People frequently refer to Big Government and its excesses and intrusiveness as reflecting George Orwell's predictions of Big Brother. But this current mess brings to mind a different British satirist: Lewis Carroll. We're more in Alice's Wonderland than in 1984. In Orwell, it may be diabolic but there is some sense behind it; in Carroll, nothing makes sense, things are topsy turvy, whims become law.
It's not even clear anymore who wants big government. It's a Republican administration that is panic-pushing the biggest governmental assistance program in history, while insisting that there be no oversight or control or reform. Just a blank check, thank you, for $700 Billion to be used at the discretion of one unelected man, who could be replaced in that post in January by Phil Gramm -- the chief living architect of the current mess -- if we are crazy enough to elect John McCain.
And none other than conservative pundit George Will headlines his column today: "McCain Loses His Head," as in the Queen of Heart's favorite verdict, "Off with his head." That's a reference to McCain's rash calling for the head of Chris Cox, head of SEC. Will goes on to characterize McCain's response as "unpresidential" (as had a Wall Street Journal editorial) in his "fact-free slander" of Cox, and says he "substitutes vehemence for coherence."
He concludes: "It is arguable that, because of his inexperience, Obama is not ready for the presidency. It is arguable that McCain, because of his boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes, is not suited to the presidency. Unreadiness can be corrected, although perhaps at great cost, by experience. Can a dismaying temperament be fixed?"
Here's the real question that makes this race Carrollian rather than Orwellian: A majority of The People agree with the Democrats on the war issue and on most domestic issues; the most reliable factor in winning Presidential elections is the state of the economy and which party holds the White House and for how long. Many Republicans don't like McCain and/or think he isn't all there. Those factors all favor Obama; he should be winning by a huge margin. And yet he holds a slim lead in the polls that shifts by the week. It makes no sense.
It's a crazy "Through the Looking Glass" world we're in.
Ralph
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
I don't know if ya'll are familiar with Naomi Klein's book Shock Doctrine. I'm not too familiar with it myself, but apparently her theory says something to the effect that governments often use disasters or intense crises to push through laws and reforms that could not have been implemented otherwise. There are a number of historical examples of this happening, but the 9/11 attacks were one prominent, recent example, where the government was able to do a lot, including getting us to attack Iraq. I think Klein is arguing (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-klein/now-is-the-time-to-resist_b_128433.html) that the current crisis on Wall Street is just another example of this type of crisis governing, and it is good to see the Democrats on the Banking Committee (I still sort of wish Chris Dodd had been chosen as Obama's running mate) saying, hold on, wait a minute, not so fast, no blank checks.
I agree, Ed. And I think a lot of people are beginning to wake up to this. My concern is that the Democrats who are trying to fix this (Dodd, Barney Frank) are not taking a strong enough stand on transparency, oversight, and regulatory reform.
They should not get bogged down on the issues of CEO compensation; it's much more important to get strict oversight and reform.
When those using panic to push bad laws say "look what will happen if you don't," we should just push back and say "look what will happen if you don't sign this bill we've passed."
Great post, here are my thoughts.
There is no small government party anymore. The Dems want large government that includes lots of domestic spending. The Repubs want large government that includes lots of military spending. There is no longer a major political party that wants to decrease the size of government. When was the last time a Repub even tried to reduce the size of government?
Its all part of establishment politics. Why rock the boat if you're in it? That is why we need term limits if we are going to see any true reform on either side.
That being said, I like your analogy.
One pill makes you larger
and one pill makes you small
and the ones that mother gives you
don't do anything at all
We don't even have to go ask Alice anymore. None of these pills are going to work.
And if you've watched C-Span today, you've heard scintillating discussions on possible solutions -
Gentleman X: Madame Speaker, I'd like to yield 5 minutes of my time to Gentleman Y
Madame Speaker: Gentleman X may yield 5 minutes of his time to Gentlemen Y
Gentlmen Y: Thank you Madame Speaker, and I thank Gentlemen X for yielding his time and for being a Leader. I'd like to yield 3 minutes of my time to Gentlewoman Z
Madame Speaker: Gentlemen Y you may yield 3 minutes of your time from Gentleman X to Gentlewoman Z.
Gentlewoman Z: I thank you Madame Speaker, and I would first like to than Gentleman Y for yielding his time to me after Gentleman X yielded his time to Gentleman Y. And I would like to thank Gentlemen X for his gracious yielding of time to Gentlemen Y. And I would like to request Madame Speaker that I yield 2 minutes of my time to Gentleman X.
Madame Speaker: Gentlewoman Z you may yield 2 minutes of your time from Gentlemen Y to Gentlemen X, of the 5 minutes Gentlemen X yielded to Gentlemen Y, who yielded 3 minutes of that time to you, Gentlewoman Z.
Gentlemen X: Thank you Madame Speaker, may I inquire how much time we have left to discuss these issues?
Post a Comment