AnnotatedOpinions.com

Despite a first year filled with divisions, denunciations and impassioned polarization, it’s not too late for Barack Obama to formulate the bipartisan foreign policy that he promised as a presidential candidate and that Americans say they crave. To do so, he should take inspiration from the best-received speech of his presidency, resist the unbecoming temptation of blaming bad news on his predecessor, and emulate the triumphant example of a long-ago Republican president. . .  

In the remainder of his term, Barack Obama can deliver more of the concord his campaign promised if he avoids self-defeating bitterness toward his predecessor, rejects grand, unattainable international schemes and, in the soft-spoken Eisenhower tradition, reconnects with the pragmatic, conservative disposition of the American people.  

[AO: Michael Medved, the writer of this opinion in USA Today, is correct. If President Obama stops highlighting Bush-era mistakes, gives up on achieving any significant international agreements, and becomes a conservative, he can achieve unity. Unfortunately, it will be a unity between Obama and conservatives, not liberals and conservatives, because Obama will have become a conservative.]

I think I’ve had my fill of moral hypocrisy. . . The press loves stories of moral hypocrisy. Catching a finger-wagging politician violating his or her own moral code warms the cockles of every reporter’s heart. . .  

The crusade against moral hypocrisy necessarily hits conservatives harder, not because conservatives are more immoral but because they uphold morality more publicly, making them richer targets. . . [AO: Not true. Conservatives seem to be hit harder because they are involved in more scandals. Take a look at Fox News’ Political Sex Scandals database. You will see that in the last 5 years, five Republicans and three Democratic politicians have been involved in sex scandals. This is why conservatives are hit harder. They’ve been doing more of it lately. This is not to say that conservatives are more likely to be involved in sex scandals. Just that they have been doing more of it.] 

What I don’t think we hear enough about is intellectual hypocrisy. What’s that? Well, if moral hypocrisy is saying what values people should live by while failing to follow them yourself, intellectual hypocrisy is believing you are smart enough to run other peoples’ lives when you can barely run your own. . . [AO: huh? Where is the
parallel between moral hypocrisy and intellectual hypocrisy in the definition the writer concocts for intellectual hypocrisy? I say concoct because intellectual hypocrisy already has a meaning. It means pretending to hold intellectual beliefs that you don’t apply in your own reasoning. See the parallel with moral hypocrisy?   

What the writer, Jonah Goldberg, is attempting to describe is more akin to intellectual thick-headedness then intellectual hypocrisy. But, alas, that would not allow him to put the two on the same level and demand an end to moral hypocrisy, which he sees as harmful to conservatives, why railing against so called intellectual hypocrisy.  

Of course, the other problem is that most people have no problem with intellectual think-headedness. Many successful CEOs, the people in the private sphere that Goldberg wants emulated, are intellectually thick-headed. They think they know it all and they want to tell you what to do. ]  

The most famous story of an intellectual hypocrite getting his comeuppance is the tale of George McGovern and his inn. The senator, 1972 presidential nominee and college professor thought he could run a vast, technologically sophisticated nation with a diverse population and an entrepreneurial culture. Then, after leaving Washington, he bought an inn in Connecticut to while away his retirement years. For a guy as smart as him, running an inn should have been child’s play. But it went belly up before the end of the year, with a contritely befuddled McGovern marveling at how much harder running a business was than he thought. . . [AO: ok. So McGovern could function as a senator. He could function as a professor. But he could not run a Bed and Breakfast so he was an intellectual hypocrite. What about the guy who can run a Bed and Breakfast but cannot run a Pizza shop? Can he be president?   

Obviously, it’s silly to claim that just because someone can’t run a Bed and Breakfast that person cannot run anything. It is silly because inherent in that criticism of McGovern is a argument that, say, the CEO of Bank of America, Citi Group, GE and other major American businesses, should be able to run a bed a breakfast (and Pizza shop, and car wash, etc). But chances are many of them would have no idea where to begin.]

That which can’t continue doesn’t. A nation can spend and spend, pile debt upon debt, but eventually there comes a reality moment when some leader emerges to say enough is enough and when decent people, looking around at themselves and their own best nature, respond by demanding a return to responsibility. . .

Osborne

But Britain has hit its reality moment. The Brits are ahead of us when it comes to public indebtedness and national irresponsibility. . .

There, voters are ready for a politician willing to face reality. And George Osborne, who would become the chancellor of the Exchequer in the likely event that his Conservative Party wins the next election, has aggressively seized the moment.  

In a party conference address earlier this month, Osborne gave the speech that an American politician will someday have to give. . . He defended government workers against those who would deride them as self-serving bureaucrats . . .  

But, he pivoted . . . The British government needs to cut back.

Cameron

Osborne declared that his government would raise the retirement age . . . that there would be no tax cuts any time soon . . . [and] proposed a public sector pay freeze in order to avoid 100,000 layoffs.  

Osborne and David Cameron, the party leader, argue that Labour’s decision to centralize power has undermined personal and social responsibility. They are offering a responsibility agenda from top to bottom. Decentralize power so local elected bodies have  responsibility.  

[AO: The problem with the op-ed is that it does not add up. It ends by saying that “Labour’s decision to centralize power has undermined personal and social responsibility” and that the conservatives “are offering a responsibility agenda from top to bottom. Decentralize power so local elected bodies have responsibility.” But nowhere in the article is there any discussion of this. Indeed the entire support for the conclusion is that the conservatives plan to (1) raise the retirement age, (2) not cut taxes any time soon, and (3) freeze public sector pay. How is any of this about decentralizing power so local elected bodies have responsibility? 

My guess is that David Brooks, who wrote the op-ed in the New York Times, combined his reasons for being in favor of the conservatives in Britain with what Brits find appealing about the conservatives. The majority of the content in the article, the part about Obsorne’s plan to raise the retirement age, cut taxes, and freeze public sector pay are all things the British public is in favor of. On the other hand, the last two paragraphs are things David Brooks is in favor of. He favors decentralization, otherwise known as smaller  government. So he sees that conservatives are doing well, ignores that they are doing well because of a strategic populist turn (i.e. not cutting taxes, raising the retirement age, freezing public sector pay – all very popular with many, many Brits) and fashions a reason based on decentralization that the public probably has very little care for. ]

Politics as religion in America: Conservatism has been converted into a religious belief, and now compromise doesn’t have a prayer. [LA Times]

The Wizard of Beck: There is no power behind the media curtain for talk jocks like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. They claim to represent a hidden majority but, in fact, represent a mere niche. [New York Times]

A question of health and women’s equality: The question for Congress is still whether the ‘reform’ that is supposed to increase coverage will instead reduce it. Will women who now have coverage for abortion in their private plans end up losing it? [Boston Globe]

Who is looking out for women’s health? [USA Today]

How the Swiss reformed healthcare: The challenges were similar to those in the U.S., and the outcome appears favorable. [LA Times]

‘Bending the Curve’ on Health Costs: The small Annapolis regulatory agency that could. [Washington Post]

Green China: Chinese may be leaving their polluting ways behind. Is America up to the challenge? [Houston Chronicle]

Mission Not Accomplished: Unless the government does much more than is currently planned to help the economy recover, the job market will remain terrible for years to come. [New York Times]

May the GDP R.I.P.: The GDP doesn’t consider the effects of income inequality, just income growth or decline. Wars, crime, environmental degradation, even natural disasters can be counted as net positives for GDP because they stimulate economic growth. [Boston Globe]

Saturn’s ride: The ‘different’ car company deserved a better end than it is getting [Houston Chronicle]

Lessons from Saturn’s fall: If General Motors had a corporate theme song these days, it might be Queen’s Another One Bites the Dust. [USA Today]

Chevron’s shifty shifting of venue: The oil giant, facing a $27-billion damage claim in a pollution case brought by natives in Ecuador, shops the case to The Hague in a bid to escape liability. [LA Times]

One Way or Another: The message from Washington to major emitters of greenhouse gases in this country is increasingly clear that emissions are coming down. [New York Times]

The Klamath River lessons: Forget winner-take-all; everyone compromised on a water plan. [LA Times]

The Courts and Privacy: The Supreme Court may have to rule on just how free the majority is to impose its morality through the law. [New York Times]

Grounded by politics: The Air Force is asking for new bids on a $40 billion contract for aerial refueling tankers, and taxpayers can only hope the decision this time isn’t hijacked by political considerations. [Philadelphia Inquirer]

Hollywood’s Shame: On Polanski, movie stars’ moral bankruptcy. [Washington Post]

That Nasty Little War: A report on last year’s war between Russia and Georgia is an anatomy of a post-Soviet mess that festered for too long — and could erupt again unless all sides show a lot more sense. [New York
Times]

Obama’s powerful presence: The president’s popularity — on view at the U.N. — has helped reduce global tensions and deprived America’s enemies of propaganda points. [LA Times]

Global Economic Challenges: The members of the Group of 20 should share the credit for avoiding the economic abyss, but now they must confront the causes and cures of the financial crisis. [New York Times]

The Afghan Imperative: Fighting the Afghan war the easy way hasn’t worked. Only the full counterinsurgency doctrine offers a chance of success. [New York Times]

Intercepting terror plots: How worried should we be? [Chicago Tribune]

Taming Brutopia: The Internet could represent a flourishing of democracy. Instead it amplifies hate. [Washington Post]

Senator Kirk: A capable interim appointee – Paul Kirk, chosen by Governor Patrick as interim senator, is one of many outstanding staff members that Senator Kennedy recruited over the years. [Boston Globe]

Immigration issue is a red herring [USA Today]

How fast they forgot the lessons of Sunday school [Chicago Tribune]

Khadafy: No camping on the Donald’s lawn – The dictator of Libya thought he had a home for his tent on property belonging to Donald Trump in the tony Westchester suburb of Bedford. [Boston Globe]

Don’t discount trade in economic recovery [Chicago Tribune]

First the Fed, Now the Med: What the Federal Reserve did to tame inflation could be replicated in health care. [Washington Post]

The Subject Was Nuclear Weapons: The Security Council must commit to a resolution intended to strengthen the fraying rules that are supposed to stop the spread of nuclear weapons. [New York Times]

Toward peace in the Middle East: Breakthroughs require real leadership from all sides. [LA Times]

Showdown on Iran’s nuclear program enters endgame [USA Today]

Now, where was I? If the ratcheting up of media multitasking is teaching us not to pay attention, is it also training us not to expect attention? [Boston Globe]

Skin in the Game: Hedge funds offer a lesson on how to manage bank risk: Let them fail. [Washington Post]

ACORN cracking: The advocacy group’s troubles deserve a full, nonpartisan investigation [Houston Chronicle]  

Picking on ACORN: There’s no evidence of wrongdoing to support the California Republican Party’s call for an audit of group’s voter registration efforts. [LA Times]

Hard truths about Uzbek cotton: The strongman regime is making huge profits on the backs of the nation’s children while ignoring calls to halt its violations of international labor regulations. [LA Times]

House vs. Senate Over Competitive Bidding: The introduction of some competitive bidding in for-profit contracts as part of earmark reform is the logical next step that Senate Democratic leaders should join the House in implementing. [New York Times]

[AO: Here are excerpts from an op-ed by Jay Bookman in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Bookman takes us back to 1961 Reagan to illustrate how ridiculous some of the arguments against Healthcare reform really are. ]

Judging from conservative rhetoric, the debate over health-care reform is in truth a fight over the future of American democracy and capitalism. Stopping the health-care bill is being described as an essential step toward restoring America to its rightful owners and rightful course. . . .

In a recording back in 1961, Reagan patiently explained, step by step, how the then-controversial proposal to create Medicare would lead to an America in which freedom was a distant memory. In post-Medicare America, government would dictate to its citizens where they would be allowed to live, what they would be allowed to study and what career they could pursue.

It’s a great case study in how elusive the line between reality and fantasy can be, particularly in the hands of a master illusionist.

Reagan begins by noting that under Medicare, the federal government would pay doctors for the care they provide. From that single data point, he weaves a portrait of America that none of us would recognize. . . .

Today, almost half a century later, we know how things turned out. Medicare did become law, as Reagan feared, but the rest of his horror story never came to pass. Government is not dictating where we can live or what we can study or what career we can enter. We remain a free people, in many ways far more free than we were in 1961.

Norman Borlaug

• Borlaug: Freedom from mass starvation: In praise of a scientist who saved countless millions from starvation. [Boston Globe]
• ‘The man who fed the world’: The extraordinary humanitarian legacy of plant scientist and Nobel laureate Norman Borlaug was a testament to the value of education, hard work, and a sense of wonder. [Philadelphia Inquirer]

Squandering the Moment: If the Middle East’s major players continue to refuse to do what is needed to move the peace process forward, the White House may have to place its own deal on the table. [New York Times]

The polarization card: It is one thing to disagree with the president. It is another to disrespect the office and delegitimize his citizenship. [Boston Globe]

Texting to Death: While stronger state laws are essential, sending and receiving text messages while driving is a national hazard that calls for a firm federal response. [New York Times]

Still Playing the Odds: With the Dow rising somebody needs to slap the incipient grin off Wall Street’s face. [Washington Post]

A rebuilt Wall Street: Taxpayer money — lots of it — saved Wall Street. Now it’s time for the government to rethink its roll. [LA Times]

Conservatives undercut health reform at their peril: As President Obama fired up a crowd of nearly 17,000 in Minneapolis Saturday with tough talk of his determination to win passage of a universal health care bill, tens of thousands of conservatives took to the streets of the nation’s capital to protest that legislation. [USA Today]

The big thaw: As threat of warming mounts, a few find silver linings [Houston Chronicle]

When Free Speech Loses: American companies’ fear and greed are making it harder to publish freely. [Washington Post]

A nuclear waste solution: Yucca Mountain may never be used, but a physicist lays out his argument favoring repositories over costly reprocessing. [LA Times]

Dems’ public option myopia: Right-wing demagogues blathering about “socialized medicine” and “death panels” aren’t the only ones jeopardizing Obama’s health reform plan. Obamacare is also taking heavy flak from left-wing ideologues. And they, in their own way, can be just as kooky. [New York Daily News]

Is it time for Obama to give another race speech? [Chicago Tribune]

Health Care, Eh? In America and Canada, reform is ultimately determined by national identity and myths. [Washington Post]

Evaluating teachers: It seems so simple and fair. Because teachers are hired to teach, let’s evaluate them on the basis of student performance. [LA Times]

A World of Hurt: This recession, a full-blown economic horror, has left a gaping hole in the heart of working America that is unlikely to heal for years, if not decades. [New York Times]

Saturday’s protest: Fed up with deficits or Democrats? [Atlanta Journal-Constitution]

Critical thinking? You need knowledge: For over a century we have numbed the brains of teachers with endless blather about process and abstract thinking skills. But we have neglected to teach them that one cannot think critically without quite a lot of knowledge to think about. [Boston Globe]

High-Five Nation: Today, immodesty is as ubiquitous as advertising. It’s funny how the nation’s mood was at its most humble when its achievements were at their most extraordinary. [New York Times]

President Obama yesterday delivered his much-anticipated back-to-school speech to the nation’s schoolkids and — surprise, surprise — there was nothing political or contentious about it.

. . . Which is why Democrats are asking why conservatives raised such a stink about the speech in the first place.

Too bad they didn’t take the same attitude back in 1991 — when the first President George Bush made a similar address at a Washington, DC, high school.

. . . Hypocritical?

But of course. They’re Democrats. 

[AO: This is what passes for an apology, my friends. At least all the Post did was call democrats hypocrites for pointing out, very correctly mind you, that the paranoia about the speech was baseless. Note that the article says nothing about Ronald Reagan’s speech to students which was, unlike Obama’s, politically charged.]

Pass pot research around: For 40 years, federal marijuana studies have been conducted in one place — the University of Mississippi. Contracts should be awarded to several different institutions. [LA Times]

A Stain on Medicine: Health professionals who played a role in torture should be held accountable. [Washington Post]

Republicans’ shameless senior moment: When exactly did the Republicans start operating one of those marketing scams that target the elderly? [Boston Globe]

Rangel has no credibility as Ways and Means chairman [Atlanta Journal-Constitution]

Healthcare reform bill doesn’t cover elective abortions: If anything, the proposal forces private insurers to go further to fund and account for pregnancy terminations. [LA Times]

Saving the nation: Americans should save more [USA Today]

Losing Will on Afghanistan: Retreating and hoping it will all somehow work out is not a serious strategy. [Washington Post]

Another Astroturf Campaign: The oil lobby has taken a page from the anti-health-care-reform manual in an effort to drum up opposition to climate change legislation in Congress. [New York Times]

Foreign reporters and the risks they run: Journalists sometimes need to make dangerous decisions in order to cover events in repressive regimes that fear independent voices. [LA Times]

Yes, immigrants get sick too: To judge by the way immigrants are denied access to health coverage in the current system, you’d think they were made of Kryptonite. [Boston Globe]

Wal-Mart and healthcare: Obama’s healthcare agenda turns out to be a deal that usually red-state Wal-Mart has decided to buy into. [LA Times]

The M-Word Surfaces in Virginia: Virginia voters will have to decide if the Republican Party candidate, Robert McDonnell, has moderated since his start-up days as a conservative firebrand. [New York Times]

A fitting memorial is back on course: It’s welcome news that the National Park Service has reached agreement with landowners in southwestern Pennsylvania to build a memorial to Flight 93. [Philadelphia Inquirer]

Bank bailout: success comes with ‘moral hazard’ [Atlanta Journal-Constitution]

Government: The TARP pans out: As banks and other financial institutions pay back the loans handed out late last year to head off the credit crunch, the federal Treasury is actually making money on  some of the loans. [Boston Globe]

Japan’s new rulers: The long-ruling Liberal Democratic Party is out; can the winning Democratic Party of Japan live up to its leaders’ campaign promises? [LA Times]

Japan’s New Leadership: The end of economic decline and political stagnation will take real leadership, not just trading one group of politicians for another. [New York Times]

Cheney’s dark side – and ours: Either we are above using the same interrogation practices that police states use, or we are not. [Boston Globe]

Obama’s Health Reform Realism: The president’s pragmatic assessment of the prospects and limits of a public option. [Washington Post]

Filling Kennedy’s Seat: Leave it to the voters [Chicago Tribune]

Conservatives, yesterday and today: Sam Tanenhaus’ new book explores the right’s shift from old-school classic conservatism to the revolutionary ‘movement conservatism’ of today. [LA Times]

Take the exit: It’s quitting time for governor of South Carolina It’s quitting time for governor of South Carolina. [Houston Chronicle]

Innocent but Dead: Scientific analysis has shown that Cameron Todd Willingham, who was executed in Texas in 2004 for setting a fire that killed his three children, had in fact been innocent. [New York Times]

Seemed Like a Good Idea . . . – The fires choking Los Angeles remind us of the consequences of our decisions. [Washington Post]

The Afghan experiment [USA Today]

The case for parole reform: Terrible stories like Jaycee Lee Dugard’s should not derail legislation to change the system. [LA Times]

Preparing for the Swine Flu: Our take on the swine flu confusion: An epidemic this fall and winter is likely to infect more people than a normal flu, but the virus will not be abnormally lethal. [New York Times]