01-17-2019 12:48:37 PM -0800
01-17-2019 07:54:10 AM -0800
01-17-2019 06:55:32 AM -0800
01-16-2019 03:10:05 PM -0800
01-16-2019 12:47:48 PM -0800
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.
PJ Media encourages you to read our updated PRIVACY POLICY and COOKIE POLICY.

The Post-Tucson Era

Easy To Borrow, Hard to Pay Back

The same irony holds true on debt. The new ceiling of $14 trillion is really $14 trillion, and the borrowing shows no sign of much abating. Markets are getting edgy. Any slight spike in interest rates could explode annual debt servicing costs. Obama can talk of higher taxes and “defense cuts,” but the only way one can balance the budget is to address entitlements, specifically Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. (The fact that Obama is not calling for 50% income rates, a VAT, and expanded Medicare and Social Security benefits suggests that even he grasps that more of the progressive agenda is tantamount to political extinction [pardon the metaphor].)

Riding the Tiger

Yet when one cuts (pardon the metaphor) defense (70,000 ground soldiers slated over the next four years to disappear), one must expect that the DMZ, Iran, Hezbollah in Syria, Lebanon, the Hindu Kush, China/Japan, China/Taiwan, Cyprus, the Balkans, the former Soviet republics, Venezuela, the Mexican drug state, and on and on will remain relatively quiet, or that they are really none of our business anyway when a vacuum is sensed and parasitic regional parties rush in to fill it. One can argue that we were on the tiger’s back in an unsustainable position. Perhaps. But getting off the tiger’s back is neither easy nor safe.

In Theory or In Fact?

I’m not sure that the end of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell in 2011 is going to be all that easy either. Will the transgendered and transsexuals demand parity? And if not, why not? Will the overtly gay soldier create edgy atmospheres that the quietly gay did not, and what will be the ramifications of a more overt otherness, if any?

Some will say that now overrepresented white, Christian southern males will insidiously discover the new landscape less inviting and quietly begin leaving or at least not enlisting in prior numbers. If true, will that be good riddance for the new progressive Army or a bad thing when the spirit of Stonewall Jackson and Robert E. Lee is needed in places like Fallujah?

Will gays be eligible for the sort of "diversity" affirmative action that is often a consideration in officer promotions that we have seen with women and minorities? Will populations self-select, in which certain branches of the military create inexplicable niches, perhaps in the fashion of male airline attendants?

And if so, does it matter at all? Will small combat units on the front line worry among the bullets much about the overtly gay in their midst, or in Sacred Band fashion supposedly forge new ties of solidarity?

Will ROTC return to liberal campuses? (I think rarely). These were questions that were apparently so politically incorrect and impolitic as not to be raised, but will be adjudicated by facts in 2011. And the political repercussions among the general public may not make the December 2010 widely celebrated decision so widely celebrated.

Addressing the Misdemeanor, Sighing about the Felony

The same is true of the START treaty. We are already hearing, in rather characteristic post-Soviet style that equates magnanimity with weakness, of Russian plans for quite ambitious missile-defense systems and unilateral interpretations of the applications of the treaty. Yet that cynicism is small beer in comparison to the reality that such showboating treaties usually address the minor problems and ignore the insolvable real ones — in this case North Korea, Pakistan, and Iran. So we may well have a START treaty where none was needed, and a nuclear confrontation where there was no treaty. And what will that say about the power of paper to make us safer?

9% Heaven

It is a commentary on how desperate we are that Americans are supposed to become giddy over news that a new 9.4% unemployment rate is slightly closer to 9% than 10%. Yet as long as ObamaCare scares away jobs, and record deficits and new regulations frighten businesses (along with the administration’s now entrenched "spread the wealth/fat cat" rhetoric), it is hard to see the jobless rate getting much below 9% (Bush was tarred by John Kerry in 2004 for his “jobless recovery” when unemployment for a bit went over 5.5%). What $4 a gallon gas will do to hiring is anyone’s guess.

Lulls and Storms

So to sum up: Obama just returned to his 2004 "no more red state/blue state" healing speech modes that would provide years of cover for the reality that he would soon become the most partisan senator in the Congress. I congratulate him on dispelling in a few minutes the entire leftist smear campaign. He soon saw the results of his calming in the polls and, no doubt, his appetite for more was whetted — especially given that his base capitulated so easily and in such humiliating fashion, in a nanosecond going from sounding like Michael Moore to a calm Gandhi.

Unfortunately, we are in a lull before the hurricane. For two years we have ignored the ramifications of ObamaCare that now begin to kick in; the consequences of going from $11 to $14 trillion in debt, with a trillion more in debt scheduled each year; the inevitable return of sky-high energy prices — and forgot that herky-jerky legislation that is pushed through to high-fiving (think prescription drug) often later proves either too costly or complex to be sustainable.

I was encouraged by Obama’s Tucson speech, but also believe he will not be encouraged by what lies ahead in 2011, most of it the result of his own making.