No president enters office knowing everything he needs to know. His experience is limited to some greater or lesser extent; his knowledge of the people from whom he will choose appointees is incomplete; his mastery of the substance of public policy, after years on the campaign trail, is likely to be out of date. And like all of us, he does not know what the future will bring.
The New York Times ran a front-page story this week called "Party Gridlock in Washington Feeds New Fear of a Debt Crisis." As usual, they got it wrong. Instead, the headline should have read, "After Scott Brown's Astonishing Senate Win in Massachusetts, New Political Gridlock in Washington Could Spell the End of the Liberal Crack-Up We Have Witnessed over the Past Year."
Something has gone very wrong.
Was it just a year ago that Democrats assumed more control in Washington than the party has had in my lifetime? It was.
As America loudly repudiates the leftist agenda of President Barack Obama and his Congressional allies, a group of partisan GOP opportunists is busy promoting a theory of “Republican revisionism.”
The last two U.S. House of Representatives elections have been Democratic landslides that have left them with a 79-seat majority. In 2006, Democrats picked up 29 seats on election night (exactly as the Crystal Ball predicted, by the way) and didn’t lose a single seat of their own, even adding another pick-up in a December runoff. The winning streak continued in 2008, with Democrats netting 21 new seats in what was a Blue year across the board.
The New York Times ran a front-page story yesterday called “Party Gridlock in Washington Feeds New Fear of a Debt Crisis.” I would’ve preferred a different title. In the aftermath of Scott Brown’s Senate win in Massachusetts, the new political gridlock in Washington could spell the end of the liberal crack-up that we have witnessed over the past year.
For voters listening to the Republican leadership over the past year, the most startling surprise was the shift in their attitude toward Medicare. Where faithfulness to true conservatism was once measured by fierce hostility to the popular insurance program for the elderly, as articulated by Ronald Reagan at the birth of Medicare in 1965, today the Republicans claim to be its staunchest defenders.
The last few months have been cruel and wintry for global-warming true believers. The long storm began in November, when a leak of e-mails from Britain's University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit revealed that key global-warming scientists tried to stifle dissent and politicize peer review, which led to revelations that the researchers had dumped much of the raw data used to bolster the alarmist argument.
We keep hearing that "Obama should move to the center." A variation on this theme is that the president should find the "sensible middle" on policy.
Money and politics is about my favorite topic (apart from spiritual faith, of course). And we had plenty of both in the last day or two.
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's recent dig that Florida is "for the old people" cut locals here to the quick.
In his bestseller "Inside U.S.A.," the hugely readable journalist John Gunther described America as it was in the last year of World War II. He interviewed hundreds of politicians, businessmen and journalists, but only four men rated a separate chapter -- three politicians and Henry J. Kaiser, the California construction magnate who built dams and ships and manufactured concrete and steel and aluminum.
Last August, Nicholas George, 22, was getting ready to fly from Pennsylvania to Pomona College in Claremont, Calif., when TSA agents found Arabic-English flash cards in his pocket -- the 200 cards included such words as "bomb" and "explosive" -- two stereo speakers in his carry-on bag, a Jordanian student ID card and a passport that showed he had visited Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Malaysia and Sudan.
The disconnect between Washington and the rest of the country has never been greater. Why can't the political class in the District of Columbia produce a fiscal product that voters, taxpayers and investors are willing to consume?
At least it's on a Sunday. Friday and Saturday are the worst.
Second only to New Year's Eve, Valentine's Day is a surefire downer for those of us who find ourselves alone on a day when it seems that everyone else is happily in love. Of course, it's all silliness. Compared to cancer and earthquakes, compared to not having a job or a place to live, who cares about silly red hearts full of chocolates, or frilly cards and bouquets? Let Hallmark have its day. Let the florists' registers ring. Why should the rest of us care?
Had George Washington joined me outside a Chili's at Chicago's O'Hare Airport recently, he would have shuddered at the sight.
How could such smart people do so many stupid things? That question, or variations on it, is being asked in Washington and around the country about the Obama administration.
My friend Ethel is mad as hell, but she has no choice but to keep taking it. She's mad at her health insurance company, and she's mad at the administration and Congress. She's equally mad at Democrats and Republicans. It's not partisan; it's personal.
"No new ideas." That was the most prominent of the criticisms of Sarah Palin's speech at MSNBC's too-cool-for-school "Morning Joe" on Monday.
The age of adulthood -- and the rights and responsibilities that come with it -- is largely a matter of opinion. Age 18 traditionally separates minors from adults. But one can't legally buy a drink in America until age 21. Meanwhile, many states are now sending minors into the adult criminal justice system, even for nonviolent crimes.
