Posted by
KWG on Monday, June 09, 2008 5:16:02 PM
Paul Krugman, Ph.D Economist, known for his work in international trade theory, has drawn on his vast expanse of knowledge to inform us about…
racism. I assume it’ll be about supply and demand.
Take, for example, that old standby of conservatives: denouncing Big Government. Last week John McCain’s economic spokesman claimed that Barack Obama is President Bush’s true fiscal heir, because he’s “dedicated to the recent Bush tradition of spending money on everything.”
Interesting thought, Paul. McCain has gained a reputation as a deficit hawk and someone who has harped on government spending throughout his Senate career, and Obama has proposed a very radical spending plan. Perhaps this association is worth exploring a little further.
Now, the truth is that the Bush administration’s big-spending impulses have been largely limited to defense contractors.
This is just off the top of my head, but I could have sworn that the largest beneficiary has been the AARP. But that’s just me, and “facts,” getting in the way. Carry on.
But more to the point, the McCain campaign is deluding itself if it thinks this issue will resonate with the public.
This is an important argument to make, because the Republican Party has made this part of its platform for years. Hope you brought facts!
For Americans have never disliked Big Government in general. In fact, they love Social Security and Medicare, and strongly approve of Medicaid — which means that the three big programs that dominate domestic spending have overwhelming public support.
You’ve gotten it backward, Krugz. (That’s your thug name. When I refer to Krugz on the pickup court, they know I’m talkin’ serious.) Americans very much disapprove of big government in general, but do approve of big government in specific. The success in the public’s eyes of these government programs you’ve named is a disconnect on the part of the people, not a synchrony.
If Ronald Reagan and other politicians succeeded, for a time, in convincing voters that government spending was bad, it was by suggesting that bureaucrats were taking away workers’ hard-earned money and giving it to you-know-who: the “strapping young buck” using food stamps to buy T-bone steaks, the welfare queen driving her Cadillac. Take away the racial element, and Americans like government spending just fine.
There was no need for “success.” Since the founding of this nation, Americans have had a basic hostility toward government. I know you’re an econ guy, Paul, but read some Jefferson.
Also, apparently, Ronald Reagan was out there convincing the American people of this as late as 2006.
The cause of a right turn, as Mr. Perlstein shows, was white fear of urban disorder — and the associated fear that fair housing laws would let dangerous blacks move into white neighborhoods. “Law and order” became the rallying cry of right-wing politicians, above all Richard Nixon, who rode that fear right into the White House.
Law and order candidates: racist.
Krugman then goes on to talk about how racism has receded in the past few years (due to Bill Clinton, of course), and how this has paved the way for Barack Obama. Hillary Clinton’s defeat, however, is a sign that we’re a relentlessly misogynistic country. Ugh. It’s plain to see that if the opposite had happened (Hillary defeats Barack), all these articles would be written in an opposite way.