Questions about the Economy, John McCain, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama

Posted by Jason Easley on 01.23.2008

I have managed to resurrect myself, and return with questions about stimulating the economy, John McCain, and the mudslinging between Clinton and Obama.

In case you are wondering where I have been, I was in the hospital for nearly a week. I collapsed last Monday, and was diagnosed as a diabetic. To put the severity of my condition into context, I came within 3 hours of dying. I wish I could tell you that it was a frightening experience or that it was just like TV, and I knew my life was in jeopardy, but I didn't. I thought I was suffering from severe dehydration, and once the IV kicked in, I thought that I would be fine. For the first time, since I started writing a few years ago, I am sitting in front of my keyboard wondering what to write about. This experience has given me a new perspective on the health care debate in this country, but honestly, that is a topic that I am not ready to cover. So if you will bear with me, here are some questions that I have been pondering lately.

If the president can't control the economy what is the point of a stimulus package?

Let's be realistic, an economic stimulus package such as that being negotiated among the White House and Congressional Democrats will do nothing to actually help the economy. This is a political gesture whose purpose is twofold. First, this package was intended to resolve the jitters among investors and the stock market. The market has been irrational and acting on nothing more than emotion and speculation for over a year now. This is a market that is being driven by fear. It is also a market that has lost confidence in the current administration to make sound economic policy decisions.

Secondly, any package is an attempt at an election year inoculation against voter outrage over a stumbling economy. The only things more hollow than the proposed stimulus package are the plans being offered up by the presidential candidates. By the time whoever wins this election takes office, the recession should be over. The only difference between the two parties is who gets the money under each plan. The Republicans are still using a version of trickledown economics. They believe is tax cuts for those at the top, and business. Democrats want to perk up the economy by boosting spending from the bottom up. The reality is that neither plan will work. Government can soften a recession, but they can't solve it. The economy has to work through its own down cycles.

Is John McCain the 2008 version of Bob Dole?

In 1996, the Republican Party rewarded the long term loyalty of Bob Dole, but nominating him to run against, then incumbent president Bill Clinton. It looks like we could be seeing history repeat itself in 2008, as veteran party war horse John McCain continues to gain steam in the race for the GOP nomination. Rank and file Republicans really don't like McCain, but Rudy Giuliani has completely imploded, and Huckabee and Romney raise as many questions as they answer. This means that McCain could win the nomination by default.

While a McCain nomination would pose some problems for any Democratic nominee, he has his own problems. I personally can't see a pro-war candidate winning in November. Then there is McCain's position on immigration. However, the big problem for McCain in a general election contest is his age. If he serves one term, he will be 75. Two terms of service would put him near age 80. Can you imagine the visual dichotomy of the image of John McCain and Barack Obama standing side by side on a debate stage this fall? I think the Republicans are desperate for a credible candidate, and McCain may be the best that they can do.

Are you tired of the mudslinging?

Over the past week or so I have had to watch a lot of TV, and I am sick of the mudslinging between the Clinton and Obama campaigns. The Democratic race is no longer about the issues. It is about how many outrageous charges the Clinton campaign can make stick to Obama. Perhaps the most outrageous is this warped idea that Obama is a Reagan lover, and the implication that he is a conservative, and Hillary Clinton is the true liberal in the race. The Clintons are angry that Obama had the nerve to dismiss Bill's legacy.

Bill Clinton did have a transformative effect on American politics. He is a big part of the reason why the nation is still engaged in partisan warfare, and our government can get nothing done. The Clinton era should best be remembered for the term gridlock. Most of the Clinton policies were stolen from the Republicans. His welfare reform was a GOP idea, as was NAFTA. Traditionally, Republicans had been the ones concerned about balanced budgets. Obama was correct to point out that Bill Clinton had no lasting impact on public policy. The mudslinging we are seeing now will grow by the power of 10 if Hillary Clinton is the nominee. If she is elected, you can expect 4-8 years of gridlock and bitter partisan battles.