I have remarked in a few places, perhaps published or perhaps on the radio or both – can’t really recall, that Obama has studied intensely the first Clinton term and is likely to have learned not to lurch too violently and over-reach in leftist policies in the first two years. Well, Victor Davis Hanson persuasively disagrees.
And for all the talk of a new realignment and the end of the old conservative regime, 2008 is more likely explained as a once in a lifetime alignment of the stars (cf. Carter in 1976): the mid-September meltdown that ruined McCain’s lead; the normal weariness after eight years of incumbency; two wars; a charismatic young and path-breaking Democratic candidate, a liberal’s renouncing of public campaign financing to amass $600 million.
If such reasoning were true, then the sentiment might be ‘strike now’, while the House, Senate, media, and indeed the world are all on board since they may not be either six months from now, much less two years from now. And that would suggest, I think, quick action on the fairness doctrine, an end to union secret ballots, a stop on a lot of drilling (all this in the short term costs nothing), as well as hefty income and payroll tax increases — in short, the big government Euro-model at home, and the UN/we-are-the-world model abroad.
So maybe because the election did not show a radical and permanent shift in the electorate, it is more, not less, likely that we will see a leftward lurch, especially on structural things like unions, open borders cum amnesty, and fairness doctrine/talk radio, etc. that would all be seen as investments in ensuring more liberal voters in the next elections.
Very solid reasoning and equally unfortunate. Note that the ‘Fairness Doctrine’ implementation needs no Congressional passage or Presidential order. The next FCC chairman can simply issue decree.
And the next FCC chairman is likely to be… the last FCC chairman who oversaw the ‘Fairness Doctrine’ implementation and maintenance before Reagan replaced him.