President Obama came close, but he still just cannot admit that his radical policies and their effects on the economy are the cause of his devastating political rebuke. For most of his press conference, an oddly depressed Obama voted present, as he all but said that the problems are mostly ours, not his — or at least not his agenda but perhaps an occasional inadequate communication.
In clingers fashion, he once more is talking down to us, explaining that we confused his necessary solutions with a bogeyman increase in big government, and so typically, in fright and ignorance, lashed out at his party. He is claiming the outrage grew from the same frustration that elected him, rather than arising precisely because of him and his agenda. In short, we are angry because his EU-socialist agenda is progressing too slowly and hasn’t delivered as promised — as it will in time. Perhaps then we will thank him for his proper big-government, big-spending solution.
He seems bewildered (for the first time?) that his popularity as a campaign rhetorician did not last when he became responsible for actual governance. For most of the press conference, a humbled but deer-in-the-headlights Obama half-heartedly argued that the populist outrage against his own massive debt, huge wasteful government, and elitism was really outrage against the economy he inherited, an outrage that he shares. We don’t know it, the president hints, but we are still angry at the Bush years, and yesterday mistakenly took our wrath out on Obama’s methodical, albeit too slow, efforts at recovery. In short, there was little admission whatsoever that Obama’s message and the way he pushed it turned off millions — there was no repentant Clinton, circa autumn 1994, here; instead, a shocked Obama who seems hurt that we do not appreciate him.
I don’t think the American people — who just last week heard their president boast that Republicans had to sit in the back seat, and that Latinos should punish their Republican “enemies,” and who have now given him the greatest midterm putdown in over a half-century — suddenly will pay much attention to his calls for an end to the old divisiveness.
Otherwise, I have two reactions to the election — one about the national scene, the other about my home state, California.
Had not some zealots talked of possible 90-to-100-seat gains, the Democrats would be in greater shock today at the near-historic 60+ House pick-up, along with a stunning near sweep of state legislatures and governorships, as well as gains in the Senate — and all a mere 21 months after the beginning of hope and change. The idea that we are going to copy EU socialism is dead. So is Keynesian massive borrowing. So is the promised second wave of Obamism, such as cap-and-trade and blanket amnesty. Obama’s supporters can brag that erstwhile absolutely safe senior Democratic senators like Boxer and Reid managed to get reelected, but they must understand that Obama’s vision and his method of enacting it simply turned off the vast majority of the country.
Some things also have to change on the conservative side. Congress must not remain hostage to farm-state representatives and senators, for whom the huge agricultural subsidy programs are sacrosanct; a decade ago, we went from “eliminating” those programs via the “Freedom to Farm” Act to calling farm pork a post-9/11 matter of national security. On the budget front, I doubt we will hear much talk, at least in the short term, of massive tax cuts that eventually will result in greater supply-side growth and thus greater revenue. Instead, I assume that any Republican tax-cut attempt will have to be matched in the here and now by a commensurate cut in spending, dollar for dollar — or rather, given the deficits, one dollar in tax cuts, two dollars in spending cuts. I also don’t think we will see representatives bragging of the new pork-barrel community centers they brought home, with their own names plastered on them — at least for a while.
In California, there is some irony: The philosophy that led the state to the highest tax rates in the country, along with the near-worst schools, largest deficits, and most crumbling infrastructure, was reaffirmed. Now California’s state government will have to deal with the reality that if the highest-tax state in the union raises taxes still higher, it will lose even more high earners than the current 3,000 who leave each week. A Republican Congress is not likely to bail out a bankrupt California. More likely, we will see even more of the present ad hoc government-by-euphemism. More “furloughs” instead of pay cuts for unionized public employees, “temporary” larger class sizes in the schools, more “user fees” imposed by executive order in lieu of getting new taxes passed.
The state will continue to descend into a pyramidal society. On top there is the wealthy, leftist coastal elite from Napa to Hollywood, which is seemingly immune from the effects of high taxes and regulation (and wants more green laws, gay marriage, abortion, and therapeutic bromides). The top of the pyramid is in league with a growing underclass in part dependent upon a huge entitlement industry; this coalition thus favors more taxes, entitlements, unionized public employees, open borders, etc. Meanwhile, a squeezed middle-class private sector is slowly being strangled, shutting down, and leaving.
What are we left with? Public money in California running out is, in fact, a solution of sorts.
The only word that comes to mind is "Wilsonian": Obama is Wilsonian in his stubbornness and tone-deafness and I think he will suffer a similar fate, though instead of his undoing being a massive stroke, it'll be a decisive defeat at the polls in 2012.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf I thought the federal government would let California go down the tubes, I might agree that public money running out is a solution. Unfortunately, I am one of those who thinks that coming to the brink of fiscal disaster will result in a bailout for CA, and the continuance of too big to fail. I don't wish CA any harm, but the lunatics do seem to be running the asylum. I wonder also if the illegal aliens there realize how far in the hole their sanctuary state is going, and what things will be like if it falls, without a federal bailout. It may become a lot like Somalia, and I don't wish that on anyone.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI know we are all in the mode of shooting down anyone who is a naysayer right now... but I just do not accept the premise of a "sea change" or a "mandate". This election once again resulted in who could get their base more peaved and off the couch, and while it seems to have worked at a pretty local level, the national races did not. Of note, the races that especially featured the darling candidates of the tea party and Mrs. Palin were mostly unable to capitalize, even when the winds favored them.
I fear this will absolutely NOT be enough to remove the president from office in 2012. That's absolutely not intended to disparage the tea party, Palin, or all us conservatives who went out and did our duty with enough success to at least put a check on the downward spiral. It just means that we are NOT gaining ground in the grand scheme of things if we think that getting the base out, plus 5-10% extra indies going our way is what does the trick: those independents slosh back and forth all the time anyway. It will not work against a superior "ground game" combined with subtle election fraud and loosey goosey election law encforcement.
And as we see over and over again, when its close, the fraudulent apparatchik almost always kicks in and we lose.
A true sea change of the entire electorate, to me, looks more like 40-50 states voting the same way. It looks like an explicit removal of even relatively safe veterans that rightfully ought to be in jail for some of the things they've done; such as Frank, Boxer, and Reid. It looks like a significant chunk of the opposing party acknowledging that their own team is not worthy of their vote, and going for the other guy with intent. The last time that happened was with Reagan, as far as I know, but I am relatively young.
The results I keep looking at show all the repubs going for repubs, all the dems going for dems, and the independents breaking left in left-leaning states, and right in right leaning states by a few points - at best maybe 15%. there was no decisive blow-out that would indicate that Americans really want this train shut down. All it says to me is that Republicans are motivated to shut it down.
And in my opinion, if we are not mindful of that shortfall, we not only lose 2012, we lose America. Period.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm not sure Meg Whitman would have been much better than Brown. would she really have been able to do anything about the teacher's unions? Seems to me that about half the adult, working, female population in CA is in someway employed by the school system. I don't think you can overestimate their power.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAs a conservative Californian I am not entirely discouraged by the election results. I do not have faith in politicians but I do have faith in markets. The labor market is making its correction. Jobs are leaving. The financial market will not buy California debt forever, at least not at sustainable rates. The changes I want will be made when there is no choice but that the are made.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWell said. The Democrats, by asking the Republicans to compromise, are really asking the American people to compromise. Apparently they didn't get the unmistakable message that was sent to them yesterday - REVERSE COURSE!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI didn't see much contrition either.
Pundits frequently use the term "double down" to describe Obama and his headlong pursuit of unpopular leftist policies.
I think this misses the correct blackjack expression for Obama and his style: splitting a pair.
In this bearish economy in the midst of the breakdown of the Euro-model, Obama keeps drawing a pair of threes. With each pair, Obama inexplicably splits his threes. Time and again, he's pushing his chips on policies that are of dubious merit in a good economy and absolutely DOA in the current one.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt seems to me (from a long way away and only by reading reports) that California is the closest real-world analogue to the events of Atlas Shrugged that is possible.
I've only been to America twice in my lifetime - and visited a grand total of four states - Texas, Nevada, Arizona (to see the Canyon, natch) and California.
It is a real pity that California is choosing to go down this path, my only hope is that not all of the Cioppino makers on Fisherman's Wharf go galt.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe notion that Obama took no responsibility in his speech is, on its face, ridiculous.
These are just a few quotes:
“Over the last two years, we've made progress. But clearly, too many Americans haven't felt that progress yet, and they told us that yesterday. And as president, I take responsibility for that.”
“And that's going to require all of us, including me, to work harder at building consensus.”
“I'm the president of the United States and that my core responsibility is making sure that we've got an economy that's growing, a middle class that feels secure, that jobs are being created. And so I think I have got to take direct responsibility for the fact that we have not made as much progress as we need to make.”
“I think that there's no doubt that, as I reflect on the results of the election, it underscores for me that I've got to do a better job, just like everybody else in Washington does.”
“When I won election in 2008, one of the reasons, I think, that people were excited about the campaign was the prospect that we would change how business is done in Washington. And we were in such a hurry to get things done, that we didn't change how things got done. And I think that frustrated people.”
“I'm doing a whole lot of reflecting. And I think there are going to be areas in policy where we're going to have to do a better job.”
Its clear that Obama is accepting responsibility, and even admits that he is going to need to adjust policy accordingly. To buy your commentary, you have to ignore, well, basically the entire press conference. Or your have to see the press conference through such a partisan lens that your entire perception of it is distorted.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseEvery sane person in Calif. needs to evacuate. The whole state is a George Romero movie.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI was recently offered a position with a firm in the Bay area that would result in a $50K raise. While that would be a huge raise in this economy, the specter of California becoming the "sick man of America" was too much for me to even consider the move.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuseetherealle
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWho's losing America? That kind of talk demonstrates you don't know jack.
Amazing to me that the California marijuana proposition failed in the wake of all the liberal triumphs there.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf you want to see massive income disparity, just wait and see California in another 5-10 years. With all of the middle-earners leaving, we'll be left with only the very rich and the very poor. No one else will be able to afford to live here.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis right here shows me Obama is the quintessential narcissist.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@gsmorgan You can't be serious. Have you forgotten about the famous "expiration date" on all of Obama's statements? He will say what needs to be said to appease the uniformed masses and then go off and do whatever his progressive/community organizing mind thinks is best for the part of the country that Mrs. Obama is proud of today.
Victor, as a fellow Californian I feel your pain acutely. To give those of you non-CA NRO readers a taste of how bad it is in CA I'll give you a local failure. Fullerton, CA, not exactly a liberal bastion mind you, is so anti-business that companies have to base their operations outside of the city just to get around the punitive regulations to do business in Fullerton. CA is such a lost cause that God Himself couldn't even bail out this sorry excuse for a state.
And don't expect Jerry Brown to enact anything like perestroika anytime soon, he's more committed than Mikhail was.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe only responsibility Obama took was that he failed to accomplish what Obama wanted to accomplish. The planted axiom in just the fragments you (gsmorgan) cite is that we should all work harder to overcome our "partisanship" and let Obama do what he wants to do and furthermore to give him credit. You mention that partisan problem yourself in saying VDH doesn't see what responsibility Obama took.
Victor's analysis stands -- Obama did NOT admit his radical policies were not shared by those who rebuked him.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWashington Post subhead:
"Obama acknowledges setback; defends policies"
VDH suggests that the subhead should have been able to be something more like:
"Obama acknowledges policy missteps; promises to listen to people"
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseUntil Obama owns up to his part in preventing a recovery, he is still far from rehabilitation.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCalifornia is in danger of becoming a third world state. Make no mistake, it is importing poverty and ignorance. Americans cannot understand how thoroughly uneducated people are south of the border. I'm talking about the ones who walk into the U.S. and show up in our schools.
So the elites can live behind their gates and use the private schools, and have their gardeners and nannies, but when you lose the middle class, you are no longer a stable society.
And I do not want to bail out California. No way, no how.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse