Sarah Palin Could Be Right-ca1816

UnCategorized When Sarah Palin recently resigned as Governor of Alaska, most .mentators wrote her political obituary. Without a power base in the statehouse, it was said, she would have no chance at a national role. Her somewhat stumbling resignation speech was taken as a proof that the Palin phenomenon was fading away. It is of course possible that the governor truly wanted out, her will crumbling under the pressure of investigations, media harassment and alleged ethical and family issues. There is on the other hand a much more interesting explanation: that her ambition is intact and growing, but that she wants out of government because it is not a good place to be right now. Sarah Palin has extraordinary political talent, and she can raise a crowd with her little finger. That talent may be telling her that government as it now stands is headed for a shipwreck. If so, she will be better off outside than in, confident that the one who jumps ship first will get most of the credit. The United States is not in good shape right now, and despite the repeated predictions that the economy will soon bottom out evidence of any improvement is hard to find. The previous administration has been blamed for much of the mess, and the current one has promised Change. Yet a close look shows both administrations to have remarkably similar policies, with the new almost seamlessly continuing the policies of the old. Let us consider: Both have achieved vast expansions of government power and influence. Both chose massive bailouts and unchecked deficit spending as the preferred means to restart the economy. Bush ran large deficits, Obama runs huge ones. Neither put any check on congressional spending. Both were highly supportive of the financial industry. Bush allowed it to run loose until it crashed. Obama is propping it up with trillions in tax money. Both administrations have run a loose mo.ary policy. Obama has continued the Bush policy of military expansion in the Middle East and Central Asia. Bush gave us the Medicare drug benefit, and Obama wants government-funded health care. There are other similarities, but the above should suffice. More importantly, both administrations have relied for political support on the hard core wing of their respective parties: Bush on the neo-conservatives, Obama on the big-government liberals. We know what this attitude did for the Republicans: Barack Obama in the White House, a Democrat-controlled House and a Democratic super-majority in the Senate. What it will do to the Democrats is still in the future, but the early signs are already there: Obama’s support among the key independent constituency is dropping rapidly. It is of course possible that the current administration will somehow pull it off and resolve the crisis. But if, as suggested above, they are only enlarging on the mistakes of the previous one, the chances are slim to none. So far the hard core of either political party has been in control of policy. But if the crisis lingers and the independents peel away, the majority of voters will drift to the center, where the numerical majority will reside. So the unthinkable could be happening: by their repeated blunders and their disregard for the ordinary voter the established parties have truly opened the door to a third entity, party or coalition, giving it a fighting chance to succeed. Such an event occurred only once in U.S. history, with the birth of the Republican Party in 1854. It could well happen again in our time. Maybe this is what Sarah Palin is looking forward to. If she isn’t, someone else soon will. About the Author: 相关的主题文章: