The American Spectator

Reader Mail

Why Not the Worst?

7.14.08 @ 12:01AM

(Page 2 of 7)

I have a few more worst case scenarios. From the foreign policy side, Obama could send troops into Pakistan to chase bin Laden, destabilizing the country and causing failure of the Musharaff government with subsequent takeover by the Islamists. The Islamists then attack Afghanistan to put the Taliban back in power. Perhaps a nuclear weapon or two gets lobbed at our bases there. In Iraq, Obama fulfills his pledge and starts pulling out troops as fast as possible. Hopefully the Iraqi government could withstand this, but who knows? In Iran, Imanutjob proceeds full speed ahead with his nuclear program because he knows that Obama will do nothing about it and if Israel tries, Obama will throw them under the bus. Imanutjob then launches his nukes at Israel, as he has pledged to do, and Armageddon ensues. In the meantime, Obama refuses to enforce the very national intelligence bill he just voted for, citing new information that he just learned.

On the domestic policy side, taxes get raised within the first 100 days, sending the stock market into a tail spin. With all the turmoil in the Middle East and no increased production here at home, oil hits $300 a barrel. I predict it will hit $200 a barrel the day after Obama becomes President-elect. People, especially those with capital, will tighten their belts and the Depression will be a pleasant memory. People will then beg Lord President Obama to take over health care. On the plus side, this will lessen our Social Security liability as health care gets rationed for the elderly. Justices Kennedy and Thomas retire for whatever reason and now the court make-up goes from 4-4-1 to 6-3.

Note that every one of my scenarios are plausible and require no action on the part of Congress, even raising taxes since the tax cuts aren't permanent. The Democrats in Congress will spend their time fighting among themselves to see who can over-reach the farthest, so their impact will be minimal. All of Obama's pronouncements are subject to change. All of them including his supposed feints to the right.

Hillary would have been irritating and I don't like McCain any more than the next guy, but Obama will be a disaster for this country. He's the worst kind of politician: the kind who believes his own press.
-- Andrew J. Macfadyen, M.D.
Omaha, Nebraska

So let me see if I've got even a hint of what Philip Klein has said. Other than the tax disaster and government controlling our health via a national healthcare system Obama would create, other than weakening our country's security, other than these things, things might not be so bad with Obama?

BTW: Klein may think it's "another good sign" that "Obama has reversed his progressive stances on public financing, trade, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and gun control, among others..."

But, respectively, if Klein and others actually believe anything that issues from Obama's mouth that's anywhere right of his extremist leftist positions is anything but politically expedient hot air, then I suggest they've either got a serious blind spot in their discernment and/or they're kidding themselves.

Given how Obama's lunged right recently and how he's changed positions so quickly and frequently that not even his advisers can agree on what's what, how can anyone believe anything he says?
-- C. Kenna Amos
Princeton, West Virginia

With the possibility of an Obama Administration becoming more likely, I think Philip Klein's article is timely. And while it may an exercise in futility to attempt to predict what an Obama presidency would actually do, I think it is worthwhile to at least look at the economic ramifications. I know many Democrats and "moderates" will not be swayed by predictions of disaster, as they can point to 8 years of Bill Clinton (through rose colored glasses, of course) and the post 1995 growth and the subsequent internet revolution. However, the economic scene is totally different in 2008 than 1992, and demographics may finally pose the biggest challenge no matter who is president.

Philip Klein does point out the dangers that an Obama presidency may pose in terms of enacting Universal Coverage, and allowing the Bush Tax Cuts to expire. The obvious combination of a massive tax hike (which is what the expiration means) and the incremental addition of hundreds of billions in new government liabilities make such a scenario unlikely from a political point of view. As Klein pointed out, Obama is much more sensitive to the political middle than his detractors realize. Wall St, contrary to many people's perceptions, is filled with Democrats. The memory of the 1993 Clinton increase (passed by the Senate by one vote) is still vivid, and in my opinion set the stage for the Gingrich Revolution more than did Hillary's foray into Health Care. Back then as now the Democrats had working majorities in both Houses; the taxpayers punished the Democrats a year later. The Democrats on Wall St wish for an Obama presidency to succeed, not fail. The combination of large tax increases (one also cannot forget the creep of the AMT on the middle class) and additional spending at a time when the economy is on the cusp of a recession is not only foolish but political suicide.

The other thing also to consider is the shape of that the economy will likely be in 2009. The Fed policy on interest rates may still save our ailing financial banking sector, but it is having serious repercussions vis-Ã -vis inflation. The weak dollar has caused an every growing bubble in the commodities market. Energy and food price increases are sapping hundreds of billions out of consumer's pockets. The attendant problems in automotive, airlines, and RV markets are just a glimpse of what could be waiting for the next president. Couple this with the continued melt-down in the real-estate and mortgage sectors, and one wonders why anyone would want to be the next President. The beginnings of a Wall St Bear market also do not bode well for 2009. The exasperate matters, the first of the baby-boomers are now retiring. The single biggest class of investor is in this age group. Their investments represent trillions in the equities market. With a weakening economy these people may decide to opt out of the work place early and begin cashing out their mutual funds and stocks.

These economic limitations and challenges I think will prevent any major new initiatives coming out of Capital Hill or the White House. The Far Left wish lists of massive new taxes on income and capital, massive new spending programs, and a plethora of new regulations may have to be shelved indefinitely. Even 64-year-old radical professors wish to retire with their nest eggs intact. The last thing these people want is to see their $800,000 in vested annuities get halved by a Wall St sell-off. Most boomer retirement plans include traveling the world, or vacationing in Palm Springs, not working as a Wal-Mart greeter. All of a sudden we just might hear words like tax and spending cuts coming from a Democratic majority -- of course, don't hold your breath.
-- JP
Indiana

The article on a potential Obama presidency was absurd. Mr. Obama is far to the left and will have a very left Congress. Foreign policy will be a disaster and domestic policy will move towards a more socialist America. Problem areas such as the War on Terrorism, the potential Iran-Israeli confrontation, tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan, Chinese involvement in selling weapons, an emerging threat from Russia, threatened oil supply routes in the Strait of Hormuz and Malacca, confrontations with North Korea and uncontrolled borders, all under the watch of an inexperienced and naive president! I will not go into detail on domestic issues from abortion (including his views on Accidental Birth) to transport of Obama's envisioned "new sources of energy" (infrastructure needed for distribution of as of yet un-developed sources), An Obama administration will accelerate a move to dependency on government. A government run by people and a party who "knows" what is best for the American people and will create a society that stifles creativity and innovation but "takes care of the people." Socialism? You bet!
-- John J. Pilato, Sr.
Buffalo, New York

Whether by accident or design, Philip Klein has illuminated the primary reason some conservatives prefer a Barack Obama presidency as payback to the Republican Party for deserting them: no one man can ruin the country in four years.

Really? Jimmy Carter's a benchmark. What makes conservatives believe Barack Obama can't "top" him -- decisively?
-- Arnold Ahlert
Boca Raton, Florida

Letter to the Editor

topics:
Taxes, Foreign Policy, Trade, Health Care, John McCain, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Business, Entitlements, Social Security, Religion, Islam, Abortion, Environment, Hollywood, Constitution, Law, Supreme Court, Military, Iraq, Iran, Russia, Israel, Pakistan, NATO, North Korea, Socialism, Immigration, Nuclear Weapons, Energy, Oil