What America Needs
July 18th, 2008 at 09:53am Mark Noonan
From Victor Davis Hanson:
Our 21st-century paralysis is surprising. The United States is not materially exhausted. We sit atop trillions of dollars worth of untapped oil, gas, coal, shale and tar sands.
America could mine more uranium, and reprocess fuels to build hundreds of nuclear plants. American agriculture is blessed with the world’s best soils, most developed irrigation systems, and most productive and astute farmers.
There is as much sun and wind in the western United States as anywhere in the world. We have plenty of natural resources and the know-how to make all the wood, steel and cement products we need.
A new, hungrier generation of Americans will have to want to reclaim our pre-eminence and change the national attitude. It must be ready to pay off generations of debt rather than borrow, build rather than sue, and drill rather than whine.
It’s time to honor rather than avoid and outsource physical labor. Our children are healthy enough to cut our own lawns and pick our fruit. Let’s also hope they want to hear a lot more about Gen. David Petraeus’ success, and a lot less of Madonna’s latest psychodramas.
But just as importantly, what Americans need now is leadership to get moving again — rather than more platitudes about hope, squabbling about race and gender, and endless rhetoric about who is really a maverick or a true conservative or the most liberal. What we need to know from our two presidential candidates are specifics about how to jumpstart America.
So, how many more barrels of oil, refineries and megawatts will America produce –and when and how? How much debt will the next administration retire — and when and how. How and when will our schools return to knowledge-based rather than the present (and failing) therapeutic curriculum?
Americans, in short, should be tired of hearing that we are a post-industrial, postmodern, post-anything society. Instead, we want to be known again as a can-do producer nation that sweats as much as it thinks. And the confident presidential candidate who can best assure us of that will surely win this election.
My answer, naturally, is that McCain is the better man to do these things - and, indeed, McCain has been tacking towards a new understanding of American strength, and the real point of American conservatism (it isn’t just a powerful military and low taxes - those are incidental to conservatism, not central). While there is a rank foolishness in Democratic class war rhetoric (especially when at least a plurality of the rich back the Democrats - and its probably an absolute majority), no conservative can view corporate America with anything other than dismay at the way they’ve made of mess of things in housing, automobiles and finance. We’ve been so busy, on the right, fighting the War on Terrorism and fighting off socialism that we’ve forgot that a two by four needs, at times, to be directed at corporate America, too. All conservatives, schooled as we are in understanding the inherent weakness of large bureaucracies, should understand almost instinctively that a large corporate bureaucracy is only slightly better than a large government bureaucracy.
It is time for us to really get America moving again - a comprehensive insistence that government get out of the way, but corporations be held to the highest possible standards of honesty; an insistence that the lawsuits stop; a demand that NIMBYism on things like oil drilling and refineries be slammed hard; a realistic approach which gathers our immense strength and applies it to our pressing problems. And, most importantly, a rigid defense of the family - against intrusive government bureaucrats and corrupt teacher’s unions, to be sure, but also against corporate greed which views the family 14 year old as a prime target for sex and violence marketing.
Its all of a piece - for many decades we were focused on defeating the USSR. Lately we’ve been concentrating on the War on Terrorism - but its does us no good to win the war abroad only to lose it at home. What America needs, from top to bottom, is conservatism - conservative economics, conservative morals, conservative government. McCain may be the man to do it, but Obama is definitely not the man for the hour. This is no time for intra-movement fights over alleged purity, but it is the time to fight it out on each issue for what is really best for America - conservatism.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Democrats, Republicans
15 Comments Add your own
1. Calvert | July 18th, 2008 at 10:27 am
While talking about the war in Afghanistan yesterday, John McCain predictably went after Barack Obama, saying Obama “has no strategy.” It was an odd attack, given the fact that McCain had just flip-flopped on his Afghanistan policy, and embraced Obama’s strategy as his own.
Here’s McCain yesterday, talking about his plan to send more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, in order to bring an Iraq-like strategy to the country.
The key quote, of course, was pretty straightforward: “[O]ur commanders on the ground in Afghanistan say that they need at least three additional brigades. Thanks to the success of the surge, these forces are becoming available, and our commanders in Afghanistan must get them.”
What’s important to realize, though, is that while Obama has been arguing for a year that he wants to send additional troops to Afghanistan, McCain has always held the opposite position, opposing the deployment of more U.S. troops, and arguing that any additional troops come from NATO.
Yesterday, however, McCain reversed course, change his position, and embraced Obama’s policy as his own. As Josh Marshall explained, “So let’s all say it out loud: McCain is now copying Obama’s position on Afghanistan. And with troops that he doesn’t have since he’s against pulling any out of Iraq.”
But it gets worse. McCain has actually held multiple positions on Afghanistan in the last seven days.
2. Fredrick Schwartz | July 18th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
1. Calvert | July 18th, 2008 at 10:27 am
Maybe we can get Elton John to write a campaign song for John McCain and call it “Finger in the Wind!”
3. Mark Noonan | July 18th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
Calvert,
Except for the fact that John McCain’s views were based on a desire for American victory and Obama’s views based on a desire to hate President Bush and the liberation of Iraq, you’ve really got a point there…
4. Mark Noonan | July 18th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Fred,
You’re paid to come here, aren’t you? I mean, I don’t think I’ve seen anything other than mindless talking points out of you lately…
5. Retired Spook | July 18th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
I don’t think I’ve seen anything other than mindless talking points out of you lately…
The key word being “mindless”.
6. Tractatus | July 18th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
Obama’s views based on a desire to hate President Bush and the liberation of Iraq
mindless talking points
Uh-huh.
7. Electro | July 18th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
And this is not a talking point? This is infantile.
But hey, as long as you can sleep Noonan.
Good stuff.
I love knee slappers like this.
8. at Desert Conservative&hellip | July 18th, 2008 at 6:36 pm
[…] What America Needs […]
9. FmrMarine | July 18th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Mark;
NObama wants to raise taxes, tax the oil companies to LOWER the cost of oil,
he will exceed carter on destroying this countries economy, and very well may launch us into a civil war…..nice change, orchestrated by a racist, marxist, mulatto, community leader, crooked chicago, empty suit.
10. Dave Rave | July 19th, 2008 at 8:38 am
The Republican Right keeps on using socialism to solve its unchecked capitalism problem.
First we bail out Bear-Sterns, now we bail out FannieMae and FreddyMac and there have been others before.
These companies wanted to be free of regulations so they must pay the consequences. If FannieMae is too big to fail, then it should go into government receivership and become a nonprofit institution. Either that or allowed to sink as the rules a capitalism apply.
11. Nevada Pundit | July 19th, 2008 at 11:24 am
Dave,
Fannie and Freddy hold or back 1/3 of all the home loans in the US. If you look at the damage the current mortgage crisis is causing where, in the worst of areas, 8 to 10 percent of the loans are troubled think what would happen by putting another 33% on the table.
Now I do think that it was rather irresponsible for the government to allow them such a free reign especially when they have such heavy government subsidys but to allow them to go under would create a backlash unprecidented to the american people.
BTW, I do know that not all loans from fannie and freddie are bad but the banks don’t have the capital to buy those loans, so where do they go?
Also, without the backing of F & F the banks lending critirea would tighten much worse than it already is. This, of course, would drop home values a lot more.
12. Ray Gunn | July 19th, 2008 at 11:57 am
I found an excellent commentary on the Dailykos.
It explains the difference between Republicans and Democrats.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/7/18/93041/0587/7/553243
13. Mark Noonan | July 19th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
Ray,
Damn, you liberals are on to us! Our “Racist Plan of Vast, Neocon, Right Wing War for Oil Conspiracy” is unmasked! Whatever shall we do?
14. french student | July 19th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
Mark
Do you realise that actually democrats have historically been better for the economy than republicains?
on this link
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hale-stewart/proof-democrats-are-bette_b_113238.html
you will find that on average, democrats are better for GDP growth and employment growth, they tend to reduce economic inequalities, AND get a better-balanced budget than the republicains (they may “tax end spend”, but republicains tend to borrow and spend even more). Even Wall Street grows more under democrats, for Pete’s sake!
Now you can say that what your country needs is conservative economic policies…. But facts and history disagree with you.
15. french student | July 19th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
crickets chirping….
Leave a Comment
Please report any inappropriate or abusive comments to abuse@blogsforvictory.com. Please include the blog entry title and the comment number.
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed