David Frum's Warning

cuffleyburgers

Alex

Excuse my dimness but I don't understand the difference between high spending high taxing liberals and what we would call socialism?

The problem is not in the semantics it is the fact that government spending a large portion of the national income is A BAD THING.

The desire by government to control vast swathes of the economy (by using its powers to extort tax, and to enact laws that oblige people and companies to act in certain ways to suit the government's political aims) is exactly the first step on the road to Serfdom, or even to AYn Rand's dystopia.

Plus you only consider the US situation where they have a much more effective legislature.

I would say the position here is much more dangerous.

Don't forget "1984" seemed a crazy exaggeration when I first read it (in around 1984). But Brown's Britain is a great deal closer to that image than seemed possible then.

The Brown spending spree really only let rip once Blair had handed over the keys, so we're only half way through it but it is undoubtedly accelerating.

Unless something is done, there is time before the next election to get much further along the Atlas Shrugged trajectory than you imagine.

Conservative Cabbie

Things aren't completely rosy for Obama in the polls. From Rasmussen:

Only 38% think Obama's stimulus plan will actually help the economic situation.

Nearly half (46%) the people think Obama should be more positive about the economy than he has been.

Only 25% believe that Obama's mortgage proposals will help the housing market.

The Republicans are only 2% behind the Democrats in the generic congressional poll (the closest it's been since 2005).

Obama and the Democrats are enjoying a honeymoon and the GOP are in the public's doghouse right now so of course some polls will look bad for the GOP (especially a New York Times poll that you quoted).

ndm

Matthew Yglesias has a long post on the Rasmussen poll riffing of a Josh Marshall comment that [b]ut the qualitative questions, in terms of their phrasing and so forth, are frequently skewed to give answers friendly toward GOP or conservative viewpoints." To be honest, I think everyone is polled out after last year so no one really cares about polls like this.

Gabriel

David Frum gets nothing. If he did, he would publicly be renoouncing his 8 year support for Bush's "go shopping" politics of fiscal irresponsiblity.

The credit-bubble welfare-state polity is on its last legs, both in America and across the western world. Either a strong, no-compromise conservative President is elected in 2012 with a stong, no-compromise conservative congress or the United States is sunk amidst a deluge of hyper-inflation and public insolvency.

However, if a strong, no-compromise strategy fails to win Republicans any elections, so be it. America will fall, but no more than it would with a RINO Presidency.

Sometimes doing the right thing matters. To be perfectly frank, any country that would elect a charlatan fraud like Obama deserves to be destroyed, I sort of wonder why Republicans even bother trying to save such a country.

Craig Strachan

So you think Limbaugh/Hannity would be losing ticket in '12 then?

Craig Strachan

So you think Limbaugh/Hannity would be losing ticket in '12 then?

Rob Cremona

Suggested addition to English dictionary

to 'frum frum' - to talk seemingly-intelligent gibberish while only succeeding/attempting to make sense only to those who benefit from a/the scam.

ndm

Gabriel writes "any country that would elect a charlatan fraud like Obama deserves to be destroyed." I wonder if the archangel would like to expound on that sentence - both the "charlatan fraud" and the "destroyed."

I know Alex Massie's comments are being polluted by runoff from Melanie Phillips's blog but, really, talking about "charlatan fraud" and suggesting the United States needs to be "destroyed" is deep into al Qaeda territory.

porkbelly

Frum is that strange thing - an anti-capitalist conservative. (Pat Buchanan is another). He worships at the altar of "stability" and "order" - risk-taking enterpreneurs are, to him, worse than left-wing rabble because they threaten to up-end the Establishment with their brash ambition. So of course he feels sympathetic to Obama - placing banks under public stewardship and turning them into stodgy utilities is precisely what Franco or Peron would have done. How can anyone believe that this is "temporary" - will Pelosi, Frank and Dodd relinquish this kind of power? Hah! The government is going to sink into this mess deeper and deeper, flailing about trying this or that scheme depending on whether Geithner or Summers has the President's ear that week. It will be an economic Vietnam, brought about by the same over-confidence that technocrats can sort it all out thanks to their massive brainpower (untainted, usually, by real-world experience). Look back at Robert McNamara for an example. Right now Americans are desperate to believe the rhetoric; one wonders a year or so from now whether they will still be as gullible.

THX1138

Cabbie everywhere I go you spouting polls. In case you have forgotten my side won the important poll back in November. Brought a little smile to my face just typing that.

Craig- I'd go with O'Reilly/Malkin in 2012 how could they lose. That Papa Bear is just so cuddly.

David

The next few years are crucial for the Republicans. They've got to start laying the groundwork now to avoid being consumed by the southern strategy and its related culture wars. Otherwise they'll find it hard to win back the White House.

Wilhelm

Alex Massie squeeks '' David Frum gets it ''

Isnt he the one who coined the phrase '' the war on terrorism ''. How can you declare war on a tactic ? Thats like Churchill declaring war on blitzkrieg.

Wilhelm

Ps . Alex, Get yourself a haircut, you look like Lawerance Llewelyan Bowen.

Conservative Cabbie

THX

"In case you have forgotten my side won the important poll back in November."

No I haven't forgotten, I doubt you'll find anywhere where I think the GOP don't face a difficult struggle ahead. However, I don't live with my head in the clouds thinking that Obama is some uniquely popular President like you do - he isn't.

David

He is popular. He's not uniguely popular in that there have been popular presidents before, but he is popular.

It's like Labour with David Cameron. Brwon et al think that Cameron is not popular with the public, and try to attack him on that assumption. It fails, because Cameron is pretty well liked. Alan Johnson got it right - accepting the view of Cameron, and going after the party instead has more traction. The Republicans need to do the same here. Stop trying to convince the public they don't like Obama.

Gabriel

ndm
Fine,

charlatan:-
According to Obama's published memoirs he has spent less than 5% of his life doing what could plausibly be dscribed as a real job. His entire political career has consisted of nothing more than campaigning for the next office he aspired to and, now that he has reached the summit, he shows no signs of wanting to govern as an adult, preferring to launch from one act of profligate spending to another.

fraud:-
Obama has consistently lied about his past, his views and his associations. He has lied about his association with a racist church, his friendship with a terrorist responsible for the death of U.S. police officers and about his involvement with the criminal organisation ACORN. Meanwhile, he has mobilised legions of the ignorant and the naive with vague and ofen nonsensical sloganising.

destroyed:-
Within 30 years the American federal government will be flat broke. Either it will default on its loans, its welfare payments or inflate its way out of trouble, or some combination of the above. Either way it won't be pretty.

I'll leave off with a parting shot from the Sun King's latest speech:

"You see, the flow of credit is the lifeblood of our economy. The ability to get a loan is how you finance the purchase of everything from a home to a car to a college education; how stores stock their shelves, farms buy equipment, and businesses make payroll."

Yup, consumption based on credit is the lifeblood of the new American economy, not production and certainly not saving. This is what terminal degeneracy looks like.

ndm

charlatan: President Obama is a young and successful politician who first gained elective office at the age of 35. Politicians campaign to win office and ambitious politicians, like ambitious individuals in other fields, strive for success which in politics means winning election to a higher office. I can only take it that Gabriel confuses the meanings of the words "charlatan" and "politician."

fraud: Gabriel's accusations of fraud while a commonplace in the cube next to Alex Massie's are widely and correctly regarded as insane. These accusations were widely discussed during the 2008 election and the US electorate wisely decided that where not insane they were inconsequential.

destroyed: The United States government will not default on its loans - after all it does not cost much to print fifty million $20 bills. Furthermore, it is well understood that welfare as represented by Social Security is fiscally sound and is currently predicted to run surpluses until 2047. Healthcare is a different issue but the crisis facing Medicare is precisely the same crisis facing private-sector healthcare. Of course, Republicans are in no position to criticise Democrats regarding Medicare since they passed a massive expansion of Medicare and the consequent huge giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry.

Based on his final dismissive comment criticizing the manner in which credit greases the wheels of capitalism it is pretty clear that Gabriel has almost no understanding how the capitalist system works. Obama was precisely correct in his description of how credit allows people to buy cars and farmers to buy equipment, etc. Gabriel even exposes his own stupidity in a single sentence "[y]up, consumption based on credit is the lifeblood of the new American economy, not production and certainly not saving." I wonder if Gabriel even understands what happens to the "saving" he believes will save the American economy - it is, of course, lent out as "credit" to someone else.

Gabriel ends his post with "[t]his is what terminal degeneracy looks like." I take that as a reference to his post.

Gabriel

I said "inflate its way out of trouble"

ndm said "it does not cost much to print fifty million $20 bills"

Oh, but it does and you'll see just how much.

Two further points. First, obviously Bush's economic policies were a disaster, I said that in my first post. Secondly, basing normal consumption, as opposed to investment, on debt is not normal for economies, capitalist or any other. Look up some stats from even a decade ago to see what has happened to the debt burden. Obama and establishment hack economists claim that what we are experiencing right now is a lack of confidence, but they are wrong. This is a drastic market correction to compensate for twenty years of massive misallocation of resources towards immediate consumption. It is real economic facts that underly this recession. What Obama wants to do is continue the party and, even if he succeeds in the short term, which is doubtful, it will only make the final crash worse.

Finally, the new America:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vY84fF2hzhY

Sort of like the mass movements of the last century, only with less intellectual rigour. Republicans should wear their electoral defeats as a badge of pride.

ndm

-- Obama and establishment hack economists claim that what we are experiencing right now is a lack of confidence, but they are wrong. This is a drastic market correction to compensate for twenty years of massive misallocation of resources towards immediate consumption.

This is utter baloney. President Obama and respectable economists are well aware that the financial crisis was caused by massive misallocation of resources. They also recognize that the current business environment has been significantly affected by a massive loss of confidence. Obama is at least trying to do something to solve the financial and business crisis that could bring catastrophe to the America people if allowed to fester - as the Republican Party appears to seek with its pathetic response to the crisis.

Bow it is clear that some people do not understand the magnitude of the problem facing America and when you can;t even recognize a problem you are unlikely to be able to respond to it and solve it. And it is the failure of the Republican Party as a whole to recognize the nature of the serious problems facing America that led to Jindal's disastrous showing last night. Here, for example, is David Brooks on the News Hour with Jim Lehrer:

-- Not so well. You know, I think Bobby Jindal is a very promising politician, and I opposed the stimulus package - I thought it was poorly drafted - but to come up at this moment in history with a stale, "government is the problem...we can't trust the government"...it's just a disaster for the Republican Party. The country is in a panic, now. They may not like the way the Congress passed the stimulus bill. The idea that government is going to have no role in this...in a moment where only the Federal government is big enough to do stuff...to just ignore all that and say government's the problem...corruption, earmarks, wasteful spending - it's just a form of nihilism. It's just not where the country is, it's not where the future of the country is. There's an intra-Republican debate: some people say the Republican party lost its way because it got too moderate, some people say they got too weird or too conservative. He thinks they got too moderate, and he's making that case. I think it's insane. I think it's a disaster for the party. I just think it's unfortunate right now.

"it's insane" - "a disaster for the party." Well, we can go with Gabriel and his "any country that would elect a charlatan fraud like Obama deserves to be destroyed" or we can go with David Brooks and recognize that the Republican Party has lost its way.

I found Gabriel's youtube link to Obama and Julio to be somewhat offensive. I don't see why anyone should be mocking Julio for working his way through college by slaving away at Macdonalds for lack of any better opportunity. Not everyone has the talent and the connections to provide themself with the luxury of an Ivy League education. In the educational circles I moved in humility was always encouraged because no matter how smart you thought you were there you was always going to be someone smarter than you. That is a lesson Gabriel needs to learn.

Gabriel

"Bow it is clear that some people do not understand the magnitude of the problem facing America"

Whatever you can discern from my comments, I don't think you can say I don't understand the magnitude of the problem facing America. You don't, David Brooks doesn't, Obama doesn't, at least judging from his policies and statements. Fine, nor do Jindal and most Republicans. Capital gains tax cut won't save the economy, but at least they won't actively worsen the situation. The only people who do understand are Austrian economists and a few Marxists who are salivating right now (which is why I wouldn't absolutely commit to Obama not understanding. Perhaps he still holds his college views and the Stimulus is actually designed to bankrupt America, perhaps not. Either way, it makes no odds).

But let's be clear. Selling your children into debt-slavery, even if it works in the short run, is not an economic policy. It's the last convulsion of a civilization desperate to be put out of its misery.

Three final points:
The problem is not that Julio is educationally sub-normal, it's that he's part of a hysterical cult posing as a political movement and that the new American culture holds up his idiocy as something to be admired. It should worry everyone that a country swept by inane messianic fervour is rushing through so much legislation of gargantuan importance.

Secondly, the Republican party has not simply lost its way, it is a a complete disgrace.

Thirdly, I hope everyone observing notices that the Obamaloons are already publicly adovcating the mass printing of money in order to pay for The One's spending spree. All while accusing others of economic illiteracy. (All savings are lent out huh? Would have been news to Ricardo.) I didn't think Obama would start preparing the ground for this until 1010, I'll have to revise upwards my judgement of the gravity of the situation.

ndm

-- The only people who do understand are Austrian economists and a few Marxists who are salivating right now

Reminds of the old "Wha's like us? Damn few, and theyre aw deid."

-- But let's be clear. Selling your children into debt-slavery, even if it works in the short run, is not an economic policy. It's the last convulsion of a civilization desperate to be put out of its misery.

Initiating a debt-funded and unnecesary war in time of economic prosperity is economic folly. Running up the budget deficit to push the economy out of recession is not selling our "children into debt slavery" it is providing a sound economy in which they can thrive. There is ample proof of this right now in the United States where the Federal government is borrowing money to provide a large stimulative boost even as the individual states invoke counter-stimulative policies, such as furloughing workers, because they are bound by balanced-budget rules.

As to Julio being educationally sub-normal I would again advise to you exhibit some humility. Had you said your comment about "any country that would elect a charlatan fraud like Obama deserves to be destroyed" at a McCain rally I can assure you that you would still be mocked as a fool across the YouTubes.