Left Behind
Michael C. Moynihan | November 24, 2008, 3:32pm
Perhaps President-elect Obama isn't the left-wing radical so feared by the green-inkers at Newsmax and Human Events. And this is distressing some of his most vocal supporters. We are a few months away from inauguration, but impatient progressives are already fuming that Slavoj Zizek hasn't been appointed to the National Security Council.
Here is The Nation's Washington correspondent, Chris Hayes, on the coming Obama betrayal:
Not a single, solitary, actual dyed-in-the-wool progressive has, as far as I can tell, even been mentioned for a position in the new administration. Not one. Remember this is the movement that was right about Iraq, right about wage stagnation and inequality, right about financial deregulation, right about global warming and right about health care. And I don't just mean in that in a sectarian way. I mean to say that the emerging establishment consensus on all of these issues came from the left.
Hayes is being sectarian—and reductionist. God knows what it means to be "right" about health care, for instance, when The Nation's solution to America's problem (a single-payer model) hasn't been attempted. This magazine has addressed the problems of American health care at great length and has acknowledged that the current system is, in many respects, broken. Does that mean that libertarians have also been "right" about the issue, that we too should expect representation in the next administration's "team of rivals?" Does one only have to diagnose a problem to be "right," or must we also provide an effective prescription? It is amusing, though, to watch young folks like Hayes, who came of age during the George W. Bush presidency, discover that Obama will not simply ascend to the presidency, pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan, close Guantanamo, disassemble the NSA spying program, and create a Department of Peace, headed by Ramsey Clark. There is a reason that Obama's first term is starting to look like a third term for Bill Clinton.
Update: My indefatigable colleague Damon Root blogged Hayes earlier today. Check it out (and the hundred plus comments) here.
Draco | November 25, 2008, 9:07pm | #
Don't fret, Obama had to appoint a competent economic team.
Obama had an important role early in the growth of the mortgage crisis when he taught ACORN members to successfully agitate for mortgages that made no economic sense and that would never be paid back.
Obama performed so well at ACORN that it led to a successful political career. As a senator, Obama sided with the Democrats in blocking reform of the mortgage mess for years, even after it was obvious by 2003 that toxic mortgages were a growing threat to housing and to the economy.
Obama did so well as a senator that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae gave him over $100,000 in political donations, second only to Senator Dodd among all those in Congress.
When the toxic mortgages began to collapse, the $700 billion for the original bailout was a good figure to provide relief until the mortgage market recovered. But instead of the mortgage markets stabilizing, markets throughout the entire world went into a tailspin. What on earth could have driven such a disaster?
Well, Obama is a Marxist, and every Marxist state without exception is an economic failure, or worse. This includes Western Europe, which has had depression level unemployment and (lack of) productivity for two decades.
When it looked probable that Obama might be elected, investor were not willing to sit idly as a Marxist government reduced their returns or confiscated their profits, so all investors who were able bailed. This left the pension funds and 401-K retirees holding a greatly reduced bag, and destroyed liquidity and confidence throughout the markets.
According to Bloomberg today, Nov 25, the total hit to markets around the globe is now $23 trillion, over one and one-half times USA GDP.
So, Obama had to bring in a competent economic team. Otherwise the USASSR would not have survived six months, let alone as long as the USSR did. But the issue is still very much in doubt. Economic competence now may not be enough to overcome the stupidity of electing a Marxist as president.
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSS
