One of the things that concerns me most about the pending $1 trillion bailout of the financial sector is that it reinforces the idea of government as an all-powerful entity that can fix any problem. Reporting on the campaign trail, going to these town hall meetings, it has always amazed me how people assume that government has infinite resources — whether it’s health, housing, bad weather, or plain old bad luck — Americans have come to assume that government will be there to insulate them from the ups and downs of everyday life. The pending action will only make things much worse. Americans who purchased homes that they couldn’t afford, banks that made loans to those who they shouldn’t have, financial institutions that made risky bets on derivatives even though they had no idea what they we betting on — they’re now all off the hook. And the bill will be paid by responsible working class Americans who either paid their mortgages or deferred purchasing property because they were priced out of the market by skyrocketing prices driven by irresponsible lenders and borrowers, and those who invested reasonably. The fact that Hank Paulson can snap his fingers and come up with $1 trillion to rescue financial institutions means Americans will assume government can dip into a bottomless well to cure any ill in society.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
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.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
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?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?