I believe it’s a tenet of psychology that when pushed into the “fight or flight” mode, animals (and people) revert to type.
So it shouldn’t have been a surprise to anyone that, as the Obama administration’s fortunes worsen, his most liberal supporters (those still supporting him, anyway) are falling back on the Kenynesian mantra: “Spend More! Spend More!” and its collollary, “We didn’t spend enough! We didn’t spend enough!”
The latest proponents of this idiocy is none other than that gift-that-keeps-on-giving, the New York Times.
In an Sat, Aug 28 editorial entitled “Waiting For Mr. Obama,” the Times lays it out:
If President Obama has a big economic initiative up his sleeve, as he hinted recently, now would be a good time to let the rest of us in on it.
After a quick statement of how things could have been worse if not for government action (the “stimulus”) the paper opines:
But it has not been enough to revive hiring, without which a real recovery is impossible. In the meantime and even more ominously, economic policy making has all but ground to a halt.
And why might this be? That’s right, class, because of EVIL REPUBLICANS who are thwarting recovery at every turn:
Congress is gridlocked. For nearly two months, Republicans blocked an extension of unemployment benefits, a basic recovery measure. They are still holding up a bill to spur more lending to small businesses.
What, oh what, is the solution ponders the Times? There’s the usual: let the Bush tax cuts expire to punish the evil rich; oh, and explain why the middle class shouldn’t be taxed more right now, lest it ruin the recovery… (I’d like to hear that explanation myself, coming from the guy who’s taxing the middle class more come Jan. 1).
But the set piece on which the Times seems to hang its battered hat, is – if you’re drinking or swallowing, finish before reading on – the Times says the prescription for what ails our economy is to come up with a modern “Moon Shot” (my words): some grand public project that will give us all hype (er, I mean HOPE) again, and a mission in life.
In other words, spend LOTS more money!
That mission could be the “21st century infrastructure,” that Mr. Obama mentioned on a multi-city trip this month, “not just roads and bridges, but faster Internet access and high-speed rail.” It could be energy independence, with high-tech green jobs and a real chance for addressing global warming. Either of the above would make sense, economically and politically.
From the Times’ lips to the President’s big ears!
Let’s hope Obama and his team are SO out of touch that they heed the newspaper’s advice. That should alleviate any close or contested election results on November 2, and maybe even bring the Senate back to the “R” column.