Life At New Animal Farm Won’t Be All That Bad
By July, we will come to feel that 2009 will be one of the most upbeat years in our history, as what used to be the news media∗ begins to get behind America and report on all the mysteriously wonderful things that are suddenly taking place.
All the campaign talk of the Great Depression, a Vietnam-like war, and our shredded Constitution will now thankfully subside as the Obama administration assumes office and solves problems with conciliation, dialogue, and multilateral wisdom, rather than shrillness, unilateralism, preemption, and my-way-or-the-highway dogmatism. We will hear that, by historical levels, unemployment is still not that bad, that GDP growth is not historically all that low, and that deficits, inflation, interest rates, and housing starts are all within manageable parameters. “Depression” will transmogrify into “recession” which in turn by July will be a “downturn” and by year next an “upswing” on its way to boom times.
Indeed, almost supernaturally crises will be solved with the departure of the hated Bush: no more flooding streets from cracked water mains that were a result of a President’s neglect of infrastructure, and no more spontaneous crashes of Mississippi River bridges due to diversions of critical federal aid from cash-strapped states to Iraq. And when the temperatures rise or drop, the wind howls, the clouds burst forth or go away, the snow melts or piles up, it will be, well, nature that caused the havoc, not the current occupant of the White House who failed to sign Kyoto.
As we watch the innocent die from natural mayhem, it will be due to the breakdown of local responders who now suddenly kill people, not federal inaction—except perhaps for an occasional few Bush federal holdovers that have not yet been rooted out. Human nature, of course, now will be seen more culpable, more selfish, as in needlessly resisting wise and caring federal interventions, rather than being inherently noble but shunned by an uncaring Washington. Yes, when dikes collapse and planes collide on crowed runways, it will be due to a cruel and unpredictable nature, or intrinsic design flaws, or improper local use and maintenance, or the past President’s nefarious legacy, not current government policies. (But if you still must bash the government, it will be wise to do it in 1950s style of inattentive state and local officials, prone to regional and tribal prejudices, blocking the infinite wisdom of a caring federal government.)
Some military action abroad could be necessary—and necessarily reported on as measured and reluctant, rather than cowboyish and gratuitous. European whining will be a result of miscommunications or the Euros’ unfair caricatures of Americans, not Bush’s alienation of allies. If radical Islam strikes, it will be, well, radical again and sometimes even dangerous, not a figment of neocon pipe dreams. If an administration official quits, goes on 60 Minutes, and writes a nasty tell-all book about Obama’s insensitivity and his government’s directionless ennui, he will be a heretic, a whiner, a turncoat, not a truth teller or brave maverick who blew the whistle in need of a bestseller hyped from NPR to the New York Times. We will come again to hate the filibuster, obstructionist Congressional policies, and the occasional loud-mouthed Senator who voices slurs against our nation in unpatriotic fashion.
And who will be the new Virgil to sing the praises of The One? (arma virumque won’t do, of course; insufficiently metrosexual)
Dear professor,
You left out the dobermans. They can be mean. I hope they don’t get too mean to the horses.
Doc,
You need to write to Works and Days daily. We don’t care how brief. Every day we need a dose of your Freedom broadcast to help us hang on.
Dr. Hanson,
You are correct, the men in Los Angeles don’t look like the men of my father’s (world War Two) generation. They look very effeminate.
God help us for we surely won’t help ourselves.
VDH,
How predictably true, like looking back at an historical presidency before it even begins. Some in the MSM feel this progressive myth making is actually their duty: make him a god so they can render him infallible once he dons the purple robes. They might as well just make Obamerica our State religion and call him Caesar.
In modern America the media’s perception IS reality. And for them no historical lessons necessary, no comparative framework needed, no questions asked. He’s good. We’re good. Let’s get on with our myth, I mean history, making.
But, fate can be fickle. You never know. Who’d a thought a bunch of suicidal lunatics would fly big planes into big buildings? Stuff happens. Stuff not even the MSM can spin in his favor. I hope at least Obama is thinking about what his predecessor faced shortly after taking office. And that he has a better grip on reality than his media lackeys would grant to us.
Speaking of grip on reality, what ever happened to that scientific consensus on global warming? Seems it never existed, as it’s now becoming clear the scientific community, at a minimum, remains divided.
Suppose during Obama’s first term the planet is conclusively shown to be cooling, that the Dems and the MSM only listened to one side of the story and saw only what they wanted to see. Would we recognize that their stupidity had us tilting at windmills (pun intended)? Would they then scurry around looking for more data to prove their theory, like Bush searching in vain for WMD in Iraq?
This may very well happen, and it won’t be ascribed to an Intelligence failure, but to a failure of intelligence on the part of the MSM. The “consensus” on global warming they touted was all along a fiction. A scientific consensus may develop in the next few years, but one contrary to what we’ve been sold thus far. In that case, I hope the media gets the Bush/Cheney/WMD treatment in spades.
When can we turn our hearts and minds to our own Hope & Change…..for a broad and decisive public backlash to the moronic, sheep-like “Four legs good, two legs bad” barnyard in which we will all necessarily live for some time? All the while the Dodds, Franks, Obamas, et al will actually be strutting on two legs. The old irony of political folly always returns.
Sanity and what is decent in our national character,King Arthur-like, must return.
Mr. Hanson:
Much of the former news media will not even make it through 2009. The ones that do increasingly will preach only to their choir of leftist seniors.
It is not leftist control of the propaganda ministry that we should fear, it is their control of the education ministry.
Dear Dr. Hansen,
As you know all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others, to misquote Animal Farm, thus while we are all equal, his Holiness Barack Obama is just a little more equal than the rest of mankind.
And since you have been correct in all of your predictions, and have always been spot on in your commentary, not just America but the rest of the world is going to suffer the results of the unbridled and worthless lightness of being of the Obama reign just as we got hammered by the hatred and lies that the media gave us about George Bush.
I live in a country where the media is unabashedly Left wing, and has actually managed to so damage Right wing candidates that these journalists put their boy into office. The candidates they chose were the most incompetent, dangerous, inexperienced, and misguided people possible, one led us into a terror war you can’t even imagine with casualties in the thousands, and the other implanted a terrorist army in the heart of our country which ultimately gave us four years of death, destruction, and countrywide misery.
You have as yet no idea just how destructive Barack Obama’s four years will be to America and the world, but we are all going to find out, and even the Left wing American and International journalists who helped Obama win will rue the day they did.
VDH:
Hey…it’s all about the “self-esteem”, don’chaknow.
Folks in and and out of public service will be doing the exact same things that they’ve always done…rubber-stamping mortgage applications, waterboarding Gitmo detainees, driving gas-guzzlers, drinking $5.00 cups of latte and eating foods loaded with saturated fats…but they’ll feed GOOD about themselves while doing it.
Let’s face it now…we’re going to have the BEST. ADMINISTRATION. EVER.
In fact, we already DO…(and it hasn’t even begun yet).
It’s going to be far worse for the enterprise of what America great than even this well crafted commentary. And the worst part is it will be glorified as progress and we may never recover from the “salvation” being dealt.
Dr. Hanson does not predict, he remembers; in this case, the Clinton administration, although Germany in the ’30s probably felt the same way. I always thought Willie’s “incredibly high” poll numbers were just that, and that a lot more people saw through him than was ever acknowledged.
TLM’s point about stuff happening is correct, however. It’s the stuff that blindsides an administration that often define it. Given we have someone with no legislative, administrative, or executive experience who intends to put the important matters, defense, foreign policy, and the economy, on auto pilot while he works on the social engineering he’s thinks he’s so qualified to oversee, it’s entirely possible the rubber could hit the road a lot harder and sooner than anyone believes. The incredibly inept way the Blago business has been handled may well be the tip of a nasty iceberg.
Thank you once again, Dr. Hanson.
I too await the much anticipated Mr. Obama’s reversal of the “temporary national condition”. I have it on good authority that Orren Boyle will finally deliver the order of rail to Taggart Transcontinental on January 21st.
*shrugs*
This is going to be a very long four years, isn’t it?
I just returned from a vacation in Aruba (planned long before it was prudent to forego such a vacation – oh, well) and as is my custom I wandered far and wide in my rental car. As I passed a nondescript building I noticed that someone had pasted a poster upon the stucco exterior. It was set crooked by some measure, as if a Hollywood set director had purposefully done so as to give a sense of authenticity and urgency to its placement. It was a grainy, black and white version of the Obama posters that we have come accustomed to, his head tilted back, nose in the air a la Mussolini. And across the bottom, in upper case stencil lettering was the word ‘PROGRESS’. A cold chill involuntarily coursed through my body, the hair upon my arms, legs, neck standing erect, a sour taste entering my mouth. I wondered silently to myself, is this what it is was like in Europe in the early days of the thirties? Is there a gathering storm of madness?
I have adopted a fatalistic view on things. I say let them do their worst. Let Mr. Obama adopt all the Hope and Change that he can stomach. Let Al Franken and Caroline Kennedy sit in the Senate. Let Pelosi run wild with her left wing agenda. Pull out the stops and let the liberalism run wild. Only when the people see what actually happens when liberalism reins unfettered will they believe the inherent evil that is at its core. Only then will they excise its creed from the political forum as a surgeon would a cancer. In the meantime, those of us in opposition should do as Madison, Hamilton and Jay did in the Federalist Papers, make the case for a nation that is ruled by consent of its governed in accordance with its Constitution.
Like the commentators above, I too look forward to the demise of the corrupt media. I will be sure to pick up a copy of the New York Times on the last day that it is printed but not before. As a Red Sox fan, a golden lining in the demise of the Times is its decision to sell its stake in the team’s ownership, removing a glaring incongruity in the Boston/New York rivalry.
Dr. Hanson -
As “…Everything Old is New Again…” Are you saying 2009 will be 1933, 1961, 1977 or 1993 all over again?
-S-
Well…well said…sadly, almost Pulitzer worthy in such a day an’ age an’ desperate glories as this…
President Obama will be hamstrung from the outset by economic conditions that defy an ideological solution. We can anticipate a market recovery followed by inflation and higher interest rates while the Federal Reserve attempts to soak up the excess liquidity. The best thing Mr. Obama can do is step back and let the process proceed without interference. Any attempt during this period to advance a progressive, social agenda with taxpayer funds will only exacerbate the problems. Let us see if the president-elect has the wisdom to proceed with cautious restraint. Now is not the time for ambitious new programs.
Falling oil prices offer Mr. Obama an opportunity to advance our foreign policy objectives. Iran’s economy is now teetering on the brink of collapse, and our European allies have finally recognized the danger in Iran’s nuclear program. Now is not the time for “talk without preconditions.” It’s time to take our enemy to the mat: surrender the nuclear program or face internal collapse. Let us hope our new president has the wisdom to recognize the opportunity.
We will know soon enough if our new president is an ideologue or a pragmatist. Current conditions dictate a strategy of domestic restraint combined with aggressive foreign policy. These are precisely the conditions least likely to appeal to Mr. Obama’s sense of mission. Too bad. You play with the hand you are dealt.
I doubt that the Messiah wants the economy to be declared fixed TOO quickly. He’s got a lot of pent up stupidity to inflict upon us and that would be a lot harder if the economy suddenly and magically recovers.
A beautiful piece, maybe Dr Hanson’s best. Echos of the Annals, Orwell and even Gibbon. Perhaps there is hope though. The blogosphere, or the rightward part of it anyway, has eliminated the memory hole. No matter how the press will grovel and lie, all those quanta will be there to reveal the truth. Whether the truth will matter is another issue. But it will be there.
“Now is not the time for ambitious new programs.”
Agreed. There is actually never a time to advocate “make work” projects. But little of this madness has anything to do with practical economics. No, it is simply a subconscious, if not even conscious, opportunity to help “elites” grab power. Any excuse will therefore be used to justify their indulgence in such narcissistic behavior.
Numerous cynics have long known that Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.’s work on the New Deal era leaves much to be desired. To be blunt, it is not worthy of respect. However, the late historian’s many books and articles have a practical value. They help elites win elections and often even fatten their wallets.
Ah, the good Professor has recalled his “Tacitus” for us all!
Funny how after 1900 plus years we humans still govern much like our ancestors.
Who wudda thunk it?
Happy New Year! Now, let us all pray…
When gas reaches $10 a gallon and heads higher, we will be told by the government-run media how wonderful it is for both the environment and the economy.
When the military situation falters in Afghanistan and Pakistan becomes a sea of Islamist-led instability Bush will be blamed.
When military enlistment and re-enlistment rates plummet, the government-run media will assure us that this is a “welcome movement away from a militaristic society to a peaceful one”.
And when Islamofascists attack targets on American soil the government-run media will tell us that “the negelct of the Bush years” led to this situation.
And the sheep will never wonder if it could have been different.
I have adopted a fatalistic view on things. I say let them do their worst.
Agreed, though it’s the thought of what will happen during their “doing” which makes me keep my truck’s gas tank always 3/4 full and a ready-bag packed and waiting by the door.
When the farmers finally go insane, which I believe they will, us animals should start eyeballing the barn exits.
~Paules:
I agree with your comments on Obama being constrained in the near term, but I’m still not sure I understand what his “sense of mission” is (other than to satisfy his personal ambition to be an historic president). He may actually relish his current constraints, as he doesn’t have to show us his cards yet. He can remain an enigma a while longer, until something happens that forces him to make a tough decision.
If tested on a national security issue, being aggressive should be a no-brainer for this ambitious, though inexperienced, Democratic president. Fail at that, and you won’t be re-elected (Carter). Half-measures and dithering when openly confronted by terrorists would worry more Americans now than such an approach did in the 90′s (Clinton). Retaining Bush’s national security team shows Obama to be cautious in this regard. He’ll likely be aggressive, but not pro-active.
Domestically, it’s as you said. For now, no room for audacity there either. If the economic mess continues longer than expected, and Obama rides it out, he could be running for re-election in 2-3 years with no truly significant decisions under his belt. That may suit him fine. Since the media would sing his praises anyway, a cautious Obama could coast to re-election, and make plans for his memorial on the Washington Mall. That, BTW, may be his true “sense of mission”.
The only cure for pomposity is relentless mockery.
Ave Shirtless Halter of the Rising Waters, Spreader of the Wealth and most Intelligent President Ever. Your drooling hordes of supporters pray to you for you to spread the light of your magical presence.
Recall an interview on the History Channel with some old geezer talking about a certain political figure coming to power in early 1933. (I won’t mention his name as that will obscure my point.)
The new politician had the power to command the press. Suddenly everything in the nation got much better. Everyone began to feel good about the direction the nation was taking.
As the old geezer in the interview pointed out…the press reported that everyone was in agreement the government was at last implementing the right policies; policies that everyone supported and would solve the nation’s problems.
16. Sean
What do you mean ‘almost’?
Truer words were never spoken.
Dr.Hanson: You have expressed perfectly the thoughts of millions of us in your eloquent, erudite manner. Unfortunatly, our manufacturing base has been destroyed by decades of greed and profit taking by corporate heads. That was Ross Perot’s “giant sucking sound”, which has now come home to roost, with Big Labors input of course. This recession is different, and will become the norn in our country, not the exception because all we produce nowadays are hamburgers and lawsuits. O
“Like the commentators above, I too look forward to the demise of the corrupt media.”
Otherwise soundly and prophetically written, the one flaw in Dr Hanson’s thesis is that of the (entirely) sycophantic media. Much of this latter-day fouth estate thrives (well, subsists) on headlines.
“If it bleeds, it leads..” accurately describes what drives the media today. They’re always out their looking for the fresh angle. If the Obama administration turns out to be the gang that couldn’t shoot straight and Pelosi and Reid continue congress’s incredible string of single-digit approval ratings whilst stepping on their dangling members, then folks will tire of the all-good-news-all-the-time format and turn elsewhere for controversy.
The proletariat — as numbed as it is — will not long tolerate the continual bouquets and hosannas to Obama and the Pelosi/Reid consortium who wish to lead us all through the hazards of civilization by enveloping us us in some gauzy big brother, übergovernmental shroud. Even the citizens of s declining Rome needed circuses accompanying their bread.
No, as those of us in the public become more and more restive, we will form an audience to which certain rebellious reporters will play. Gradually, the trickle will become a freshet, a stream, and then a raging torrent as it is revealed that the king is, indeed, wearing no clothes.
Sure, there will be attempts to make The Messiah seem competent but, if he is not, then no amount of propaganda will mask his bumbling.
Want proof? Remember the massive stranglehold the big three (ABC, NBC, and CBS) had on America’s view of the news during the Carter years. Yet, by 1979, there ws so much of a rage fomented against that pathetic incompetent that even the MSM’s under-reporting of polls could not hold back the tidal wave that swept Jimmy the Bumbler out into the sewers.
I do not believe that Obama is as smart as Carter.
WOW! What a prediction. I fear that Mr Hanson has acruately predicted our future. He didn’t mention that with the Fairness Act, we will no longer need the first amendment. Guns will become illegal so only the police (aka the government) will need them. Is there another Ruby Ridge in our future?
I guess I’m a sucker for the most dire predictions, but I’m expecting a market dive in May, then another one in Nov. Gold drops to $300, the Dow to 4000 and predatory mobs roam our cities with law enforcement and the social safety net overwhelmed. Then I’m expecting Dear Leader and his acolytes to consolidate and expand their powers with the approval of Congress and the media. One big ol’ fire at the Riechstag.
Dr. Hanson,
Spot on regarding the media as Obama’s rose-petal tossers, but I have one quibble:
“…though please—preferably a Volvo or Mercedes SUV rather than a Tahoe or Yukon…”
Where I live, I see plenty of liberals in the latter two vehicles, often with a “stop global warming” or “no war for oil” type of sticker on the bumper. The irony is lost on them, I’m sure.
Dude, you are SUCH an optimist…
Prof. thanks for your wit, wisdom and common sense. You are a bright spot in the otherwise dark barn.
So true, so true – the era of doublethink tightens its grip, as Obama’s lack of executive experience is magically transformed into an advantage, while Sarah Palin’s far more substantial leadership is deemed insufficient for even the *Vice* presidency – so the man from hope and change will be incapable of making a mistake, at least in the eyes of the media, who will pronounce his every move as “Carefully deliberated” (As Time magazine concluded, his “Genome is global, his mind is innovative, his world is networked (just as though he occupied a different world from the one the rest of us live in)) – and every misstep, no matter how slight, will be attributed to either obstacles left behind by Bush, or new ones placed by uncooperative bureaucrats (or even bigots – talk about a convenient scapegoat!).
It has really been difficult to imagine news reporting on Obama becoming any more pathetic, but I have a feeling that we ain’t seen nothin’ yet.
“As Time magazine concluded, his “Genome is global, his mind is innovative, his world is networked..”
..wow, Time actually said that? What a load of rubbish. We have to ask ourselves how many actually</i? will continue to believe that crap over the next four years?
Where’s my free stuff? He promised it and I want it.
Eric #9, et al;
Doncha know? The Bailout will be extended to the NYT and LAT, and other suitable candidates. Gotta keep those Truth Spigots open and flowing, after all!
Retch.
The return of confidence gambit is already in play through the agenda-setting media. Could not the contrarian market and voter’s choice be seen as a massive vote of “no-confidence” in the money markets and regulatory governance? Already the Obama is being raised farther and farther up the pedestal of hope. Does that not measure also a fall?
What charm does he have to keep him free of useful critism or even satire? Obama begins his term with a determined list of problems. What about those great unexpected events to which every president has been greeted? I predict a vast quantity of uncertainy besides the experimental changes that he promised.
The one curiosity in this election is that I was certain that this upturn in the news would happen the second it was announced that Barack Obama had won the election. That’s the way it happened with Clinton, the change in the economic situation and everything else was *literally* overnight. I guess that was too nakedly partisan to repeat.
GET USED TO MY BEING A JOHNNY ONE NOTE MR. HANSON. OBAMA IS AN ILLEGAL PRESIDENT. YOU HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO POUND THIS POINT HOME EVERY SINGLE DAY UNTIL HE IS GONE. ANYTHING ELSE IS A SHIRKING OF YOUR DUTIES AS AN AMERICAN CITIZEN.
HE HAS DUAL CITIZENSHIP THANKS TO HIS FATHER AND IS THEREFORE INELIGIBLE TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. THAT NO GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL IS WILLING TO CONFRONT THIS MATTER DOES NOT MEAN IT IS WITHOUT MERIT.
IT HAS COMPLETE MERIT AND NOW, I REPEAT, NOW, THE ONLY RECOURSE IS FOR PEOPLE LIKE YOU AND ME TO MAKE NOISE EVERY DAY. THERE WILL BE MORE TO FOLLOW. MORE GROUPS WILL FOLLOW. MORE ACTIONS WILL TAKE PLACE.
WILL YOU BE AT THE FRONT OR THE REAR OF THIS GROUP?
“If an administration official quits, goes on 60 Minutes…..”
60 minutes would never invite such a heretic on their program in the first place….
Please. Kyoto was signed by Al Gore. The Senate never got to vote on the treaty.
For the life of me, I don’t think I’ll ever come to grips with the idea so prevalent in the major media that it’s THEIR “holy mission” to see to it that their favorite candidates get nominated and THEIR favorite nominee is elected.
I have a job that allows me the pleasure of meeting and talking to literally thousands of people every year. When time allows, I make it a point to feel them out on their political philosophies. In the 80s, I found that a large percentage of people who were registered as Democrats in Oklahoma so identified–not because they agreed with the national Party’s leftward drift–but because Republicans rarely ran in their LOCAL elections for such things as County Clerk, Tax Assessor, County Commissioner or Sheriff, so the ONLY way they had of controlling who got those jobs…which had the most immediate effect on their daily lives…was to be able to vote in the Democrats’ primary. In Wyoming, the voters were mostly staunch Republicans because voters there were committed conservatives and they identified the GOP with conservatism and the Democrats with liberalism–even then. That is not to say that Oklahomans didn’t ALSO prefer conservatives. To them, it was merely a matter of available choices. Oklahoma didn’t elect a Republican governor until some 80 years after Statehood and have either chamber of the State legislature with a GOP majority until even after that. In part, I think that was because the local media were dominated by conservatives. The editorial philosophy of the two major State-wide newspapers was reliably conservative–as it was in five of the six broadcast TV networks and most of the radio stations with political talk in their respective formats. This year, which was supposed to be a disaster for the GOP, saw not a single county in Oklahoma vote for Obama and saw the GOP take control of the lower house of the legislature for the first time in history. It’s true that we have a Democrat governor, but that seems to be an anomaly of the 2006 election which saw an anti-cock-fighting referendum on the ballot which brought out thousands of Democrat, rural, SE Oklahomans who rarely vote to vote against the referendum. Their numbers were enough to give the current governor a narrow victory over his GOP opponent…former NFL great, Steve Largent, who, in a normal election, sans the cock fighting issue, would have won handily.
My point is that I, too, see disaster ahead, but the coming economic holocaust will undoubtedly give rise to a resurgance of conservatism. What we can only hope for is that the disaster isn’t TOO disasterous and one from which we can recover.
formwiz, turfmann, et al.,
why would americans return to conservatism, when that threw us into the abyss in the first place. i don’t read even a shard of concern about the bankers who gave themselves 1.6billion dollar “bonuses” with our money. bonuses, mind you, for morons who screwed up in the first place.
obama hasn’t done anything to deserve this attack on his “plans”. he isn’t even president yet. he’s surrounded himself with a brilliant and knowledgeable and experienced team. american arms are not sticking up in the air like the germans who so loved their wonderful leader while he was promising to gas jewish mothers with their jewish babies. there’s nothing like that here.
what is the problem. i am stupid, so it eludes me.
the controversy over warren was handled very well by obama. he is quite unflappable when it comes to core concepts. the major one being that we are groups of people who think and believe differently about the same things.
and we have to listen to each other, if we like it or not, because we all comprise, as americans, who we really are. we are bonded only by our faith in america, which is precicely what he is asking us to have.
as an aside, a strengthened national police force, like the national guard is crucial. it isn’[t the army and it augments anti-criminal activity and help for unforeseen, unmanageable catastrophes like floods and hurricanes.
i like the idea of that kind of security. i like it, whether or not it principally affects me, myself and i.
we can rebuild america and we can rebound. why are you pinned to a disaster scenario. that you don’t believe we can do this is a great mystery to me since you tout yourself as patriots. get yourself a t-shirt with, yes, we can, on it. maybe that will help.
Wow. Has anyone seen the videos of Caroline Kennedy answering reporter’s questions? The woman must be overmedicated. She can’t put a coherent thought together and comes off sounding like a high school junior explaining why she’s now interested in a political career. The Palin bashers must cringe when they hear the new female poster child for the Democratic Party speak extemporaneously. Sarah P would eat her for lunch in any side by side comparison.
Judy
a “strengthened national police force” would be controlled by what government agency? Hmmmmm. Where should we send your brown shirt? and I guess I’m stupid ’cause I didn’t realize that Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Maxine Waters, Bill Clinton et al were Conservatives! And BTW if you haven’t been hearing about the bankers who committed these atrocities you really are stupid, as you say.
THE BIASED NEWSPRINT MEDIA IS DEAD:
Americans have turned there backs on agenda driven “news”. They aren’t going to come back.
http://www.greensrealworld.blogspot.com
“…american arms are not sticking up in the air like the germans…”
“…a strengthened national police force… it isn’[t the army and it augments anti-criminal activity ”
-Judy,NYC
The form is different but the substance is the same. The desperate collective need for order and control supercedes the individuals need for freedom.
Judy, in my opinion it was not conservative principles that threw us into the abyss but those politicians that abandoned conservatism and acted like their liberal bretheren that have made this mess possible. The ultimate example of this is those Republicans that are now backing bailouts for every Tom, Dick and Harry, Inc. that thinks it is too big to fail. Why even my liberal Democratic representative is in opposition to these bailouts. Conservative principles espouse limited government and we are now in a full sprint away from that – at our great peril unfortunately.
You would be correct to infer that I am not a supporter of Mr. Obama. My lack of support is based upon a careful review of his record (that which he makes available) and a comparison to my own political beliefs. They do not match up, indeed, I do not see any rational basis for anyone supporting someone who has so little tangible evidence of qualification.
As to your comments on Nazi Germany, and what liberal rant would be complete without a reductio ad Hitlerum (I beg your pardon, Dr. Hanson), I think that you need to do a little more studying on the circumstances of Hitler’s rise to power, the complicity, or lack there of, of the German population and exactly how much they knew of the evil that was being done in their name. My conclusion is that societal madness is a phenomenon that can infect any nation if it is not mindful of the lessons of history. And to that end, that is exactly why you should greatly fear, and resist with every fiber of your being, a national police force. It runs so counter to the founding principles of this country that those who advocate it I cannot help but feel that they are utterly and completely ignorant of the Constitution. As you mention, you live in New York City. As I remember, there was a time in the 70′s and 80′s when it was, as a whole, a very dangerous place to live. I seem to remember that there was a certain mayor that came to power promising to clean up the mess and quite well succeeded. This Bostonian wouldn’t hesitate to walk the streets today when he would certainly have avoided doing so back then. No need for a national police force, just an insistence that the rule of law be followed and criminal behavior not be tolerated. A national police force, in my mind, evokes images of the exact Nazi Germany scenario that you throw up in my face. There is no need for it, no rational basis for it, and no Constitutional provision that permits it.
Now let’s get on to your comment on Pastor Warren. The “controversy” you allude to is a red herring. At the inauguration, Pastor Warren will stand up, give a brief prayer and sit down. That’s about it. As to controversy and unflappability, you apparently did not watch, or care not to remember, the Saddleback Forum. Pastor Warren, who is unapologetically pro-life, made Mr. Obama quite uncomfortable with his inquiry into Mr. Obama’s position on abortion. As far as I am concerned, a glib rejoinder as “above my pay grade” disqualifies one as being termed unflappable.
Judy, I will count you among the legion of Obama supporters that are swept up in the hoopla after eight long years of being tyrannized by the illegitimate President Chimpy McHitlerbush (or whatever the rabid left calls him) without stopping to carefully consider the man you were supporting.
May God bless Mr. Obama as he takes office. I sincerely hope that I am completely wrong in my assessment of him for the sake of my country.
HE HAS DUAL CITIZENSHIP THANKS TO HIS FATHER AND IS THEREFORE INELIGIBLE TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. THAT NO GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL IS WILLING TO CONFRONT THIS MATTER DOES NOT MEAN IT IS WITHOUT MERIT.
Why hasn’t anyone demanded that he stop hiding behind that forged piece of paper and show his real and proper birth certificate? If he has nothing to hide, then show the American public that he truly is eligible to wear the hat. Until that time, I will never believe a word he utters.
In Truth … sadly Victor D. Hanson is dead on the money here .
There is a old saying … When the Media likes you and more importantly your racial leftist politics (equal agenda’s ) .
They can make Chicken Sh*t Taste like Chicken Salad to their readers and listeners that don’t look for the cold facts.
I use to believe it was the media honest and honorable intentions and reason to “Report the news “but Not any longer .
Example- Bush , Chaney and Karl Rove were found Guilty by the Media for outing Valerie Plaine as a CIA Agent the day the Fed procurator said he would try the case and look for a “Dun did it” ….. knowing it was Robert Armitage all along . Colins Powells Chief Ass. yet neither one told BUSH THE TRUTH letting him be touched for two years by the media .
Yet Obama and many on his staff had a long time (9 years ) well known relationship with the Nut Mayor in Chicago but the Day that same Procurator announced the Crimes an criminal charges against the Chicago Mayor . The entire Media in perfect “Unison “…. said Obama was not involved even thought they knew he was deeply involved with that Mayor for many years and had even campaigned for each other ….. Yet Bush , Chaney and Kove had never met Valerie Plaine but they were guilty even though for 2 years the facts never pointed toward them even once . [And } the Media never said they were sorry for lying about Bush , Chaney and Rove putting them though hell for two years .
Ms Plaine was a deck clerk and never a top secret CIA undercover field operative we learned only “”After the Trial ” .
And just as the homeless were “rediscovered” after the inauguration of George W. Bush, look for them to be airbrushed and explained away more in the next administration.
42. Curt… 52. Char
If we have questions about the Prez Elect, we don’t have them about our system of government.
The system of checks and balances give the courts the power to determine illegalities and the legislature the power to impeach.
The courts have demurred and the legislature is on Obama’s side so we’re stuck.
It’s time to stand down, be patient, and go on with our lives.
I was for Berg myself but the time has passed. Be cool.
I wonder when liberals like Judy NYC will ever figure out that Bush (neither one) is NOT a conservative. Never was. Ever. Never. Ever. Never. Get it through your self-proclaimed “stupid” head Judy.
Mr Obama is very lucky to have as his loudest opponents people who think that he is not eligible to be President. Their zeal (AND CAPITAL LETTERS) tend to drown out rationale criticism of new administration. Because they raise a straw man that can be so easily knocked down, (and even if successful would make Joseph Biden president) the Democrats owe them a debt of gratitude.
As far as I am concerned, now is the time to start thinking about which coin Mr. Obama’s image should appear after he leaves office. This is because the judgment on his administration is already decided: Half the country is ready to accept him as one of the greatest Presidents, the other half the worst. This will pose a conundrum because the only Republican on a coin is Lincoln (another president who had half the country thinking he was the worst). So will we see the end of the Kennedy half dollar? I guess that depends if Caroline is in the Senate. Maybe we could find space on Mt. Rushmore as well.
As for substantive issues, everything good in the next four years will be because of the “O”, everything bad will be the fault of “W”. The Democrats campaigned against Herbert Hoover for two generations, I am sure they will invoke the 23rd letter of the alphabet for decades to come.
Finally, the Achilles heel of the Democrats is that it tends to fracture when in power. Its unity depends its opposition. Have you noticed that nothing shakes the “X-Files” wing of the Democratic Party as the recent praise for Obama from conservatives concerning his cabinet choices? — And the Achilles heel of Mr. Obama is flattery.
27. Ron
Prizes don’t work that anymore…..disemmination of national agendas…Obama’s book numbers were all faked…
Judy,
get yourself a t-shirt with, yes, we can, on it. maybe that will help.
Dec 28, 2008 – 7:44 pm
God that tripe makes you sound like a huge loser. Hey, guess what? Come in close so you can hear me. I was/am doing fine under Bush. Sorry that losers like yourself weren’t, but maybe if you had some actual skills, you’d have been doing fine, too, and you wouldn’t be repeating mindless crap phrases for all the world to read. Ponder that conundrum while I’m paying higher taxes to support you, will ya?
As Nietzsche said, the strong (me) must be protected from the weak (you).
Too much overpaid government, too many lawyers in general, not enough technology technicians and the Y Generation playing international-virtual-poker with the Earth’s air…yeah I think you got it all. Thank you Dr.
Historical Presidency=Hysterical Presidency. Lincoln should be dug up and held accountable for this fiasco. How do you hang crumbled bones and hair though? Never fear, just repeal the 14th amendment and let bygones be bygones.
“Well, that settles it. That’s good enough for me! The solution, as I see it, is for me to work harder!” =Judy in NYC
You probably wrote a truer word, Sir, but, yes. It will be true…
“National police force”: Obama didn’t use the word “police” in the speech from which this rumor got started. Maybe someday this myth will be dispelled. The term Obama actually used is “Civilian National Security Force”–not “national police force”. If you read the speech, or watch him deliver it:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2046706/posts
…you’ll see that he was trying to get us to focus on the other meanings of the term “national security”–the civilian aspects of life we value. He thought it was important to point out that the term doesn’t apply just to military strength, border security, etc. He was presenting a completely NON-military proposal, of providing more funding to public sector programs, and starting a few new ones–not some single new organization, and certainly not an armed one. He was contrasting the need for a military, with the equal need for a non-military emphasis on national service organizations that are just as necessary for national security, as the military. So, it was a proposal for exactly the OPPOSITE of what he’s been accused of.
It’s also the only speech in which he spoke about it, implying he’s aware his initial thoughts about the plan might not have been too well thought out, or at least not well-expressed.
The link above contains a side-by-side comparison between Obama’s original written speech, and a transcript of the actual speech in which he changed a few things in it. Ignore the reader comments on that linked page, which appear after the speech text–they go into the usual misinterpretive nonsensical ranting we’ve heard before.
Some of the ideas behind this plan sound good, but at least one aspect, as originally proposed, was disturbing: REQUIRING schoolkids to participate in ways appropriate for them, with penalties to be imposed if they didn’t. The word “require” was originally used in his web site’s description of his plan, but it was amended a few days later (no doubt by hearing from people who pointed out that this approach was uncool), so that it now reads:
“…setting a goal that all middle school and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year…”
50 hours a year isn’t a lot, but to me, that wording still doesn’t sound right, since by retaining the word “all”, it now just IMPLIES compulsion, or at least just shaming kids into it. Some people have tried to justify this compulsion, by pointing out that we compel kids to go to school through high school, and take certain subjects, but that’s forgetting that for many kids, being forced to take certain classes, sours many of them on some of the subjects being taught. Similarly, carrying through this compulsion into working for the community, might sour kids on working for the community once they get out of high school, in the same way that many kids are soured on science, history, etc. since they were forced to take these subjects when they were kids. Some people might say, that for every kid that gets soured on community service because it was compulsory in school, there will be a kid whose exposure to community service, which he might not otherwise have had, will instill a genuine liking for it–but that still doesn’t justify making it compulsory for kids, or even shaming them into seeing it as a goal.
Obama’s community service plan is also extended to college students, but there he proposes an incentive:
“…and by developing a plan so that all college students who conduct 100 hours of community service receive a universal and fully refundable tax credit ensuring that the first $4,000 of their college education is completely free.”
Here, the goad is a tax credit, not compulsion, or shame, etc. But to me, this raises the question: why not give the pre-college kids some tangible incentive too? Not pay them directly, since that could be seen as a simple bribe, but some reasonable incentive.
In any case, I don’t think we have to worry about any of this equating to a new Hitler Youth, brownshirts, etc. I know Obama’s background as a community organizer is misunderstood by many, but it doesn’t equate to trying to start new versions of those organizations.
@64 John Sawyer,
Your argument about the name is purely semantical and bankrupt in substance. A security force is inherently militaristic as security is about the use of or threat of force. The Founding Fathers so brilliantly and effectively designed our defense to be controlled by civilians that Mr. O’s reinvention of this wheel is not only unnecessary and unwanted, but insidious.
Alone, your observation about his “initial thoughts” and their lack of intelligent structure or coherence is enough to torpedo this concept proferred by a politician campaigning for the highest office in the land responsible for intelligent and coherent public policy.
Continuing forward to the idea of tens of thousands of relatively untrained, poorly motivated young (any) citizens given more authority than they are experienced to handle being unleashed upon a society which has no use for them…
Mr. May,
As to your continuing forward, I submit the idea of tens of thousands of HIGHLY trained, HIGHLY motivated young citizens (aka Obama supporters) that are given any sense of perceived authority being unleashed upon society, which is what I interpreted the remarks to mean in an encoded fashion, is a clear and present danger to individual liberty as we know it.
I agree with, and amplify, your remarks.
@ 65 G.May:
You’re insisting that the terms Obama used, referring to a “security force”, can only mean military force, when he was very clear that this was not what he meant. You wish to believe there’s only one definition of certain words and phrases, but as anyone should know, that’s not how language works. The term “security” doesn’t simply mean “the use of or threat of force”–for instance, the term “financial security”–do you believe this phrase means the practice of using the force of arms to make money? Anybody could offer many more examples.
Please point out to me, in Obama’s remarks, where it describes putting kids into the kinds of positions of authority you envision. In doing so, please don’t continue to try to infer from his remarks that this is what he “really” meant, or even that this is what it could “really” lead to, at least along the militaristic lines you envision.
Did you read Obama’s speech, and watch the video of it, which I linked to?
Do you really believe Obama would state, in a public speech, that he wanted to start a national paramilitary force? Are your perceptions of him so slanted that it clouds your common sense that much?
Nor is my “observation about his ‘initial thoughts’ and their lack of intelligent structure or coherence…enough to torpedo this concept”. Obama, like anyone else, doesn’t always express himself clearly the first time. It doesn’t disqualify a person from running for any office, even the presidency–politicians do it all the time–nor does it automatically torpedo whatever ideas the person is proffering.
So I’m not concerned that there’s any military or paramilitary subtext in Obama’s idea of a “Civilian National Security Force”. I’m more concerned about the non-military implications of what turfmann describes–the idea of giving tens of thousands of young people a sense of perceived authority, even when it’s non-military or non-police force oriented. I don’t think that was encoded in Obama’s speech–I think it was pretty clear that this was part of what he’s openly suggesting–giving a lot of young people some perceived, or even real, authority, even if it’s just a perceived MORAL authority. I’d like to think the idea of people helping people in national, non-military service is a basically incorruptible concept, but it’s not–I wouldn’t like to see a lot of young people running away with Obama’s original intent, and becoming a self-righteous bunch telling “unbelievers” that they’re evil unless they fall in line, without even listening to what the “unbelievers” have to say (we already have enough of that)–with that mentality, even people who have some real counter-ideas to offer will be harassed or worse. But as to whether any of these proposed kinds of authority really will turn out to be good or bad, that may be to be determined, but if there are any issues with it, I doubt whether it will amount to a tide of awfulness. I wouldn’t go so far as to believe turfmann’s assumption that Obama’s proposal is inherently “a clear and present danger to individual liberty as we know it”, but it should be watched, not because Obama is deliberately suggesting something onerous, but because it could get out of hand and go beyond what he envisions.
People of any stripe, given real or perceived authority, can wield it improperly. I wouldn’t like to see the ideas of one person, or a group, foisted on others with different ideas, when those different ideas aren’t automatically evil either, but rather are defensible at least in principle, or are backed up by experience–the basic idea turfmann is counter-proposing to Obama’s, being that ideologies imposed by government can be a bad idea, even when those ideologies “sound good”, since people high on moral authority can do some real damage if they don’t have some perspective, which most younger people are usually short on. In other words, government imposing moral authority beyond what it’s supposed to, supposes that the morality of too much of the citizenry is bankrupt and needs fixing, instead of the problem being the confused morality, immorality, or lack of morality of some “leaders”, and their subsequent actions and inactions. But the position of the presidency does carry with it an imperative to be moral, and to speak out about it, and hence we see every president making statements and taking some measures to foster morality, as they see it. So the concept of an administration trying to foster morality isn’t inherently wrong or unprecedented–I wouldn’t automatically try to slap down any statements about morality that Obama offers, but rather investigate them first with a little more depth than we usually see applied to thoughts about Obama’s “Civilian National Security Force”.
@67 John Sawyer,
First you say his comments were not well thought out or intelligently constructed, and now you say he was quite clear. Yet you have the gall to lecture on the use of language. You’re just projecting. I have not once suggested merely one definition of words and phrases, but one can always smell the reek of self-indulgence when common words and phrases are redefined or reinterpreted to make them more palatable.
Did Mr. Obama mention a “Civilian Financial Security Force”? Or a “Civilian Job Security Force”? You can’t possibly be serious.
But let’s say for a moment that we are as stupid as you and Mr. O think we are. As much as we’re reminded about Mr. O’s eloquence and intelligence, one might think he would be so graceful as to fill the unwashed masses in on what exactly this grand plan might be, let alone, phrase it in clear and concise language that is not so easily “misunderstood”. Until such time as Mr. O deems appropriate for us simpletons to know exactly what he means, some of us MUST infer and some of you must give us apologetics.
Again, you’re projecting your own bias upon me. My “common sense” would tell me that a candidate (or candidate elect) for the highest office in the land would do the electorate the common courtesy to elaborate on his ideas. Unfortunately this isn’t the only grand scheme he’s hoisted up the flagpole without sufficent explanation.
To answer your questions – Yes, I watched the video and no, I didn’t read the *entire* speech. I saw the video in it’s entirety a long time ago.
The following quote demands clarification or explanation:
“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve gotta have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”
This language is quite clear. Extremely common political terms with very specific connotations being used by our number one guy. Trying to put this in context with the rest of the speech takes a few linguistic contortions.
Going back to the idea I put forth about young people and their perceived or real authority being unleashed, you may feel it’s worth a shot, however when the President-elect has stated it needs to be “just as powerful…strong (and)…well-funded” as the military, you’ll forgive me if I’m not willing to give him a blank check or free reign.
John Sawyer:
Your argument for a benign interpretation of Obama’s “Civilian National Security Force” idea depends on a degree of trust in this relatively unknown politician that, as yet, I do not share.
Organizing community improvement projects for young Americans under the rubric of “National Security” merely waters down the term. Almost anything the federal government promotes can be given a national security spin — improving the economy, infrastructure projects (TVA/CCC in the 30′s), improving health care, etc. The Nazis made having multiple babies a patriotic duty for German mothers, important for the security of the Fatherland.
For most of us, calling any government sponsored entity a “National Security Force” implies an organization patterned on the military or law enforcement agencies. You can make a semantic argument against this interpretation, but at a minimum it’s a poor choice of words. Obviously, many totalitarian governments have civilian organizations — with a national security moniker — which exist solely to protect the government, not the people.
Finally, why do we need the government to organize and pay for activities already performed by churches, local community organizations etc? Why cajole or compel students to participate in something they may not be interested in? Maybe if we educated them better, they would work to improve this country on their own initiative. And our failing education system is a bigger national security threat than anything Obama’s national security force seems designed to improve.
I think the the rant is absolutely right — it’s just been the unfair, left wing, radical, lying scum press that makes it seem like we are in dire economic straights. (It’s got not to do with the republican legacy of privatization and deregulation.) Those bastards that have made it appear that a bitter old scum sucking, lying, draft dodging, money grubbing VP that sat on the board of Halliburton was making a fortune for his cronies by war mongering. The elite media types that have convinced the gullible masses that unauthorized wire taps are somehow less than our patriotic duty. Negative naysayers that would have us believe that the stock market actually lost a third of it’s value this past year or that banks, retailers and manufacturers have been devastated. I don’t even know who can be blamed for telling us that the biggest deficit known to humanity has been put to us by a “conservative” espouser of less taxes, less spending. And it must be those damn Islamic fundementalist that insinuate that just because 4 or 5 million middle class citizens of Iraq have fled to Lebanon and Syria leaving behind literally everything they had to save themselves and their loved ones that the idiot (No Nation Building, Mission Accomplished) Bush’s invasion, occupation, subjugation of Iraq was something less than a brilliant plan.
Yea I see the point — or, Perhaps one should remove their head from that stinky, moist, warm place that seems to be obscuring their vision and look back at the last eight disasterous years.
It used to be not needed to report ‘good’ news: for example, ‘No plane crash today’ is expected, therefore it is not news.
After Obama takes over, it will be the sacred duty of those ‘used to be news media’ to not report any ‘bad’ news. Instead, I expect to see/read lots and lots of tear-jerking (sorry, heart-warming) hopey-changey stories daily.
Hence, they will have earned the new name – “Reverse News media”.
We are embarking upon the most revolutionary transitional phase of our national existence, and you mock? After we will save millions of American jobs by erecting protective trade barriers and eliminating outsourcing to places like India, we will then help those people by sending them billions of dollars of charity from our rejuvenated economy. Other nations will love us once again! We will also rejuvenate the economy by taxing the rich and increasing government spending by heretofore undreamed of amounts. We will reduce corporate greed by giving them millions of dollars of taxpayer money so corporate executives won’t have to be be greedy, unethical, and under the unnecessary stress to have to make that money under the duress of a free market. We will create goodwill and peace around the world by talking nicer to leaders whom previously we would call insulting names like “belligerents”, “thugs,” “state terrorists,” and other like old school, black/white thinking, derogatory, tension-creating titles.
Dr. Hanson, you just don’t get it.
This online paper is as bad as Huffington News in its own way. I choose to come here to see if I can understand where the right is coming from and I leave perplexed. I am about tired of hearing all the gloom and doom senerios regarding Obama’s presidency.
Here is what I do know. I know that much of the imagery you put forth predicting a Nazi like state in the US have are present in this adminstration. Bush has done some pretty scary things in his war on terror and in solving the current finacial crisis in America. Before you point a finger at Obama, how about taking a really close look at Bush and what is doing. The right is not totally innocent either. Until we learn to work together and find common ground, we are pretty much up the creek.
from John Sawyer; Obama’s community service plan
“…and by developing a plan so that all college students who conduct 100 hours of community service receive a universal and fully refundable tax credit ensuring that the first $4,000 of their college education is completely free.”
Sounds rational to me. Matter of fact why even go look for ‘real’ work after college (Engineering and science)? Why not use political pressures to stay in Community Service? ‘It’s been done Before’. Forty dollars an hour is roughly UAW scale which is far better than many of the nations lower echelon ‘real workers’ earn at 12 to 14 dollars an hour with NO bennies. Plus the chance to one day run for the presidency is far more lucrative, apparently once in Community Service of course.
Another issue (also brought up by Judy) is quote; the words, “A National Security Force”. Which word is the problem? “FORCE”?…”SECURITY”?…”NATIONAL”?
I take it people have never been to a popular entertainers concert? Even large political rallies come to mind. “FORCE” SECURITY” “NATIONAL”. Robert Mugabe would be so proud. Many others understand history but apparently about 51% have not a clue? that other little sentence bothers me as well, “Equal to the Military in ‘POWER’ and Funding”. Also as he say’s these words, look at his eyes and watch his facial expression change as you watch the vid clips on YT.
Also apparently forgotten by the media, is the Community Reinvestment Act of 1973 (Carter), given teeth in 1999 by Willie, as a timed release ‘poison pill’ for the next administration. Then the childlike ‘super glued’ keybords, desk drawers, chairs, etc, that Willie’s ‘crew’ left behind as they sabotaged the whitehouse infrastructure for W (removed from the keyboards btw).
Keep on teaching Victor, the message will gradually cut through ‘The Fog’.
Dr Lumplevin-
At first I thought, “Is this a joke?”. Then I checked your website…