-
Next: The Benghazi Select Committee
May 13, 2013 | 94 comments
-
Nobody Died in Watergate
May 9, 2013 | 148 comments
-
Benghazi Bullchips
May 6, 2013 | 184 comments
-
Obama’s Thin Red Line
April 29, 2013 | 207 comments
-
Why Has No One Taken Credit?
April 22, 2013 | 189 comments
Loose Canons
What’s at Stake Tomorrow
Just imagine where’s we’ll be in 2017 after a second Obama term.
Tomorrow we go to the polls in the most important election of our lifetimes. If that seems an overstatement, the following should erase any doubt.
RealClearPolitics has the race essentially tied, with Obama leading by a hair. My favorite political guru — Michael Barone — has predicted a mini-landslide for Romney.
Whatever the result may be, the stakes could not be higher. Barack Obama’s presidency has been totally partisan and intensely ideological. He has pushed everything he could touch radically leftward, changing America’s course and the world’s. If he is re-elected, that push will continue so effectively that whoever succeeds him in 2017 will discover that most of the damage done is irreparable. Consider just a few of the most important issues that the president — be it Obama or Romney — will decide.
Last week, Mad Dog Harry Reid (D-Nev.), the Senate Majority Leader, said that it was “laughable” to think that liberal Senate Dems would work with a president Romney. Unless the Republicans take the Senate, nothing a President Romney offers will even come to a vote unless Romney can find a way around Reid. “Bipartisanship” is as easily corralled as a unicorn.
Our economy has to regain economic security, which means stability in the conditions that promote growth. We have not had that stability since at least 2006. In the six years since then, we’ve lost the historic rate of American economic growth, amounting to at least 15% of our GDP.
Economic security is impossible to achieve with a devout Keynesian in the White House. Obama believes that government is the most beneficial influence on our economy, and has proved that time and again with the “stimulus” that didn’t create jobs and with Obamacare, which takes over 16% of our economy and does nothing to reduce the costs of health care. Obama has been obstinate in his refusal to even consider reforming some of the government programs that will bankrupt the nation, from Social Security and Medicare to his policies that thwart energy development. Obama’s solution to our energy crisis is more global warming nonsense, from wind farms to electric cars.
In January, if Obama is re-elected, we will go over the economic cliff the Keynesians have built. Taxes will rise dramatically, causing — as the Congressional Budget Office foretold last August — a deep recession that will last for years. CBO’s projections are really a best-case scenario because they include huge increases in government revenue despite the recession they predict. But tax revenues can’t rise in a recession: the economy has to grow to produce the incomes that can be taxed and it won’t if Obama is re-elected.
Obama’s plans are to stand by and be sure that tax increases coming next year happen, and then seek more. In the third debate, he said that sequestration — which will take an additional $600 billion out of the Pentagon’s budget over ten years, totaling $1 trillion over that period when combined with the nearly $500 billion Obama has already cut — won’t happen. Which is nonsense. Obama has repeatedly threatened to veto any bill that stops sequestration to prevent defense cuts. The “grand bargain” he’s talking about to avoid sequestration is something he won’t agree to without massive tax hikes.
In short, the biggest thing at stake tomorrow is our economic future. With Obama, it will be dismal.
If Obama is re-elected, he will continue his brinksmanship on every bill to raise the federal debt limit, now over $16 trillion. House Republicans — still lacking the courage to win a showdown by risking a government shutdown — will quiver and quail and make more “if-then” budget deals. Those deals — like last summer’s “supercommittee” debacle — always have the Republicans give in on something with an immediate effect, like the debt ceiling, in return for Democrats’ promises to do something in the future which they have no intention of doing. The House may be able to stop some of Obama’s proposals, but on the economy they will cave in unless the 2010 freshmen and other conservatives rebel. They haven’t yet.
Our lack of economic security — which is the predicate to national security — means that rebuilding our national security is proportionally less possible as our economy declines. Obama’s agenda forces both our economic security and our military security to diminish.
Our allies know this, as Israel has learned to its pain since Obama declared that he wanted more distance between us and our only ally in the Middle East. Our enemies know this, as Iran has in Obama’s utter failure to stop or even slow its march toward obtaining nuclear weapons. Obama is in the process of abdicating America’s superpower role in the world.
Few Americans cast their votes on the issues of national security and foreign policy. But consider this: what Obama has done so far can be repaired in the next four years. But if Obama is allowed to continue on his path of abdication and withdrawal, after another four years the world will have changed in ways his successor will find beyond his power to correct.
Iran will have nuclear weapons unless Israel undertakes a war which may cost the Jewish state its very life. Iran, and the other state sponsors of terrorism, will have gained advantages that will allow them to control the Middle East’s oil. China will have built its power over the Pacific region to the degree that Japan and Taiwan will come under its thumb. India will be more isolated and Pakistan — a nuclear-armed state sponsor of terrorism — will grow in power.
America’s military will shrink in size and — more importantly — in capability. We won’t build the future weapons that will be necessary to deter or defeat our enemies abroad or craft the strategies to deter or defeat the threats we face. If Obama is re-elected, America’s enemies will grow stronger as we grow weaker. At the end of Obama’s second term, if there is one, the world will have changed to a degree that his successor won’t be able to restore America’s security for that reason and one more: without a strong and stable economy, American national security will become something we can’t afford.
About the Author
Jed Babbin served as a Deputy Undersecretary of Defense under George H.W. Bush. He is the author of several bestselling books including Inside the Asylum and In the Words of Our Enemies. You can follow him on Twitter @jedbabbin.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (43) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Jed Babbin
More Articles From Loose Canons
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/11/05/whats-at-stake-tomorrow
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Peace in Our Times
- Hannah and Her Friends
- The Demise of Money and Credit
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
James Baker| 11.5.12 @ 6:32AM
I already voted, have volunteered to be a poll watcher for the Republican party in my precinct, have told everyone I know about the issues we face. Now I am praying, with all my heart and soul for my Country, that we turn back from liberalism and all the ills it spawns.
TLP| 11.5.12 @ 9:06AM
Just look at that picture of Harry Ried, there. Standing alongside the Creature.
This is what "I would rather Rule In Hell, than Serve In Heavan" looks like.
It is also reminiscent of the old: Fox and the Scorpion, and the trip across the River.
And, of course: "What does it profit a man, to Gain the whole World, and Lose his Immortal Soul?"
Tomorrow beckons.
Alan Third Party Voter Brooks | 11.5.12 @ 6:45PM
Another one of your Bushes?
Alan Third Party Voter Brooks | 11.6.12 @ 1:32AM
The growth of entitlement spending over the past half-century has been distinctly greater under Republican administrations than Democratic ones. Between 1960 and 2010, the growth of entitlement spending was exponential — but in any given year, it was on the whole over 8 percent higher if the president happened to be a Republican rather than a Democrat. . . . The Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford and George W. Bush administrations presided over especially lavish expansions of the entitlement state.
Appleby| 11.5.12 @ 6:32AM
Vote Romney or the world ends Wednesday. Now that is a cheerful message.
Jack in Wi| 11.5.12 @ 7:17AM
I am voting for Romney and hope he wins. Wisconsin an important swing state that may decide the election. Some polls here say Obama is ahead. But if he was ahead here why is he coming here 3 times in the last 4 days? I don't know many people voting for Obama. But I do live in the most Republican county in the state.
LarryK| 11.5.12 @ 1:32PM
Now we all know that the world will not end Wednesday if Obama wins a second term, but sure will feel like it!
Frank Drackman| 11.5.12 @ 6:47AM
Whats the problem?(Problemo, for our friends from south of the border) the Dow will be 26,000!!!!
And there'll be 5(or 6 +/- Breyer)GLBT Judges on the Surpreme Court.
Gas will be $8/gallon, you'll be able to see a doctor within days(OK, so he's a butcher from Honduras, how smart you gotta be to write a simvastain scrip?)and Blacks will still murder other demographic routes at a rate 10x everybody else.
OK I made that last one up, but just try walkin in West Atlanta(or any part of Atlanta) wearing a Romeny/Ryan Shirt...
I'm pickin Romeny with 269, winning with a fieldgoal in OT...
Frank
Alan| 11.5.12 @ 7:40AM
Your dead on Franky, your Atlanta comment was dead on but try walkin in Detroit with ANY shirt on.
KennesawJack| 11.5.12 @ 9:47AM
Frank, Sad, but true about Atlanta. Damn shame but I'm not sure I'd walk around in Mid-town wearing a Romney/Ryan shirt.
Al Adab| 11.5.12 @ 12:11PM
Frank:
I have Romney at 266 counting both ( and I'm nervous about them) FL and Ohio. He needs one more, possibly IA or WI or CO to eek out a win. Which do you think is the field goal?
Occam's Tool| 11.5.12 @ 4:05PM
Romney with 315. Thank you. Elric of Melnibone will explain on Wednesday.
Von Mises Jr| 11.5.12 @ 7:31AM
I believe Jed is mistaken about the Senate. Not only will the coattails of Romney Ryan deliver the Senate to the Republicans, but they are irrelevant if Romney is elected.
Obama has constructed an Imperial Presidency, or more accurately a dictatorship. The main problem with shutting down the government by not extending the Debt Ceiling was that Obama threatened senior's Social Security and Military pay. But if Mitt and Ryan are running the government, the shoe is on the other foot.
Failure of the Senate to pass a Budget means Romney decides who gets funded. So he can simply end the Dept of Education, HUD, and Interior, defund ObamaCare and the 16K IRS Agents, as well as reduce Food Stamps and SSDI back to 2008 levels.
All the liberal programs can be decimated regardless of whom controls the Senate.
Nancy in NC| 11.5.12 @ 8:15AM
I thought we had a chance to take the Senate until Akin and Mourdock had to shoot their mouth off about abortion. Why can't they just say they're pro life and move on? Once they start to define that stance it always gets dicey. And when men say too much about abortion, I get antsy. After all, they will never be pregnant or have to face that decision.
Personally, I believe the abortion thing has led this country down the tubes culturally. When life has so little meaning it destabilizes the cultural.
But don't we have the chick before the egg? Perhaps when we started moving away from our Judeo-Christian heritage in the rest of our lives, the acceptance of Roe v Wade was easier to swallow.
History just keeps repeating itself. Do we not look more like Rome every day?
Von Mises Jr| 11.5.12 @ 9:03AM
Our Constitution of Enumerated Powers does not include abortion. It is understandable that we had mission creep in things such as disaster relief. But issues such as abortion should not be Federal issues.
The left politicizes everything. They are sick SOB's that can't mind their own bees wax. While I object to abortion personally, if Caligula and Linda Lovelace want to drive to the States of Hell such as CA or MA, our Constitution says that I can't stop them legally. So why do these bastards insist that I give them my consent and pony up for the doctor to suck the brains out of an unborn infant?
nathan| 11.5.12 @ 10:24AM
"No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property . . . . without due process." Fifth Amendment. Forget about the religious aspects of this for a moment. We know that the entity growing inside the woman is separate from her since she only contributes half the DNA. So what we are debating is when does it acquire due process rights, Fifth Amendment rights. At birth, certainly. At viability, sure. How much further back from viability to conception does it have it's own separate rights? That sir with all due respect IS a constitutional issue.
We don't know for sure what "personhood" is. We really don't. But you see based on the dehumanization of people in the last century that led to the Holocaust, Rwanda, and so many similar things, if there is a 1/10,000 chance that "person" begins at conception, we err on the side of conferring Fifth Amendment rights then. We have to. And from the standpoint of the rights of the entity the means of conception are irrelevant. Rape or incest have no bearing on its Fifth Amendment rights. Why should he/she be executed for something he/she had no part in doing? Does someone really want to make that case from a Bill of Rights perspective? Be my guest.
That sir is why it's a federal issue because it's a rights issue for the entity.
Von Mises Jr| 11.5.12 @ 10:40AM
Go back to playing with you hot dog.
nathan| 11.5.12 @ 11:52AM
WOW! What insightful political commentary! I know based on past experience that I'm probably asking way too much here, but you wouldn't actually want to address what I said and tell me where I'm wrong? Or is that asking too much of you?
You let me make this simple for you. "People" have rights. Not just Americans, Madison doesn't use that term in the Bill of Rights, certainly not in the Fifth Amendment, but "persons". And they can't be deprived of those rights without due process. And it doesn't make any difference who these "persons" are. An accused serial killer, an accused child rapist, an accused terrorist, or even someone like an entity growing inside a woman who given what we know about genetics, probably maybe has a claim to being a "person". For all of them for any "person" that comes in contact with "our" government anywhere in the world, the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments clearly apply and must be adhered to by all federal actors who take an oath to uphold and defend what, the people of the United States? NOOOO. The CONSTITUTION of the United States. For you "conservatives" here (raise your hands) you must side with the Founders and Madison in particular where "persons" are concerned.
Class dismissed.
Occam's Tool| 11.5.12 @ 4:12PM
Foreign persons do not have the same rights that I do vis-a-vis the US government. In short, if I am held hostage by Islamic terrorist vermin (a redundancy), the US Marines are free to blast away scum to rescue me, Nathan. You seem to have a problem with that particular point, for some reason.
Perhaps it would have helped if you were only saved from being a terrorist victim by a twist of fate, as I was. When I took my current job, I had another offered---that of Psychiatrist at Fort Hood---before the massacre. Only an Act of G-d kept me from choosing the other and being murdered in a "workplace" incident.
Take your head out of your ass, Nathan. Babies are different from alien terrorist scum on a battlefield.
nathan| 11.6.12 @ 7:08AM
Sir: You compared apples and durians here. In the situation you described, blast away. That sir, is a BATTLEFIELD situation. What I was referring to, and be OH SO CLEAR HERE is, person drops his weapon, raises his hands, and is taken into custody. He is disarmed and is now in a cell. Clear so far? At THAT POINT where he/she represents NO THREAT TO ANYONE, he/she has all Fifth/Sixth/Eighth Amendment rights you and I have regardless of where they are anywhere in the world based on the oath of office taken by federal actors. Go back and read my post again, "accused individuals" have rights, regardless of who they are and cannot be mistreated according to Madison. Madison was clearly less concerned about potentially bad guys walking than he was about innocent people being abused.
fmm| 11.5.12 @ 1:50PM
And this is why Atkin and Mourdock were correct in their basic message. Atkin did not present his ideas well but Mourdock did if you go back and read his actual words. Abortion is murder imo, and we have a lot to atone for.
Occam's Tool| 11.5.12 @ 4:08PM
Nathan: in essence, you are stating that a baby is ababy from moment of conception, and that rape and incest are not factors that allow for abortion. That is correct from my perspective.
However, when faced with a true choice between mom and infant and the possibility of saving only one, on that one I would defer to mother, of if impossible, husband or other next of kin.
Peppermint Tea | 11.5.12 @ 9:03AM
Nancy get antsy?
Oh my!
As a man I would like to say, abortion has killed 50 million fetuses in America since 1970; thereby ruining the Soc Sec ponzi scheme and the Baby Boomers will suffer.
50 million is more than Hitler, or Stalin, but not as many as Mao, the ideological hero of the O administration.
Frank Drackman| 11.5.12 @ 10:52AM
Umm it's more like 70 million,
your forgetting than 1/2 of those fetuses were female, and would be getting screwed by the other 1/2(give or take a few homos)and(Dr. Strangeglove accent) figuring an average fertility rate of 2.09, infant morality rate of 2.7% , cube root of pie....
Jesse Jackson would have won in 1992...
Yay Reproductive Rights!
Frank
Al Adab| 11.5.12 @ 12:12PM
No Jr, Dems keep the Senate and just think about what obstructionism will mean then.
Joellen| 11.5.12 @ 4:26PM
Nancy, where is your faith and trust in the LORD? Neither Mourock nor Aikin will lose. Theirs hearts are pure for those most precious and innocent, the unborn. Neither one meant to be callous, Mourdock was intentionally mis-quoted and Aikin did what we all do, he got nervous, and spoke before he could articulate what he meant to say. They are not the evil ones Nancy, and the Lord will protect them, just think of David vs. Golaith. In fact, we all should remember that tomorrow when voting - put all our faith and trust in the LORD and pray unceasingly. I know I am!
KennesawJack| 11.5.12 @ 9:48AM
Welcome back, Von.
Butch| 11.5.12 @ 4:26PM
Mises: most of all, lay off all EPA regulators and all DOT regulators. Then sell off all federal land, or at least the mineral leases, and exploit our most promising industry: fossil fuels. Harry Reid be damned.
Hardcard| 11.5.12 @ 7:54AM
Pray and Vote !
Mike G| 11.5.12 @ 8:16AM
Mr. Babbin, the only thing I disagree with is your thinking that Romney will appoint conservatives to the Supreme Court. I see nothing in his past that would suggest that he would appoint anyone other than Anthony Kennedy and Stephen Breyer clones. I don't consider these men any better than Obama Marxists.
Paul Kotik| 11.5.12 @ 8:45AM
I've just spent a month in the America of 2017 if Obama wins a second term.
A formerly prosperous, growing, orderly country which decided to turn itself over to Soviet-inspired racialist revolutionaries.
South Africa.
I have seen the future, and it lurks.
TLP| 11.5.12 @ 9:24AM
Exactly. And, you will NEVER hear a Peep about the Self-Immolation of what once was one of the Most Beautiful Places on Earth.
As was her Sister Country - Rhodesia.
They're Animals. You wanna see your Missing Link?
You got'em. They're the ones Laying Waste to every scrap of land that they plant their Flag into, everywhere in the World. Be it the Continent of Africa, an American City Borough, a City Block, or any Street or School in this Country, where they make up the Majority.
If that's Racists? I don't give a Sh*t.
They are a Parasitic Organism, that Feeds off their Host, until there is Nothing Left.
They are not unlike their Muslim Brethren, who are a Cancer on the Civilization of Man. A Cancer that - like all Cancers - needs to be Irradiated and then Cut Out of the Body, if the Body is to survive.
Occam's Razour.
This isn't the Study of Interdementional Quantam String Theory at the Subatomic Level.
It's: 2+2=4.
Hello?
Paul Kotik| 11.5.12 @ 10:06AM
They're not even clever parasites. A clever parasite always leaves enough for the host to survive and produce more.
KennesawJack| 11.5.12 @ 5:26PM
If Paton were writing it today, I wonder if the narrative of "Cry, The Beloved Country" would change a bit.
Paul Kotik| 11.5.12 @ 9:04PM
What an excellent question.
Many white South Africans voted "Yes" in the self-immolation referendum because they fell victim to the classic error of all social engineers and revolutionaries, even (especially!) those acting in good faith. This is the tragically mistaken belief that all alternatives to an unsatisfactory arrangement are superior to it. In fact - as in South Africa and in Zimbabawe - some are much worse. Sometimes the unsatisfactory arrangement is also the best possible one. It could be, in fact, that the best possible arrangement is always unsatisfactory to idealists.
KennesawJack| 11.5.12 @ 10:13PM
I found it deliciously ironic that Obamarx's Kenyan brother, in the interview with Dinesh, said the problem with Kenya is that the Whites left too soon unlike South Africa. What he missed was that South Africa, once a first rank nation, is now becoming an irrelovant third-world (or worse) nation.
Ken (Old Texican)| 11.5.12 @ 9:07AM
No "true conservative" will approve of Romney across the board. Screw -em!
Let them get to work on the congressinal battles, and let's give Romney some support....enough for eight years to keep the communists at bay.
and as Confucious say: "a .22 is the answer to many ills."
Who Knows?| 11.5.12 @ 11:47AM
Actions have consequences. Karma works.
Perhaps it’s useful to return to basics, especially at this intense tipping point.
What’s THE most undeniable law of physics?
Entropy rules!
The very material AND energy Universe always tends to want to “spread the wealth”—to run down into disorder.
Americans, heretofore, have been the best bringers of order known to mankind. Just wander around in cities, and marvel at the rearranged elements of steel and plastic and so on, or ride the highways across mostly empty stretches of land, which itself has been ordered to grow food—which is even more order.
The Obama phenomenon is simply entropy, chosen by the majority of Americans who are THEMSELVES expressions of disorder!
What else do you call someone who takes “order”, say food stamp money, and destroys it WITHOUT providing any “order” in return?
Yes---after four years of the bonfire of disorder, maybe a majority of the order makers are about to ORDER a rebirth in ORDER---in the American “house”.
I’m certainly NOT very hopeful, though.
There’s a whole lot of disorder STILL going on, and a Romney win and control of the senate (won’t happen, IMHO) won’t stop the inevitable arrival of more of it.
Batten down YOUR hatches---the real disorder hasn’t yet arrived.
Occam's Tool| 11.5.12 @ 4:13PM
South African Medical Schools are no longer considered 1st world. They used to be among the best in the world.
Americanpatriot| 11.5.12 @ 5:46PM
Get out the vote for Romney. Word is on the street that the liberal media is going to call this election early for Obama when he is not winning to stop people from voting for Romney.So please get out the vote.
KennesawJack| 11.5.12 @ 5:57PM
Same crap they tried with Kerry. Remember when they called PA for Kerry then had to take it down? Not going to work this time.
Rhoetus| 11.5.12 @ 9:09PM
Bush41: Reneged on Reaganism which led to Clinton.
Clinton: Had sex while Washington burned.
Bush43: Overspent on more than just 2 wars. Rather then eliminating the Dept of Education gave us no-child left behind (what a joke).
Obama: Our first Red president.
Now what?
ArturoMabb| 11.5.12 @ 10:47PM
Republicans will easily hold a majority; in fact, they will lose a net of only two seats, ending with a majority of 239 to 196. Of particular interest to knowledgeable conservatives, Conservative www.abercrombieporto.com Opportunity Society co-founder Dan Lungren will indeed hold on in California's hotly contested, redistricted Seventh District. And in Utah, Republican Mia Love will rush past incumbent Jim Matheson.