Dispirited

My blogging has been sparse lately. Other than a post or two about mommies, or my own baby, the occasionally vicious Mr. Mollo, I haven't quite felt up to tackling issues of political and philosophical substance.  Part of it is simply too much on my plate.  Part of it is the current state of political affairs.

This evening, I read this, and I wonder, "How can people treat a true hero like John McCain like this?"

Now we have unnamed fellow veterans claiming that McCain doesn’t understand war enough because of his captivity for the last five years of the Vietnam War. That is simply absurd. Cleland says that he didn’t know which heart and mind would blow him up, but McCain didn’t have to wonder at all which would torture him. He got a good, close look at the evil that totalitarians produce for over five years “on the ground”. How exactly does being forced into the captivity of the enemy “seal” one away from their tactics and their motivations?

Do not think I am a McCain apologist; I am not.  I remain horrified that McCain-Feingold is the law of the land, I do not share some of McCain's social beliefs, I believe that dropping gasoline taxes for the summer is one of the latest idiocies in "buying the public's vote" - and McCain's most recent pronouncements on global warming?  Oy; please - don't get me started!

One can surely argue that McCain is wrong about Iraq policy, or that his philosophy about defense and war is flawed.  But not familiar or aware of these issues because he was "sealed away?"  Please.

Other issues of the day also continue to confound me.  Like Professor Mankiw and my friend Professor Burgess-Jackson, I applaud columns like this one by Thomas Sowell:

While economists are talking supply and demand, politicians are talking compassion, "change" and being on the side of the angels-- and against drilling for our own oil.

Has any economist ever attracted the kinds of cheering crowds that Barack Obama has-- or even the crowds attracted by Hillary Clinton or John McCain?

If you want cheering crowds, don't bother to study economics. It will only hold you back. Tell people what they want to hear-- and they don't want to hear about supply and demand.

Why do so many seem to think that politicians can legislate away economic laws like supply and demand?  Do they really believe that if Congress passes laws stating that energy sources will be more plentiful and less expensive that it will be so?  If they believe this, then why don't they exort Congress to cause money to grow like fruit on trees, for the government to provide each and every one of us with a vacation home on the beach, an exotic sports car, plus lobster and filet every night for supper?  Do our politicians not do this for us because they are selfish ogres?  Or, is the real answer that they don't do it because it is not within their power - just as it is not within their power to return gasoline to $1.89 a gallon merely by passing a law that it shall be so?

We can vote people into office who will make laws that either help or hinder the conditions of markets.  Surely decisions that our government select have an impact on that.

But no Senator nor President can make that which is rare common by fiat.

It seems so simple - just as our government cannot vote to remove the laws of gravity, or change quadratic equations, our government cannot alter laws of economics.

Still, given the behavior of so many, it appears that many do believe these mystical powers cleave to politicians.  "Vote for me, and the economy will grow!"  "Vote for me, and everyone will have affordable health care!"

We see the snake oil salesmen of our time parade in front of us - and they are running for the highest offices in the land.

No wonder I prefer to blog about my cockatiel and my beautiful mom....

Comments

[Greg]

Interesting post, especially the part in which you decry the unfair treatment that is lavished on John McCain. I am curious did you have the same take on the treatment of John Kerry and or Max Cleland? My guess would be no, and that I find a tab bit hypocritical, but I am sure you will come up with some sort of distinction to justify this position. On that note, and this is a side issue, but what was your opinion on John Kerry's wife Teresa Heinz and her tax returns?

The bottom line is this. 80% of the country says the country is heading in the wrong direction. Most economist are saying we are heading towards a recession if we are not in one already. Most economic numbers are dismal. One of the President's jobs is to come up with policies that are in the best interests of the country. Given the facts I have just stated, can anyone argue that Bush has done this? Taking a budget surplus and turning it into record deficits is not what I would call fiscal responsible. That could be why the Republican brand is so tarnish, and they are losing in places they have held strong for decades. There are no magic laws or policies that will make things better, it will take someone who surrounds him or herself with competent people, and who offers LEADERSHIP something we have not seen in the last 8 years.

If the policies of deregulation and pure free markets as the Republicans seems to enjoy, then why is the country saying we are going in the wrong direction, and economically things are so wrong?

[Peg]

Presidents do not have special fiat to run the country as they wish. There is something called "Congress" that plays a role.

In addition - if you think that Republicans have hewn to free market principles in their actions in the last number of years, Greg - you are sadly mistaken! This is a sizeable part of why some of their candidates are not faring well lately. Republicans are not voting as many would like them to do.