Ruminations, February 15, 2009

Wait ‘til next year

In the 1950s, “Wait ‘til next year” was the rallying cry of the Brooklyn Dodgers. Each year it seemed the talent-laden Dodgers (aka, “Da Bums”) would cruise to the National League pennant only to lose in seven games to the New York Yankees.

Now, with President Obama’s economic stimulus bill approved, the question arises: what about next year?

If in a year’s time we are on the road to recovery, then it will be time for those wonderful folks in Congress to initiate some fiscal discipline and cut much of the spending that they have put into the stimulus bill. Remember, a stimulus plan is supposed to be a one-time shot, designed to increase economic activity and then go away. Will Congress have the political fortitude to cut spending in 2010? Or will they just use the stimulus bill as a baseline for more spending?

If they use it as a baseline, how will they pay for future spending? By increasing taxes? By inflating the dollar? By instituting price controls?

The current economic situation may indeed be something that requires action but does it justify putting off thinking about the future?

And what’s wrong with this bill is that there are too many projects that will require continued funding in the future and Congress is not nearly as talent laden as the Brooklyn Dodgers were in the 1950s. Of course, the Dodgers finally won after seven tries. One hopes that Da Bums in Washington don’t take as long.

Bush III

Throughout the 2008 presidential campaign, the Obama team kept telling us that John McCain represented Bush III. Now that Obama is in office, it seems like his foreign policy is … well …

Consider:

·         The Bush Administration argued in court that the case of five detainees, who claimed that they had been subjected to an “extraordinary rendition” program, should be dismissed because the case threatened national security and relations with other nations. Last week the Obama Administration said ditto.

·         Last week in Munich, Vice President Biden told the world that the United States was prepared to negotiate with Iran on a number of topics, providing that Iran ended its nuclear arms program and stopped supporting terrorists – precisely the pre-conditions set by the Bush Administration.

·         Russia chafed at the Bush Administration’s support of NATO expansion. Last week in Munich Biden said of the United States’ policy, “It will remain our view that sovereign states have the right to make their own decisions and choose their own alliances.” In other words, ditto Bush.

·         During the Bush Administration, Germany refused to provide more troops for the NATO command in Afghanistan. In response to the Obama Administration’s request for more German troops in Afghanistan, German Chancellor Angela Merkle continued her opposition.

·         Last week, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton offered bribes to North Korea if it would abandon its nuclear program. Sounds an awful lot like the Bush Administration, doesn’t it?

Gosh-a-rooty. Maybe the Obama Administration will be as bad as the Bush Administration was. Or, depending on your point of view, maybe Obama Administration will be as good as the Bush Administration was.

And in Afghanistan …

Thomas Schweich is a former U.S. ambassador for counternarcotics in Afghanistan, deputy assistant secretary of state for international law enforcement, and chief of staff of the U.S. mission to the United Nations. He brings knowledge of the region and its players and of its poppy cultivation to the table.

Schweich is concerned about President Barack Obama’s personnel appointments to Afghanistan. He cites specifically Richard Holbrooke for an op-ed piece in which “every salient fact in his piece was wrong,” and Lt. General Karl Eikenberry for his cavalier dismal of the efforts to reduce poppy cultivation – and thus reduce a source of income for the Taliban.

The full article may be found in the Toronto Globe and Mail here:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090213.wcoessay0214/BNStory/specialComment/home/?pageRequested=all

And in Europe …

According to a European survey commissioned by the Anti Defamation League, 31% of Europeans blame the global economic meltdown on the Jews.

A lot they know! They should talk to President Obama. The meltdown was caused by eight years of Republicans.

Hoover

We are told, by Senator Barbara Boxer (D, CA), that Republicans run the risk of behaving as Herbert Hoover did during the Depression: saying no to everything. If we are to believe Boxer, Hoover did nothing from the time the Depression began in 1929 to Roosevelt’s taking office in 1933. Is that a fair rap?

What did Hoover do? Here are a few of the things he did in response to the Depression.

• He supported and signed the Smoot Hawley tariff
• He called business leaders to Washington and urged them not to drop wages.
• He created the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, which gave some $2 billion to local governments and made loans to banks, mortgage associations and other businesses.
• Hoover signed the Davis Bacon Act which mandated that public sector jobs receive the prevailing wage rate.
• He began a $2.25 billion public works program – the most notable project was the Boulder Dam.
• He signed the Norris LaGuardia Anti Injunction Act that allowed employees to unionize and forbade courts from enjoining non-violent strikes.

One could make the argument that Hoover did too little. One could also make the argument that Hoover did too much. But to say that he did nothing?

Why would Boxer say such a thing? Perhaps Boxer likes to bend history to fit her own predilections and that of an uninformed constituency.

BC and AD

Boston College (BC) was founded in 1863 A.D., by the Society of Jesus (Jesuits) as a Catholic university. It is open to members of all faiths but retains its religious foundations.

During the last semester break, BC President William Leahy, S.J., thought that the college needed more emphasis on its religious roots and directed that crucifixes be placed on the walls of classrooms where they had not been. It seems like a reasonable thing for a Catholic institution.

“Jesus Christ,” cried some of the instructors, though not with the reverence you might expect at a Jesuit institution. This group tended to look at these religious and Christian art symbols as too sectarian and stultifying to the educational experience. Some of them have threatened to leave BC.

It seems odd that a private Catholic university would come under attack for visibly representing its faith on its own campus. Perhaps it’s odder still that this group of university professors finds offense in the representation of Jesus but willingly accept Heisman trophy winner Doug Flutie whose statue also adorns the campus.

Maybe they don’t fully appreciate the difference between a “Hail Mary” and a “Hail Mary.”

Quote without comment

Will Rogers, writing in The New York Times, July 5, 1930: "This country has come to feel the same when Congress is in session as we do when the baby gets hold of a hammer. It's just a question of how much damage he can do with it before you take it away from him."

Robert J. Kulak

West Hartford, Connecticut