"It's the Economy, Stupid" after all
If there is one thing I know absolutely nothing about, it's economics. I seem to share that ignorance with John McCain by his own admission. And lo and behold, the economy has turned around and bitten us on the ass. As I watch my TIAA/CREF account sink slowly in the West I ponder what to do next. Don't know.
Apparently neither does McCain, at least according to this editorial in today's Wall Street Journal. They seem livid over McCain's talk of the economy. It's as bad as Obama's!
I suppose we could ask Phil Graham or Carly Fiorina to explain, but they both seem to have been "disappeared"* from the campaign.
UPDATE: Professor Bainbridge is also not amused. Though, like the WSJ, he thinks Obama would be worse. That's getting to be a fine distinction.
*a tactic sometimes used in Latin American dictatorships. unfriendly to the US. Like Spain.
.
Labels: economics, McCain, presidential campaign
posted by Clemens @ 9:19 AM
4 comments
4 Comments:
Don't you mean "friendly" to the United States? It happens in government unfriendly to the United States, too, but not in Latin America as I recall, and they usually use a different word.
Depends on how you feel about the old military regime in Argentina (though I admit, that technically you may be right). In Argentina the word was "Desaparecido" - the disappeared. Or do you mean the word they use for being friendly to the US?
IIRC, the old regime in Argentina that started the practice on a huge scale was treated as friendly by members of our gov't - esp Jeanne Kirkpatrick, Sec of State (the Argentine military had been the topic of her PhD thesis, and you know where that can lead an academic). I think it was the first time I heard the argument that authoritarian regimes were salvagable but socialist regimes were not.
Somehow she gave the generals the impression that the US liked them so much it would turn a blind eye to their invading the Falklands (aka las Malvinas). They were absolutely shocked when we turned around and supported Maggie Thatcher.
Then they became a lot less 'friendly.' I had some Argentine friends at the time. They were delusional about the whole subject of the Falklands so it probably wasn't Kirkpatrick's fault.
I think it was the first time I heard the argument that authoritarian regimes were salvagable but socialist regimes were not.
Hmm. I'd like to think that recent history sort of bore that out: Taiwan, South Korea, and other authoritarian regimes democratized, whereas Russia, Cuba, Vietnam, and China… I wonder what she would say about the Bush administration, circa today.
I had some Argentine friends at the time. They were delusional about the whole subject of the Falklands so it probably wasn't Kirkpatrick's fault.
Sort of like Russians & Georgians when it comes to Ossetia? :-)
Ossetia - er- ALANIA forever! (Sung to the tune of "Oh, Freedonia!").
As for the authoritarian/socialist theme, I would put Libya and Iran in possible line for the authoritarian to something like democracy. I am not sure that some socialist regimes might not be able to pull it off. Perhaps Cuba, less likely China.
And then there is Russia. But then that requires a longer post.
Post a Comment
<< Home