Random Stupidity

The Rational Middle today makes the natural progression from the insane to the sublimely stupid, as my depression of last week is turned to blunt astonishment by events local, national, and international.

Around The World

Afghanistan’s U.S. installed puppet leader (it would really be more appropriate to call him the Governor of Kabul, as Afghanistan lies outside of the Western views of nation-state) has apparently decided that it is politically expedient to not be friends with the United States. I guess I don’t blame the man, when we leave there will be a healthy number of folks ready to settle scores with Karzai, but is it really advisable to be so overtly belligerent?

Continue reading

End Game?

Thinking a dozen moves ahead in a game of chess, the combination in boxing, the bets one makes early in a session of Texas Hold’em; the practice of anticipating various possible futures and acting accordingly is the linchpin of strategy.

And its practice in our nation seems to be, sadly, on the decline.

The simple act of thinking ahead is something supposedly fundamental; we ask our children to adopt the practice  and wring our hands when they don’t. “Why can’t you just consider the consequences of you…not getting that job…not doing your homework…not applying for college…taking those drugs…driving after you drink?” We ask our children to consider many possible futures, even as we learn that most teenagers are not physiologically able to consider future in the same manner as adults.

Continue reading

D.O.A. Is A Technical Term

Dead on arrival. That is, apparently, the favored conservative method for addressing any and all policy suggestions or plans made by the President. It must be a highly technical political term, because it isn’t immediately obvious that the phrase has any predictive value.

The Stimulus Bill is dead on arrival.-Mitch McConnell

ObamaCare is dead on arrival.-Every Republican Open Mouth

An Obama Second Term is dead on arrival.-Reince Preibus

The President’s plan for deficit reduction is dead on arrival.-John Boehner

Continue reading

The Peace The Follows War

Veterans Day is holiday evolution. We celebrate those who made the ultimate sacrifice, and those who placed themselves in that jeopardy, on the day originally established to celebrate the end of one terrible conflict. World War I wasn’t originally known by that name; it was either the Great War, or the War to End All Wars. Evidently, someone didn’t get that message. As we continued to strive for newer and more efficient ways to solve problems by killing (in today’s parlance, productivity increases), we realized that celebrating the end of one war while folks were fighting another was offensive and wrong.

Veterans Day stands as one of two strident opportunities (Memorial Day is the other) to remind Americans the real definition and purpose of sacrifice. It is also, sadly, another opportunity for people to miss the point. I haven’t met many warriors who enjoyed war, or celebrated its glory, but I have met many people who think that Veterans Day is an opportunity to do both. We have, in our nation’s history, fought principled conflicts that led to noble results. We have fought conflicts for far less noble a set of reasons. Regardless of motive, warfare is vile, ugly, and hateful. Combat certainly reveals the character of an individual, but is just as certainly defines the weakness and evil of humanity at its worst.

Continue reading

Compromise, What Compromise?

There was a notion late, late, late on election night where the pundits starting talking about the Republican’s need to compromise with the President. “They just lost the White House, they lost seats in the Senate and the House, they are losing the demographic race…they have to come to the table.”

I feel a nightmare coming on…

A cursory look at the strategic position for Republicans, and their choices (both strategic and tactical) over the last 4 years, reveals little reason for optimism. Conservatives have leverage over liberals and their reaffirmed leader, President Obama, in the form of the sequester. The sequester is the package of budget cuts totaling $1.2 trillion that take effect in January and would, with absolute certainty, restart the recession.

For reference, the collapse of the housing bubble siphoned around $560 billion per year in annual demand from the economy. The sequester would amount to around 20% of that…more than enough, in the context of a struggling Eurozone, to sap the recovery of its momentum. The specter of such a collapse, according to the hopeful pundits, is enough to drive the country-first Republicans to the bargaining table.

Except that in 2009, with the nation at the peak of The Great Recession and the newly inaugurated President offering compromise his own party couldn’t stand, a grand total of 3 country-first Republicans sat down at the table. The stated goal of the party then, was to destroy President Obama as a viable political franchise, and so destroy the rebounding Democrat’s best lever for change. In the last 4 years, conservatives have expended virtually all of their political credibility, and gone to extremes rarely witnessed in American politics. They are deeply invested, not in the success of America, but the failure of their opposition.

If Democrats had retaken the House, conservatives could have looked on the investment as sunk cost, and moved forward in rebuilding their image. In the current construction, the best strategic course for conservatives is to double down on the obstruction, and bring on the double-dip recession. It would be impossible for Democrats to decouple from the job losses and cuts to domestic-based defense programs. The economics that explain these events is beyond the time commitment of working Americans, and beyond the comprehension of the mostly lazy political reporter class.

This means further erosion of the House Democratic Caucus and the loss of the Senate in 2014. That reality would allow republicans to force the President into unpopular vetoes, and guarantee a Republican White House winner in 2016. The only risk for Republicans is the somewhat unlikely scenario that Americans see through the plan, and hold the GOP to account in the next election. But history is little reason for optimism; moderates left the President’s party in the 2010 midterms, and liberals spent most of the run-up to that election complaining about the absence of a Presidential policy miracle. Then liberals sat on their hands in the election itself.

I hope I am wrong; what is more, I hope those conservatives in the House who genuinely care (in a different way than I) about the country step up and prevent this. What we need now, is 30 courageous conservatives willing to allow defense spending to flatten first, then decline, and willing to allow top marginal rates to rise to Clinton levels. Democrats have already moved far from their starting positions. I suppose it is possible, but I don’t see the strategic justification for the move.

 

The Rational Middle will explore the notion of bipartisanship in Thursday’s post…

 

Personal Reasons

In thinking about this election and its demographics, I suppose I fit the profile of a Romney voter. I was raised by white, working class Catholics. I grew up in a town where some of the unions, it seemed, were hell-bent on giving the very notion of unionization a terrible name. I was read the Bible in our home, sent to religious education, and served as an altar boy. To this day, I still believe my 6 years of Catholic schooling to be the cornerstone of whatever intellect I claim. There is little to indicate I should be anything less than a social conservative.

The dual focus of my M.B.A. was finance and international business. I believe in the value of free trade. Bootstraps belonging to my family and myself were tugged on in my slow rise to the middle. I never claimed unemployment, never went on Medicaid, and was never quite poor enough to qualify for education subsidies. To top it all off, I have spent a 20 year career working as a professional manager in a capitalist system that I believe is the best economic system we have. There is little to indicate I should be anything less than a fiscal conservative.

I grew up reading everything I could grasp about military history. I collected no baseball cards, and knew far more about Vinegar Joe Stillwell and Howlin Mad Holland Smith than I did about any athlete. My Dad’s press passes to the annual season-opening air show at Nellis Air Force Base were the highlights of my spring. I own and enjoy shooting firearms, and would not think of giving up my right to a juicy steak. There is little to indicate I would be anything less than a conservative hawk on the military and gun rights.

But I support President Obama.

Thirty years ago, I might have been a moderate Republican. Thirty years ago, Mitt Romney might have been permitted to be a moderate Republican. The world, sadly, has changed. Like a nation of teenagers, we have become unable to view the world from a perspective bigger than ourselves. We seem ready and able to condemn any facts that are inconvenient, and the entire conservative movement is committed to the derivative notion that any numbers that fail to support their worldview are necessarily wrong.

It is a very different notion to be a federalist, and to place importance on the maintenance of state’s rights while solving national issues, than it is to thoroughly disregard any role for our democracy in the solving of national problems. But that is the mantra that modern conservatives have adopted as their creed. From the federal government on down, the gameplan for modern conservatism is to deny the role at one level, then deny it at the next, before finally and completely destroying the ability of citizens to affect the destiny of their marketplace through democratically-elected government.

They have no positive argument for the reestablishment of conservative governance, they have only negative assertions about the current President. And their negative arguments are typically weak and circular. The following typifies their case:

Conservatives-President Obama presides over an economy with 7.9% unemployment, his policies have failed.

Liberals-Net job losses began in 2007, reached their peak at the end of 2008, and ended during the same month that President Obama’s first budget took effect.

Conservatives-Why do you blame President Bush?

Americans can point to a series of budget resolutions, executive orders, and enforcement decisions, made by the Bush Administration, that led directly to massive job losses. Those job losses were still in process when President Obama took office. So the entire case for Republican change is based on the idea that President Obama was not able to instantaneously reverse 8 years of executive decision-making. This isn’t excuse-making, it is exactly the kind of rigorous accountability assignment and analyses that any successful business owner must undertake. To be certain, if Mitt Romney had practiced the same level of data analyses in his hedge fund that he does on the campaign trail, he would be broke.

In thinking about the demographics of this election, my white, working class Catholic parents taught me to work hard for myself, and think first of others. They taught me that my religion was something to be embraced, not something to be enforced on others. By example, they taught me that the bad behavior of an individual did not a bad organization make. It seems that there is little to indicate I should be anything less than a social liberal.

I have never worked in a business, small or large, that was prepared to build all of its roads, educate all of its workers, and protect all of its consumers. In all of the economic history of the world, there has never been an occasion where simple human nature could not, or did not, rise up to distort and destroy free markets. All markets need regulation, as all markets are as fallible as the humans that they serve. It seems that there is little to indicate I should be anything less than a fiscal liberal.

As a proud and confident American, I am positive that the leaders of our military can continue to be the dominant force in the world without spending more money than the next ten biggest military spenders combined. As a gun owner who has never, ever, seen the world-ending, gun-repossessing legislation that the NRA constantly lies about, I am comfortable with the idea that common-sense gun regulations aren’t going to come between anyone and the 2nd Amendment. Hawks, as seen in nature, are careful and discerning birds, not given to extremism.

We will hopefully get to a time in our nation where the party of conservatives is comfortable enough in their ideology that they can embrace both it and reasoned discussion at the same time. But they don’t have that ability now. Four years ago, Republicans announced their intention to abandon all legislative goals that did not directly lead to the defeat of Barack Obama this year. Every position, without regard to the President’s process, or even the conservative origin of the solution, was attacked with labels that were unambiguously ugly and hateful.

In the mode of parents who, regrettably, don’t believe in corporal punishment, I think conservative politicians need a time-out. On Tuesday, I will vote, at every level of the ticket, to give them that time-out.

Join The Rational Middle for our live-blog of the election, with regular updates beginning at 7 pm Eastern and continuing until 1 am Eastern, and comment on Facebook right from the blog.

 

Some people don’t have the privilege…vote!