On the Contrary

In the New York Times this morning there were two editorials that set out what is the conventional wisdom about the recent election and what it portends for the Democrats and the other probably more to the reality of the situation instead of the conventional wisdom.  Sadly the nation moves usually on conventional wisdom, not reality which has been badly mangled by the media which tends to bend to the conventional wisdom without questioning some of its underlying assumptions.  To be sure, the media rarely speaks truth to power. They are too afraid to lose their access if they actually challenge these people.   Least we forget Iraq, death panels, socialize medicine, and I could go on indefinitely.

David Brooks in his editorial, What Independents Want, was pushing what I consider the conventional wisdom, albeit, inaccurate.  He accurately noted that there was a swing in independent voters toward conservatives, but he then identified the effects as the cause instead of the real root cause.  His premise was that independents think that President Obama “is moving too fast.”  He cites the economy (the real cause), increasing distrust in government, fear of the deficit, too much government regulation, and probably the accommodation of Wall Street by the Democrats (this one is right on).  Then of course he recommended to his conservative brethren that we should get back to the basics of small government and let businesses do their thing, and fail if they must (read wall street).  He did get one of these things right:  “Independents support the party that seems most likely to establish a frame of stability and order within which they can lead their lives.”  Problem is his conservative prescription for that will only fail as it did last time around.

As always the devil is in the details and one should ask David how he would have handled the bank crisis back in 2007 and what should we do now to make sure the whole economy is not threatened.  Would we do that with less government and fewer regulations?  Same with health care or the climate/energy bill.  If less government is so wonderful, why aren’t these problems already solved after eight years of Republican control?  The real issue here is that the economy is not improving and all the rest, distrust in government, less regulations, etc. are a result of the lack of improvement, not the cause of the problem.   The one thing I always find astounding is that when things are going bad, why do the voters want to bring back the people who got us in this mess and have no ideas for our future?

The other editorial was from Paul Krugman, Obama Faces His Anzio, where Paul identifies what I think is the real problem.  It is not that President Obama has tried to do too much, but he has been too timid with what he has done.  His intrepidation caused him to implement policies that are only minimally effective.  The bank crisis was averted, but then he started accommodating the bankers and real change was not effected.  The stimulus bill by his own staff’s estimation was too small.  He has compromised or watered down what he was going to do and the result is very little progress.  Paul compares this to the Anzio Beach fiasco in World War II:

“The World War II battle of Anzio was a classic example of the perils of being too cautious. Allied forces landed far behind enemy lines, catching their opponents by surprise. Instead of following up on this advantage, however, the American commander hunkered down in his beachhead — and soon found himself penned in by German forces on the surrounding hills, suffering heavy casualties.”

President Obama was elected on a change agenda and then he didn’t.  Mr. Krugman’s final summary is where I think the truth really lies:

“If the Democrats lose badly in the midterms, the talking heads will say that Mr. Obama tried to do too much, this is a center-right nation, and so on. But the truth is that Mr. Obama put his agenda at risk by doing too little. The fateful decision, early this year, to go for economic half-measures may haunt Democrats for years to come.”

Well, as noted, that is what Mr. Brooks is saying already, but I am with Paul on this.  President Obama was too timid and without some real backbone from the Democrats between now and 2010, I believe he may have wasted his chance.  The conventional wisdom summarized by Mr. Brooks is gaining speed, and if the Democrats cannot do something to improve the economy, the conventonial wisdom will prevail and we will have the same failed policies voted back into office in 2010.