AnnotatedOpinions.com

A year ago this month, the air over American liberalism was thick with champagne corks. Barack Obama the newly elected president was poised to be inaugurated, and he in turn would inaugurate the long-prophesized new progressive era. A year later, the champagne corks are hardly flying, and if this is to be morning in America for American liberalism, it seems to have come with a pretty nasty hangover. . .  

In 2008, liberals had more reason to hope. . . A little more than a year later, we surely have been hoing leftward. But it already seems as if the American people are sick of it. The 2009 off-year elections might not have been a repudiation of Obama, but they were definitely not an embrace of Obamaism. Meanwhile, by nearly 2 to 1, Americans say the country is on the wrong track. . . .   

[AO: We agree with the opinion’s writer, Jonah Goldberg: over the last year or so, there has been no giant leftward shift in U.S. politics. But the statistics he quote should be placed in context.  

Goldberg’s claim is that Americans are sick of Democrats. He marshals polling data to support that point. He insinuates that Americans want to put an end to Democratic control of government. But does the data really support this? Let’s take a look.  

Goldberg states that “by nearly 2 to 1, Americans say the country is on the wrong track.” This statement is based in part on an average of polls by RealClearPolitics.com. One of the polls showing the highest number of Americans saying the country is headed in the wrong direction is NBC/Wall Street Journal Poll. That poll shows that only 33% of Americans agree that the country is headed in the right direction (55% agreed that the country is on the wrong track. 10% said “mixed” and 2% responded “unsure”). After noting that, according to the poll, 55%, not 66% as some might be tempted to assume, of Americans agree that the country is headed in the wrong direction, the next questions that come up are (1) “is this unusual” and (2) “who do these people think are responsible.”   

The NBC/Walls Street Journal Polling data goes back to 1999. The data shows that excluding the Obama effect, a huge jump between January 2009 and February 2009, when the number of Americans agreeing that the country was headed in the right direction increased from 26% to 41%, the last time more than 33% of Americans agreed that the country was headed in the right direction was January 2005. That’s right, January 2005. In other years, during most of the booming years of the last decades, more Americans thought the country was headed in the wrong direction than do now, a time when we are still recovering from a very significant recession.  

The poll also has something to say about who respondents blame for the country’s problems. 47% of respondents approved of the job that Barack Obama is doing as president (46% disapproved). 43% want next year’s congressional elections to produce a Democrat-controlled Congress (41% favored a Republican controlled Congress).  

These polling numbers are close. There is no reason for complacency by Republicans or Democrats. However, the thrust of Goldberg’s argument, especially when considered in light of the data showing that slightly more Americans approve of the job Obama is doing and want Democrats to retain control of Congress, is not supported by the polling data. ]

One of the great frustrations of the libertarian-minded right is how Republicans got stuck being “the party of big business.”  

. . . In 2008, Obama raked in more donations from the health sector than John McCain and the rest of the Republican field combined. Drug makers gave Obama $3.58 for every dollar they gave McCain. Pfizer gave to Obama at a 4-1 rate, as did the hospital and nursing home industries.

[AO: On its face, it appears the “health sector” wrote Obama and McCain checks, and gave Obama a bigger check. But what the writer doesn’t say is that the word “health sector” isn’t limited to big businesses. No. It includes the security guard who works at Pfizer and donated to the Obama campaign. All the security guards, secretaries, custodians, scientists, and yes, managers who donated to the Obama campaign hoping for change are counted as “drug makers.”   

Consider that in 2008, of the $95 million dollars in campaign contributions from the health sector, a whopping $67 million (70%) was contributed by individuals. Now if you also consider that 53% went to democrats and 47% went to republicans, you can see how the percent of non-individual contribution likely strongly favored Republicans. In other words, there is no way to be certain but the contributions that were actually made by big businesses likely favored Republicans while the contributions that cam from individuals who work for big businesses likely favored Democrats.  

To put another turn on this, consider 2006 and 2004 contributions. In both years, 62% of total contributions from the health industry went to Republicans. But also in both years, the individual contributions, unlike 2008, were a smaller percentage of the total (about 59% to 60%). In other words, it was only when a tremendous amount of additional individual contributions were pumped into the system did Democrats receive more contributions than Republicans.  

Another obvious evidence form the data is that Democrats getting more contributions from the health industry is a recent phenomenon. Indeed, sine 1990, only in 1992 did Democrats receive more contributions from the health industry compared to Republicans. Yet even in 1992, Democrats barely received more contributions than republicans. The difference was less than 1%.  

Putting all of this together, and using and expanding on the numbers the writer offered, it becomes clear why some might say that republicans are the party of Big Business.]

Reform or Else: Those concerned with fiscal responsibility should be worried about what will happen if proposed health care legislation doesn’t pass. [New York Times]

With reforms pending, recent drug-industry price hikes raise suspicions [Houston Chronicle]

Good News on Premiums: The Congressional Budget Office’s analysis shows that tens of millions of uninsured Americans can be covered without driving up costs for everyone else. [New York Times]

If a war’s worth fighting, isn’t it worth paying for? Congress has raised taxes to fund most of our fighting, but since 9/11 the war bills have been piling up. The Share the Sacrifice Act would change that. [LA Times]

The Analytic Mode: We should embrace the analytical governing style of President Obama, and learn to live without the passion and clarity of his presidential campaign. [New York Times]

GOP folds its big tent: The focus of the Republican “unity” movement seems less ideological than personal: a blind animus toward Obama and all who would cooperate with him. [Boston Globe]

The NFL’s head case [Chicago Tribune]

Dangerous Work: Congress should fix holes in legislation intended to protect whistle-blowers at public companies from being penalized for reporting wrongdoing. [New York Times]

A bad omen in Dubai: The lack of alarm is alarming. [Washington Post]

Xenophobia: Switzerland vs. minarets – An odd ban in Switzerland on an expression of Islamic architecture shows the need for enlightened politicians around the world to defend the principle of pluralism. [Boston Globe]

Needed for Mideast peace: a sense of urgency: Arab and Israeli leaders are convinced that President Obama is in more of a hurry than they are, so they are content to have him do the heavy lifting. [LA Times]

A new momentum for Afghanistan: This is an alliance effort, and the strategy is clear, says the secretary general of NATO. [Washington Post]

Veterans and gun safety: Legislation to loosen restrictions on buying guns by mentally unstable veterans is misguided. [LA Times]

Hispanic farmers deserve justice, too [USA Today]

Facts and figures, myths and mantras: “Truthiness” has exploded alongside a new media that is decidedly not mainstream. It’s now possible to find a group somewhere in Googleland that will agree with anything. [Boston Globe]  

Celebrity affairs: Whose marital transgressions would really surprise you? [Chicago Tribune]

Can Comcast connect? In buying NBC Universal, it must find new ways to court consumers who have many media choices. [LA Times]

Why? Because it’s up there: Missions to the moon and beyond cost little compared with often- intangible benefits. [Philadelphia Inquirer]

————————–

Editorial Note: This feature, “What They Are Saying” will be discontinued on Monday, December 7, 2009 so that we can bring you more annotated opinions.

The Wrong Side of History: Attempts to discredit the health reform proposals now before Congress resemble the flawed arguments made in the 1960s. [New York Times]

Lieberman and others should allow vote on health care [Atlanta Journal-Constitution]

The Breast Brouhaha [New York Times]

Taking a hit on health care? Why, that’s women’s work [Boston Globe]

A new mammogram Rx [Chicago Tribune]

Immigrants and the HPV vaccine: A flawed prescription: The U.S. finally saw the light and dropped its requirement that girls and women seeking a green card be vaccinated against the virus that causes cervical cancer. [LA Times]

The best of bad options: more troops, but not 40,000 [Boston Globe]

Mr. Obama’s Task: To move forward in Afghanistan, President Obama needs to explain the stakes, the aim of the war, the costs and his definition of success. [New York Times]

Afghans want Obama to hold Karzai’s feet to the fire: Additional troops and resources should be conditional on the cleaning up of Afghanistan’s government. [LA Times]

To succeed in Afghanistan, we must fail: The Afghan government must take responsibility for its own survival. [LA Times]

Asking questions: Congressmen are getting cranky about the work of a new independent House ethics board [Philadelphia Inquirer]

Sarah Palin and the conservative descent [Chicago Tribune]

GOP’s procedural torture: Stall tactics are making the Democrats look foolish, ineffectual and incompetent. [Washington Post]

Bailouts revisited [USA Today]

A shield for the public [Chicago Tribune]

Fort Hood shooting hearing is too little, too soon: Sen. Joe Lieberman’s rushed Senate inquiry is unlikely to provide any answers. [LA Times]

In Palestine, a ray of light: A state-building plan that deserves the endorsement of the U.S. [Washington Post]

Operating over the limit: Surgical residents at teaching hospitals are putting themselves and patients at risk by being forced to work shifts of 30 straight hours or more. [Boston Globe]

Veterans Day

·       A set of dog tags, a clipping, a father revealed: A reflection on Veterans Day of a son trying to reconcile two very different sides of his father. [Boston Globe]

·      On Veterans Day, feeling the cost of war: Afghanistan was abstract, until my friend’s flag-draped coffin came home. [LA Times]

·      Healing our troubled vets: Suicide, homelessness, stress disorders — caring for today’s veterans will be a long-term and costly commitment. [LA Times]

·       Homeless on Veterans Day: Washington and communities across the country should support a national drive to end veteran homelessness. [New York Times] 

·      Recalling ‘Mother of Normandy’: A Frenchwoman dedicated herself to tending the graves of American troops. [Philadelphia Inquirer]

·      Veterans Day [USA Today]

·    Standing tall in harm’s way: Still Army-strong – The image of a traumatized military stemming from Fort Hood doesn’t square with reality. [Washington Post]

·    Taking care of our military: It used to be said that for kids, the military took care of its own. Now help is needed. [Washington Post]

Cruel and unusual: No life without parole for juvenile offenders The Supreme Court should rule against life without parole for juvenile offenders. [Houston Chronicle]

A National Disgrace: A court’s overt disregard for the central role of judges in policing executive branch excesses has frightening implications for safeguarding civil liberties. [New York Times]

Obama’s duty to tamp down anti-Muslim bias [Atlanta Journal-Constitution]

Dithering heights: Filibustering Republicans and three Democratic enablers bring the Senate to a halt. [Washington Post]

Pawlenty: GOP’s newest ideological enforcer [Boston Globe]

A comprehensive solution to combustible markets: Barney Frank delineates his committee’s approach to preventing another financial collapse. [Boston Globe]

Cruel, Pointless Games: The case of the American hikers is only the latest example of the Iranian government misusing and undermining its judiciary for political ends. [New York Times]

Bodyguard of lies: The House health-reform bill looked better after I heard a GOP blizzard of falsehoods about it. [Washington Post]

No fount of wisdom for GOP: Health care is much too complicated for
Congress [Chicago Tribune]

The W. and Bill no-show: It’s too bad the two former presidents pulled out of two scheduled evenings of policy debates, er, policy discussions. [LA Times]

After the wall, Bush was right: The celebrations of the 20th  anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall this week failed to note that reunification of Germany was once a topic of great contention. [Boston Globe]

East Germans feel nostalgic for the bad old days [Chicago Tribune]

Army must be on guard for extremism: For Maj. Nidal Hasan, religion might just have been the lens through which his inner disquiet focused itself. [LA Times]

Fort Hood tragedy: Terror or typical workplace violence? [USA Today]

China, the U.S. and Taiwan: The U.S. could use arms sales as leverage to ease tensions between mainland China and Taiwan, pave the way for closer Sino-American ties and promote peace and stability in Asia. [LA Times]

‘One child’ horrors: Chinese government policy is leading to forced
abortions. [Washington Post]

Kabul, Taliban are talking: Karzai’s government is reaching out to the
insurgents – with U.S. support. [Philadelphia Inquirer]

A little steel, please: Afghanistan strategy could use a little passion from a professorial president. [Washington Post]

The Trouble With ‘Zero Tolerance’: Schools should not be criminalizing students for what are essentially normal childhood behaviors. [New York Times]

Getting in holiday spirit when out of work [Chicago Tribune]

Trucks, Trains and Trees: Without a new system for economic development in the timber-rich tropics, the only Amazon your grandchildren will ever know ends in dot-com and sells books. [New York Times]

·       Op-Classic, 1989: Freedom Danced Before My Eyes [New York Times]

·       The rusting and fall of the Iron Curtain: Today is the 20th anniversary of the event that proved the realists wrong. When joyous citizens breached the Berlin Wall with rock music and dancing instead of guns and tanks, the Cold War was over. [Boston Globe]

·      After the wall fell: Too many of the commemorations treat the past two decades as a foregone conclusion. [Washington Post]

·       Cold War nostalgia: In the former East, there is ostalgie. In the West, we too look back in longing: for the symbol of moral clarity and superiority the wall was to us. [LA Times]  

·       After collapse, jubilation, fear, and uncertainty [Boston Globe]

·     Hungary was the first rip in Iron Curtain: Months before the Berlin Wall fell, Hungarians had marched to demand  democracy. [LA Times]

A 2d chance at freedom for juvenile offenders: The United States stands apart from its European allies in sentencing minors to languish in prison until they die. [Boston Globe]

Imprisoning a Child for Life: Sentencing children to life without the possibility of parole for a nonhomicide violates the Eighth amendment. [New York Times]

Healthcare’s hurdles: Democrats in the House get their way, but what we need is real debate. If only the Republicans would oblige. [LA Times]

Why is reforming health care so hard? Broad satisfaction and deep divides hinder change. [Philadelphia Inquirer]

House-passed health plan mixes good ideas, deep flaws [USA Today]

The next bubble? There’s a thin line between promoting recovery and the next crash. [Washington Post]

Who’s afraid of the big, bad Fairness Doctrine? If Rush Limbaugh and his ilk were forced to engage in a reasonable debate, rather than ad hominems, they would forfeit the moral surety — and the seductive rage — that is the central appeal of all demagogues. [Boston Globe]

Climate change bill is in trouble: Political tactics tie up the Senate version, and efforts to salvage it may be too little too late. [LA Times]

Government-haters lose: Apparently some voters think government is necessary — and good. [Washington Post]

Mickey goes rogue [Chicago Tribune]

Disney: The mouse that bored – In some ways, the effort to revitalize Mickey seems sad and desperate [Boston Globe]

Paranoia Strikes Deep: If the G.O.P. essentially shrinks down to a rump party across America, the country could become ungovernable in the idst of a continuing economic disaster. [New York Times]

Letting big money in: Supreme Court watchers are growing anxious about an imminent legal ruling that could open the floodgates of money in politics like never before. [Philadelphia Inquirer]

Red flags at Fort Hood [USA Today]

Voters thinking about jobs, not Obama [Atlanta Journal-Constitution]

The smell test: Canine witnesses need tighter judicial leashes [Houston Chronicle]

Guinness got it: The company’s 250-year legacy of God-inspired good provides myriad lessons for today. Among them: A benevolent corporate vision is good for business, for its employees and for the world. [USA Today]

Liberals and conservatives each have their own intellectual food chains. . . Independents, who are the largest group in the electorate, don’t have any of this.  

Independents are herds of cats who find out what they think through a meandering process of discovery. Right now, independent voters are astonishingly volatile. . .  

According to Gallup, the share of independents who describe their views as conservative has moved from 29 percent last year to 35 percent today. The share of independents who believe there is too much government regulation of business has jumped from 38 percent to 50 percent. Independents are in the position of a person who is feeling gravely ill at the same time he has lost faith in his doctor.  

This does not mean that independents are turning into Republicans. G.O.P. ratings are still in the toilet. But it does mean the Democrats have to fight to regain some of their most crucial supporters. . .  

First Wall Street got disproportionately big, then Washington. It’s time to return to fundamentals. No short-term fixes. Government should do what it’s supposed to do: schools, roads, basic research. It should not be picking C.E.O.’s or setting pay or fizzing up the economy with more debt. It should give people the tools to compete, not rig the competition. Lines of restraint have dissolved, and they need to be restored.  

Independents support the party that seems most likely to establish a frame of stability and order, within which they can lead their lives. They can’t always articulate what they want, but they withdraw from any party that threatens turmoil and risk. As always, they’re looking for a safe pair of hands.  

[AO: David Brooks identifies two problems when he says “First Wall Street got disproportionately big, then Washington.” Yet, his solution, making government smaller, may exacerbate the first problem. This is because all of his recommended solutions only address the second problem. Furthermore, his recommended solutions explicitly include suggestions that would allow the first problem to grow.  

There is also tension is the larger premise of the column. Brooks argues that independents want stability. He states that “They can’t always articulate what they want, but they withdraw from any party that threatens turmoil and risk. As always, they’re looking for a safe pair of hands.” Yet, one problem most conservatives have with the Obama administration is a concern that it is, in a way, removing too much risk. In other words, by accusing President Obama and Democrats of wanting to turn America into an European-style welfare state, Conservatives mean that Obama and Democrats seek to place the government in the position of assuming responsibility for the welfare of its citizens by creating social safety nets. All of this is the opposite of uncertainty and turmoil. As such, it doesn’t explain why, if fear of uncertainty and turmoil is really what is moving independents, why they would move away from Democrats. ]

Two hot buttons: Senate and House bills limit coverage for illegal immigrants and abortion. But critics aren’t satisfied. [LA Times]

The Republican Health Plan: The Republican House bill is not reform: it does little to reduce the number of uninsured, and much of the savings on premiums comes from reduced coverage. [New York Times]

As medical costs take over government, Dems duck … [USA Today]

Italy got it right: CIA renditions are wrong – The conviction of 23 Americans in the abduction of Muslim cleric Abu Omar may be largely symbolic, but it sends an important message to the Obama administration. [LA Times]

A Bad Way to Spend Money: Extending the home buyer’s tax credit is wasteful; instead, Congress should help people avoid foreclosure. [New York Times]

A Honduras hijacked by ideology: How Senate Republicans could throw the country into chaos. [Washington Post]

Afghanistan’s forgotten class: After the fall of the Taliban, many Afghan women shed their burqas, opened schools, entered Parliament. [Boston Globe]

Beyond the Spin: Hope didn’t heal the divide: A year after Obama’s election, America’s racial rifts are deep and persistent. [Philadelphia Inquirer]

The vaccine screw-up [Chicago Tribune]

Corzine can blame himself: By Gabriel Gardner There seems to be a consensus developing in the media that this week’s election results suggest a national GOP resurgence. This fails to recognize that the result in New Jersey was actually due to Gov. Corzine’s shortcomings in office. [Philadelphia Inquirer]

GOP at war with itself: Re-education camps with Sarah Palin and Glen Beck? [Washington Post]

What Reagan was really trying to do at the Berlin Wall [LA Times]

Mistrial by Google: Increasingly, courts have had to warn jurors that blogging or searching the Web during trial jeopardizes the very foundations of the judicial system. [Boston Globe]

Tribal Chiefs and the President: President Obama has taken important steps to address the economic and social problems facing American Indians. [New York Times]

Here’s what’s wrong with World Series: It’s still our greatest sports spectacular. But the World Series needs some fixing. So do the American and National League playoffs that lead up to it. [USA Today]

Our heroes, this day and the year-round [USA Today]

·       Voters remain fearful about the economy. Independent voters are a force to be reckoned with. Everyone wants results. [New York Times]

·       Democrats must focus on getting stuff done. Republicans must move toward the middle, away from fringe party elements. [Charles M. Madigan, Chicago Tribune]

·       Democrats can’t take their current dominance for granted; Republicans will falter if they insist on candidates who conform to rigid national party standards over the interests of local points of view. [USA Today]

·       Republicans must run as center-right problem-solvers or risk the fate of Doug Hoffman in NY-23 [Washington Post]

·      Persistent high unemployment and the spectacle of continued gridlock in Washington threaten Democratic dominance of the political landscape [David S. Broder, Washington post]

·      While the elections were a rebuke to the right wing, Obama and democrats must find a way to reenergize their base [E.J. Dionne Jr., Washington Post]

·      Ignore the post-election analysis. [Ruth Marcus, Washington Post]

These lessons boil down to three messages: results, results, results; focus on improving the economy; and embrace independents. The second lesson, a facus on improving the economy, can be seen as a subset of the first, getting results. Our view is that getting results is the most critical lesson that Democrats must take away from these elections. For Republicans, the lesson requires both getting results and embracing independents.

A referendum on Obama? Not likely [Atlanta Journal-Constitution]

Getting a handle on elections [Chicago Tribune]

The Off-Off-Year Elections: If there were broad messages in the grab bag of contests, they were for both parties. [New York Times]

Voters send cautionary messages to both parties [USA Today]

Time for equal rights for gays is now: Progress is occurring, but Tuesday’s rejection of a same-sex marriage law in Maine shows there’s still a lot of work to be done. [LA Times]

Who ended the Cold War? The fall of the Berlin Wall is as much Gorbachev’s unheralded achievement as it is Reagan’s. [Boston Globe]

1989 was a very good year: The end of the Cold War brought change that sent ripples around the world. [LA Times]

Berlin Wall’s lessons for today: The oxygen of a free society is accurate and trustworthy information. Yet even today, regimes around the world are intent on cutting off the supply. [USA Today]

Deteriorating relationships? The United States only seems to be more polarized [Chicago Tribune]

Welcome sign: U.S. ends a misguided HIV policy [Houston Chronicle]

Women and health care [Washington Post]

Fixing healthcare: Primary care is job No. 1 – Effective reform requires spending for front-line doctors, those who screen for preventable diseases and are a patient’s advocate. [LA Times]

A Powerful Idea on Youth Violence: A Chicago plan that will put high-risk youth on the road to productive lives deserves full support. [New York Times]

Airline safety: I say Obama, you say O’Bama – New requirements by the Transportation Security Administration that names on plane boarding classes exactly match those on personal identifications could present major headaches. [Boston Globe]

Cyclists and motorists on collision course: A physician’s conviction in a bicycle crash case reveals a noxious form of road rage. [LA Times]

For university presidents, a pay cut is in order: Presidents at the top research universities should be embarrassed by 2008 average salary increases of more than 15 percent. [Boston Globe]

The Facebook grave site [Chicago Tribune]

Take the Shot: The most vulnerable people and those in critical jobs should take the swine flu vaccine. [New York Times]

One mom’s rapid conversion to swine flu vaccine believer [USA Today]

Obama must stand firm on Honduras crisis: A U.S.-brokered deal to return ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya to office is unraveling, and the Obama administration seems to be wavering. [LA Times]

Iran’s abuse goes on: The problem is not limited to Tehran’s illicit nuclear activities. [Washington Post]