Barry becomes 'Agreeable'

Byron York logs quotes from Obama in the first debate:

“I think Senator McCain’s absolutely right that we need more responsibility…”

“Senator McCain is absolutely right that the earmarks process has been abused…”

“He’s also right that oftentimes lobbyists and special interests are the ones that are introducing these…requests…”

“John mentioned the fact that business taxes on paper are high in this country, and he’s absolutely right…”

“John is right we have to make cuts…”

“Senator McCain is absolutely right that the violence has been reduced as a consequence of the extraordinary sacrifice of our troops and our military families…”

“John — you’re absolutely right that presidents have to be prudent in what they say…”

“Senator McCain is absolutely right, we cannot tolerate a nuclear Iran…”

Does this mean Obama is changing his vote?

Dr. Frankenstein's Wall Street

"Americans should remember that Frankenstein was not the name of the monster but of its creator" -- Victor Davis Hanson

Regarding Choices

If you come to a fork in the road, take it. -- Yogi Berra


Selwyn Duke wrote an article that stopped me in my tracks this week.

As many of you know, I have advocated the investigation of third party candidates as the eminently rational choice for your vote in November. After all, neither the republicans nor the democrats have much of a platform to offer, and there are dozens of people you or I would rather have as president than either of these choices. In fact, I can think of three that are actually running for president that are better qualified and preferable as choices, so why not pick one of those instead?

I have rejected many arguments against third party voting before now. I could hold each of them up to the light and see that they reflect only the self interests of the parties themselves. Then, Mr. Duke put an analogy in play that shows a few more facets.

Picture a bus traveling down the highway. At each exit ramp, you have exactly two choices. You can move right, or stay left. The third party candidates reside in an alternate place somewhere else that is not immediately accessible. To get to one of these better places, Duke advises that you would need Captain Kirk's help. So, as a practical matter, it is always about two choices.

His argument is that every choice presented in the past leads to the sequence of choices in the future. As much as we'd like to visualize the right guy in office, the best we can hope for is to take an exit that doesn't take us very far away from our desired destination.

In many ways, choices have been made all along, and the real leaders are either not involved in the race, or have already been eliminated. To belabor the analogy once, it's like we missed the best three exits, and now have a choice between one exit and another.

Perhaps choosing between them is a more rational choice to make than one of wishing for a warp in the space-time continuum precisely on November 4th. I recommend reading the article.

Cargo Cult Economics

If Reagan offered "voodoo economics", as his opponents charged, Obama is selling Cargo Cult economics. After World War II, New Guinea aborigines build model airfields to entice the gods to bring them "cargo". They watched American soldiers build airstrips and land cargo planes, and sought to accomplish the same through sympathetic magic. Given the culture of the aborigines and their observations, anthropologists aver, making radios and observation towers out of straw and coconuts was a rational response. Something similar might be said of the position of the American middle class. Spengler, Asia Times, Jan 29, 2008.

So, what is it, exactly, that this man proposes to do? Raise the minimum wage? Okay, more unemployment. Is that what you want? No? You want more jobs? Oh, okay, so we need to become competitive with China, Russia, Brazil, and India. But that means lowering the cost of production. That will at least require energy as cheap as it is in these other countries. We can't drill? No Nuclear power? Oh, okay, we'll invest in solar energy. and wind energy. That's all well and good. So, what do we do when the sun doesn't shine or the wind doesn't blow? Might as well stay at home.

Like it or not, we are competing with the rest of the world to supply the goods and services that enrich our lives, and those of the rest of the world. When we saddle ourselves with significant competitive disadvantages, we had better have competitive advantages that greatly outweigh them.

So is there any competitive advantage to be gained in any of Obama's policies?