
Granted the Presidency is a large and weighty job. All new Presidents go through a learning curve, or at least an acclimation period. If we think back on the first two years of Clinton the parallels are similar. In fact, Time magazine had a cover showing the incredible shrinking President and asked if Clinton was even relevant.
Some Presidents came to the office with a great deal more experience, both politically and from a well-rounded life perspective. Ronald Reagan had a long career in another field, had been active in unions, spent time in the military and Governed our largest state. Bush #41 also had deep experience in business and politics before assuming the mantle. But even their early days required some necessary adjustments.
One hopes this newest President is waking up to the realization that every gesture (bowing to a Saudi Prince, laughing with a third world strong man, smirking and laughing at inappropriate humor), every word, every initiative will be watched closely, given intense scrutiny and will have tangible impact - negative and positive.
We pray that he grasps the fact that at the extremes he holds the power of life and death in his hands. With his word three pirates are dead in milliseconds. With his words our best and brightest throw themselves into harms way in Iraq, Afghanistan and other hot spots across the globe. Certainly at an intellectual level he understands his words mean things and that he wields incredible power. But what is not clear is that at a deep emotional and visceral level these realities have sunk in. They will. At that time we will see the true character and mettle of the man. He will age quickly like all Presidents do as the weight and responsibility of the job places a a heavy burden on his shoulders.
But until that day it is disconcerting to see him basking in the celebrity and coolness of the job. Sure he was funny and hip and cool on the Jay Leno show, but in these times we need more from our President than to be an entertaining guest on a late night show.
One greatness of America is that people from humble beginnings and challenged circumstances can latch on to the American promise of equal opportunity (not equal results) and rise to the top in their chosen field. When men like Clinton and Obama beats the odds we should give them a moment to laugh, pinch themselves and luxuriate in the perks of the job (think Air Force One). But then it is time to buckle down and focus on the job of preserving America as the great beacon of hope in a tough world.
Clinton was a lucky man. When he took office it was a rare time of peace and prosperity. He had the wind at his back with the dividend from the end of the cold war. The economy had gone through a small dip, but was gearing up for a strong run, and he was fortunate to have worthy opponents in Congress that kept in check many of his most damaging policies. As a country we had the good fortune that a rookie, good old boy bubba president came into power during a hiatis from major chaos - under the surface problems were brewing, but for the average citizen the world was not so dangerous and daily life was not dire.
In 2009 we don't have any margin for error.
Physically Obama is thin - probably from playing basketball and smoking cigarettes. But he is also thin in terms of experience: Life, work and politically. If one goes to the business social network LinkedIn you can find his resume. Not only does he have large gaps in his work tenure, but it is striking how limited his span of experience is and how narrow the focus. His world view is skewed by ivy league schools and political involvement.
What has been disconcerting are the number of social blunders, missteps and inappropriate cheap shots he has exhibited since he came out of the campaign bubble and has to operate in the unscripted real world. If you think he got an anxiety attack when secret service threatened to take away his blackberry (aka crackberry) - take a look at the panic in his eyes when the teleprompter goes on the fritz.
A condescending attitude, sense of arrogance and know-it-all hubris has cropped up too many times since his victory in November. Maybe these episodes are just early inning jitters, youthful exuberance (and it's attendant cockiness) from pulling off an unbelievable upset, or a man who is in over his head trying to pretend he knows what he is doing.
Time will reveal if this is the true character of the man or someone finding their sea-legs. But please someone whisper into Obama's ear and let him know we don't have time to spare - this ship is rocking badly.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
American Exceptionalism
Hugh Hewitt, Bill Bennett and Dennis Prager brought civility, humor, insight and wisdom to over 3,000 in the Denver area last night at their Obama first 100 days event.
Former Senator Bill Armstrong rounded out the outstanding presence on the podium. Besides Prager's memorable and self-deprecating high school basketball story there was a great deal of substance to discuss and ponder.
No one mentioned the words American Exceptionalism, but had they I'm sure the crowd would have applauded heartily - understanding exactly what that means and being proud of the good American has done around the world for millions. As Dennis Prager said, "I don't want to transform American, it is the great hope for the world - improve it yes, transform it no."
American Exceptionalism does not say that America is perfect or has never made significant mistakes. It is also not a pompous, condescending, arrogant moniker. It simply states that there is something about the American experiment that is different than any other nation before.
My guess is that if 3,000 Obama supporters had filled the Douglas County auditorium last night they would have booed or at least cringed at the mention of American Exceptionalism.
In five minutes Dennis Prager summarizes better than any college professor could in four years of instruction (as if a college professor today would herald America) what it is that makes American unique. Watch this segment on The American Trinity and pass it along to others.
Former Senator Bill Armstrong rounded out the outstanding presence on the podium. Besides Prager's memorable and self-deprecating high school basketball story there was a great deal of substance to discuss and ponder.
No one mentioned the words American Exceptionalism, but had they I'm sure the crowd would have applauded heartily - understanding exactly what that means and being proud of the good American has done around the world for millions. As Dennis Prager said, "I don't want to transform American, it is the great hope for the world - improve it yes, transform it no."
American Exceptionalism does not say that America is perfect or has never made significant mistakes. It is also not a pompous, condescending, arrogant moniker. It simply states that there is something about the American experiment that is different than any other nation before.
My guess is that if 3,000 Obama supporters had filled the Douglas County auditorium last night they would have booed or at least cringed at the mention of American Exceptionalism.
In five minutes Dennis Prager summarizes better than any college professor could in four years of instruction (as if a college professor today would herald America) what it is that makes American unique. Watch this segment on The American Trinity and pass it along to others.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Big government makes people mean
As government gets bigger and takes more and more responsibility for our daily lives we as a nation get less involved, less sensitive and more willing to look the other way when our neighbor is in need - in other words we get meaner.
America is wealthy enough to provide a safety net to those who are truly in need. Unfortunately for many we have allowed that safety net to turn into a hammock.
Due to government the fabric of our society is being unraveled one thread at a time. When people are in need today we have been trained to turn first to government to soften the blow. Even conservatives are being lulled into this mode of thinking.
Sure it is easier to outsource care and "compassion" to a government agency. When your brother loses his job, we ask, "have you filed for unemployment?". When your elderly parent is ill isn't it easier to let medicare provide help. When a neighbor is struggling with parenting we call social services.
The government should only be the choice of last resort - for those who are clearly without any other place to turn. Before we ask big brother for a handout families, churches, neighbors, non-profits should step up and shoulder the burden.
The blessing one receives caring for someone in need feeds the soul and strengthens the bond among individuals and communities. When we let government grow too large and take over this role we become less caring, less involved, smaller and meaner as a people.
America is wealthy enough to provide a safety net to those who are truly in need. Unfortunately for many we have allowed that safety net to turn into a hammock.
Due to government the fabric of our society is being unraveled one thread at a time. When people are in need today we have been trained to turn first to government to soften the blow. Even conservatives are being lulled into this mode of thinking.
Sure it is easier to outsource care and "compassion" to a government agency. When your brother loses his job, we ask, "have you filed for unemployment?". When your elderly parent is ill isn't it easier to let medicare provide help. When a neighbor is struggling with parenting we call social services.
The government should only be the choice of last resort - for those who are clearly without any other place to turn. Before we ask big brother for a handout families, churches, neighbors, non-profits should step up and shoulder the burden.
The blessing one receives caring for someone in need feeds the soul and strengthens the bond among individuals and communities. When we let government grow too large and take over this role we become less caring, less involved, smaller and meaner as a people.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
This is not your father's Democrat
It is often said of the military that they fight the last war. That the strategies and tactics that worked in previous engagements are utilized in a new theater until they realize the game has changed.
Peggy Noonen, who has been wobbling back and forth between despair and hope, praise and condemnation of Obama writes beautifully in her recent Wall Street Journal op-ed - "His presentation was low-key, authoritative, and had the look and feel of moderation. When you can give this impression while some of your decisions—for instance, on the legitimate cost and reach of government—are not, actually, moderate, you are demonstrating a singular political talent.
He is subtle and likes to kill softly. As such, he is something new on the political scene, which means he will require something new from his opponents, including, first, patience.
I am wondering once again if Republicans in Washington fully understand what they are up against."
It is true the Republicans don't know what they are up against. As Obama gets his balance and pace it is going to get tougher. He is not like Bill Clinton - a good old boy slickster. He is cold, calculated and a bit scary. As Noonan says he has a singular political talent - able to pull off a sleight of hand like no one we have seen for a long time.
He can say that government must be lean and find at least $100 million in cost savings, while at the same time tripling the deficit in one year - and no one laughs.
He is the same guy who says he wants to reduce his "holdings" and claims he wants to get the government out of the private sector as fast as possible. While at the same time trying to take over health care and making it tough for banks to get out of the TARP tar baby mess. How is it no one raises an eyebrow at this incongruity?
Perhaps he is telling the truth and wants to get out of certain industries as fast as possible. It could be he doesn't want to mess with the small potatoes of the auto industry and insurance sector. Those don't have anywhere the same level of clout and control over the populace as do health care and banking. And there is the sticky issue of dealing with unions that are helping sink the auto dinosaurs.
Now we know why Obama picked Joe Biden and Robert Gibbs to be on his team - to keep the laughs and incredulous looks focused on them, and away from him.
This is different, and the Republicans had better wake up soon and realize they are fighting the previous war.
Peggy Noonen, who has been wobbling back and forth between despair and hope, praise and condemnation of Obama writes beautifully in her recent Wall Street Journal op-ed - "His presentation was low-key, authoritative, and had the look and feel of moderation. When you can give this impression while some of your decisions—for instance, on the legitimate cost and reach of government—are not, actually, moderate, you are demonstrating a singular political talent.
He is subtle and likes to kill softly. As such, he is something new on the political scene, which means he will require something new from his opponents, including, first, patience.
I am wondering once again if Republicans in Washington fully understand what they are up against."
It is true the Republicans don't know what they are up against. As Obama gets his balance and pace it is going to get tougher. He is not like Bill Clinton - a good old boy slickster. He is cold, calculated and a bit scary. As Noonan says he has a singular political talent - able to pull off a sleight of hand like no one we have seen for a long time.
He can say that government must be lean and find at least $100 million in cost savings, while at the same time tripling the deficit in one year - and no one laughs.
He is the same guy who says he wants to reduce his "holdings" and claims he wants to get the government out of the private sector as fast as possible. While at the same time trying to take over health care and making it tough for banks to get out of the TARP tar baby mess. How is it no one raises an eyebrow at this incongruity?
Perhaps he is telling the truth and wants to get out of certain industries as fast as possible. It could be he doesn't want to mess with the small potatoes of the auto industry and insurance sector. Those don't have anywhere the same level of clout and control over the populace as do health care and banking. And there is the sticky issue of dealing with unions that are helping sink the auto dinosaurs.
Now we know why Obama picked Joe Biden and Robert Gibbs to be on his team - to keep the laughs and incredulous looks focused on them, and away from him.
This is different, and the Republicans had better wake up soon and realize they are fighting the previous war.
The Long Voyage in Circles
The New York Times was in full measure today. David Brooks giving the Republicans a false play book in his op-ed saying "If the Republicans are going to rebound, they will have to re-establish themselves as the party of civic order."
Oh, that's right. Looking down from my swanky upper east side condo I can see those rascally Republican's throwing molotov cocktails again in Central Park. Don't you just hate it when they do that!
"First, they will have to stylistically decontaminate their brand. That means they will have to find a leader who is calm, prudent, reassuring and reasonable." Does he really mean that style trumps substance. And I guess the Republican's need to see if Obama has a slightly less liberal brother they can co-opt into the party.
He goes on to state that there are two theories of civic order - as if order is the highest virtue. Stalin maintained civic order. Ghandi promoted civil disobedience. The founding fathers of our country claimed in the Declaration of Independance "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it". Let's not fall for this false argument. What Brooks really is saying is - Look (Obama's favorite word when not on the telepromter), we Democrats are in power and we want everyone else to be well mannered and not to rock the boat. That is what civic order means to him.
Finally he goes on to say that the Republicans "will have to explain that there are two theories of civic order. There is the liberal theory, in which teams of experts draw up plans to engineer order whenever problems arise. And there is the more conservative vision in which government sets certain rules, but mostly empowers the complex web of institutions in which the market is embedded."
I'm not so sure the liberal version works all that well. Teams of experts managing by consensus from high atop the ivory dome (analogous to the lofty theories of the ivory tower) doesn't sound like a recipe for success. Correct me if I'm wrong but Warren Buffett and his team of billionaire guru's missed the entire market meltdown. And he makes a ton of money from the reinsurance industry. Don't you think he should have seen it coming.
And not to pick just on the liberals. Henry Paulson and Ben Bernanke didn't engender much confidence during the waning days of the Bush administration. Do we really want to take David Brook's advice and re-build based on experts like Timothy Geithner who can't even get his taxes paid on time? Besides he hasn't even been able to fill enough jobs at the Treasury to assemble a team, let alone any experts.
The final claim he makes is that both these visions now exist in the Democrat party and the Republican's are left out in the cold without a clue. But show me where in the Democrat leadership there is anyone who believes the role of government is to be a passive rule enforcer?
I'm afraid if all the Republican's do is find a nice calm amiable leader and try to maintain peace and harmony they will be on a long voyage in circles.
Oh, that's right. Looking down from my swanky upper east side condo I can see those rascally Republican's throwing molotov cocktails again in Central Park. Don't you just hate it when they do that!
"First, they will have to stylistically decontaminate their brand. That means they will have to find a leader who is calm, prudent, reassuring and reasonable." Does he really mean that style trumps substance. And I guess the Republican's need to see if Obama has a slightly less liberal brother they can co-opt into the party.
He goes on to state that there are two theories of civic order - as if order is the highest virtue. Stalin maintained civic order. Ghandi promoted civil disobedience. The founding fathers of our country claimed in the Declaration of Independance "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it". Let's not fall for this false argument. What Brooks really is saying is - Look (Obama's favorite word when not on the telepromter), we Democrats are in power and we want everyone else to be well mannered and not to rock the boat. That is what civic order means to him.
Finally he goes on to say that the Republicans "will have to explain that there are two theories of civic order. There is the liberal theory, in which teams of experts draw up plans to engineer order whenever problems arise. And there is the more conservative vision in which government sets certain rules, but mostly empowers the complex web of institutions in which the market is embedded."
I'm not so sure the liberal version works all that well. Teams of experts managing by consensus from high atop the ivory dome (analogous to the lofty theories of the ivory tower) doesn't sound like a recipe for success. Correct me if I'm wrong but Warren Buffett and his team of billionaire guru's missed the entire market meltdown. And he makes a ton of money from the reinsurance industry. Don't you think he should have seen it coming.
And not to pick just on the liberals. Henry Paulson and Ben Bernanke didn't engender much confidence during the waning days of the Bush administration. Do we really want to take David Brook's advice and re-build based on experts like Timothy Geithner who can't even get his taxes paid on time? Besides he hasn't even been able to fill enough jobs at the Treasury to assemble a team, let alone any experts.
The final claim he makes is that both these visions now exist in the Democrat party and the Republican's are left out in the cold without a clue. But show me where in the Democrat leadership there is anyone who believes the role of government is to be a passive rule enforcer?
I'm afraid if all the Republican's do is find a nice calm amiable leader and try to maintain peace and harmony they will be on a long voyage in circles.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
