- Home
- News Grid
- Local News
- Green Hawk
- Business
- Politics
- School Zone
- Nonprofits
- Missing Pets
- Multimedia
- Arts
- Movies
- Outdoors
- Sports
- News Releases
- Columnists
- Blogs
- Opinions
- Classifieds
- Advertise
- Donate
- Partners
Michael Barone: The Convenient Fantasies of Obama
The resignation over the Labor Day weekend of White House “green jobs” czar Van Jones tells you some interesting things about the Obama administration.
One of them is that a man who proclaimed himself a “communist” in the 1990s and signed 9-11 “truther” petitions suggesting Bush administration complicitity in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks was considered fit for a White House appointment.
Liberal columnists have been attacking Republicans because some of their voters are “birthers,” believers in the absurd charge that President Barack Obama was not born in Hawaii and thus is not a natural-born U.S. citizen. But they have failed to identify any “birther” that occupied a position in the Republican firmament comparable to that of “truther” Jones in the Obama administration.
Another interesting thing about Jones is that the administration seems enamored of his “green jobs” concept. There’s an understandable political reason. Legislation to restrict carbon emissions that is supported by the administration would undoubtedly kill a large number of jobs by increasing the cost of energy, and so you can see why its advocates might want to argue that there will be a compensating number of “green jobs” created — at least if the government spends a lot of money on them.
But this sounds like fantasy. If there was money to be made in green jobs, private investors would be creating them already. In fact, big corporations such as General Electric are scrambling to position themselves as green companies, gaming legislation and regulations so they can make profits by doing so. Big business is ready to create green jobs — if government subsidizes them. But the idea that green jobs will replace all of the lost carbon-emitting jobs is magical thinking.
Obama’s approach to health-care legislation, unless he made a major course correction in his speech to the joint session of Congress, is of a piece with his hiring of Jones. By ceding the task of writing legislation to congressional Democratic leaders and committee chairmen, he has been following a “no enemies to the left” strategy.
By refusing to rule out the government option — which its architects see as the road to a single-payer government insurance system — Obama has prevented the emergence of a set of policies that have a chance of passing the Senate. The Senate Republicans in the “gang of six” who have been negotiating with Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus aren’t going to agree on a bill without assurance from the White House that they won’t get rolled by hard-left House Democrats in conference committee.
On Tuesday, Baucus came out with his own plan, which includes a tax on high-value health-insurance policies. But this is likely to be rejected by the left, by labor unions that have negotiated such benefits from employers and by members of Congress from states such as New York where, because of state policies, almost all health insurance costs that much.
There is an element of convenient fantasy as well in Obama’s health-care statements to date. We are going to save money by spending money. We are going to solve our fiscal problems with a program that will increase the national debt by $1 trillion over a decade. We are going to guarantee you can keep your current insurance with a bill that encourages your employer to stop offering it.
The list goes on. We are going to improve health care for seniors by cutting $500 billion from Medicare. We aren’t going to insure illegal aliens, except that we won’t have any verification provisions to see that they can’t apply and get benefits.
Most politicians like to promise voters all good things at once. Democrats got in the habit of doing this in the past 14 years when they couldn’t pass legislation by themselves. Van Jones’ moment in the White House is over. Exposure of his record in conservative media made him politically unacceptable, even though mainstream outlets such as The New York Times ignored the issue entirely.
The Democrats’ health-insurance bills remain under consideration, and with large majorities in both houses passage of some bill cannot be ruled out. But August town hall meetings and national polls have put the Democrats on the defensive. No-enemies-to-the-left and convenient fantasies may work in Chicago. They don’t work so well when your constituency is the whole United States.
— Michael Barone is a senior writer for U.S. News & World Report and principal coauthor of The Almanac of American Politics. Click here to contact him.
Comments
Noozhawk's comments are moderated, but by posting here you accept your responsibility to follow our rules as part of Noozhawk's shared online community. Please keep your comments civil and helpful. Don't attack other readers personally, and do not use vulgar, abusive or discriminatory language. Use the "Report Abuse" link if a comment violates these standards or our Terms of Use.
» on 09.10.09 @ 07:03 AM
To the Noozhawk. I have some constructive advise to give. With the existing line-up of opinion contributors that you have such as Barone,Kudlow,Sherline and Malkin you may want to reconsider the mix. I have noticed that the frequency of these and other right wing opinions is too high and not reflective of the population of SB. I would suggest dropping one of them such as Malkin that is way farther right than any one you have from the left and adding someone left or left/middle to balance things out. I know of several people that have stopped reading the Noozhawk for the very reason they believe there is a right wing slant in what is being presented. Remember than only 34% of the population is a member of the GOP.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 09.10.09 @ 12:30 PM
I agree Local. As is often the case when news outlets allow their editorial coverage to be skewed by their publisher/owners personal political views (News-Press, Fox News, USA Today et al), Noozhawk is clearly “playing favorites” and catering to the Libertarian/Republican demographic. While its certainly true that the selection of columnists and op-ed pieces is one of the discretionary choices the owner of a news organization makes, having a clear bias is unprofessional and not consistent with sound journalistic practices. That’s especially true, as you astutely pointed out, when its the interests of the minority that are winning out.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 09.10.09 @ 12:59 PM
Perhaps you should hire a fact checker Mr. Barone. The congressman chosen by the Republican leadership to provide the rebuttal to President Obama’s speech to the join session of Congress yesterday was Louisiana Rep. Charles Boustany, a former (or present) “birther”. A heart surgeon, Boustany is the co-sponsor of the “Life Sustaining Treatment Preferences Act of 2009” which would mandate that Medicare reimburse the cost of end-of-life counseling, or the so-called “death panels.” He was also ripped off by con men some time ago when trying to buy a phony British aristocratic title. Perhaps he was hoping to become eligible for National Health when visiting the UK?
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 09.10.09 @ 02:09 PM
There are/were as many conservative conspiracy theorists on why the Twin Towers collapsed so quickly as there are on the left.
What does Van Jones former comments as a private citizen have to do with Obama’s health care initiative? Nothing. Talk about a red herring.
But the heart of it is simply that from generation to generation, conservatives like Barone fear change of any kind, and always fight like hell to stop it.
Who fought against the League of Nations in the ‘20s, guaranteeing its failure? Who
fought against Wall Street regulation, guaranteeing the Depression?
In the ‘30s, who fought against Social Security and the creation of the Securities
Exchange Commission?
In the ‘40s, who fought against the Marshall Plan abroad, and the GI Bill at home?
In the ‘50s, who fought against equal access to public schools, even if it meant taking on Eisenhower?
In the ‘60s, who fought against giving Native Americans and blacks the right to vote
or to congregate wherever they chose? Who fought against Medicare for seniors?
In the ‘70s, who fought against clean water, clean air, environmental protection, universal health care, a guaranteed annual income, even if it meant taking on Nixon
and Milton Friedman?
Barone’s tribe has been crying Socialism! and the end of democracy as we know it,
non-stop, since Teddy Roosevelt went out to bust the trusts 100 years ago.
If Barone and his Cato Institute brethren were right, we’d all be red-book Maoists
fifty years now. Ha, ha, ha. He should go on Jay Leno’s new show, as a Stand Up guy.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 09.10.09 @ 02:37 PM
First, Local I suggest you try the Indy, a fine publication that does exactly what you want, caters to the left and only the left (their readership is down while noozehawk’s is up, WTF? How can that be Local?) As far as Baron, he is talking about Obama’s fantasies LTR, and his healthcare bill written by Pelosi and crew is just that, no red herring there! BTW the LON was an eminent failure on its own. Had SS been shot down we wouldn’t have the nightmare it is today would we? The Marshall plan was a great success, for Germany and Japan, totally sucked for us. The equal access and civil rights issues were argued on legal and procedural grounds not on the ideology or intent and the environmental regulations passed in the 70’s is why we don’t make anything in the US anymore, hence we’re broke, thank you very much. Your tribe has been pushing socialism ever since the Bolsheviks sacked and murdered the czar. I guess that’s where all you parasites figured you could just steal other people’s money rather than work for your own, uhhh?
Second, for all the belly aching you left wing nuts do EVERY time a right wing columnists publishes an article, you are the very first ones to read it and spew your poison. Don’t like Baron, don’t read him. Don’t like Malkin, don’t read her. But if you do then make your Moveon talking point comments and we can argue and fight with each other. But suggesting that because you think this is a liberal town and should only cater to liberals, whoa getting a bit desperate aren’t you?
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 09.10.09 @ 04:53 PM
Sure, AN50, why should anyone read Malkin when we’ve got you and your caustic craptastic absurdities staining every comment column on Noozhawk. I agree with local’s comments about the general tenor of Noozhawk’s opinionators, though. It just seems to inflame the paranoia of certain regular posters, but then I’m sure they’d just fire away no matter who or what was being posted, as if they have nothing better to do than be limbaugh wannabes.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 09.10.09 @ 06:29 PM
An50, I have engaged with you on many topics and never fails to amaze me how you always resort to condensing language and name calling. You and the congressman who disrepected the President last night by yelling “liar” only serve to help the cause of middle America. When are you going to walk up and see that I am in the middle of this country and you are now the extreme right. Just reread your critism of a great post by Long Time Resident. As a student of history, it is clear time and time again the right wing has found progress with scare tactics over decades. For example, right now the healthcare fight is a clear example. The rights of homosexuals is another.
As it relates to healthcare here is how I feel:
“What we face is above all a moral issue, at stake are not just the details of policy but fundemental principles of sound justice and the character of our country”.
The conservatives have demonstrated no principles of sound judgement on this issue. Their strategy has been to yell out lies such as dead panels, rationing and illegal coverage. The hope is to scare people just as they did in misleading us into the Iraq War. Why is it that when we try to spend money to provide basic healthcare the GOP raises a big stink but when we spend hundreds of billions on unnecessary wars they are silent?
My whole post was merely pointing out that their is an editorial imbalance at the Noozhawk and I offered a constructive suggestion. YOU ARE CLEARLY ON THE FAR RIGHT AND IN THE MINORITY. LOOK AT THE ELECTION RESULTS. Keep up tactics like you use on every post and you will only help the GOP die out faster.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
More Local News »
Michael Barone: Unlike Obama, GOP Candidates Talk Seriously About Governing
Republican nominee could have an advantage over an incumbent president in pure campaign mode
Michael Barone: South Carolina Hoping to Pick Next President
All arrows appear to point to Republican front-runner Mitt Romney
Michael Barone: ‘Tactical Voters’ Went to Romney in New Hampshire
He wins support from Republican undecideds, but he still has a lot of convincing to do
Michael Barone: Romney’s Watchwords in Iowa — Divide and Conquer
But it's too soon to say he has a clear flight path to the GOP presidential nomination
Michael Barone: Voters Want Growth, Not Income Redistribution
Economic distress makes Americans less, not more, supportive of big government
Weather: Fair 47.0º
Search Noozhawk »
