October News

Slate's Dahlia Lithwick had a very interesting column this weekend cautioning her fellow liberals against smearing Justice Clarence Thomas as they mount their defense of Judge Sonia Sotomayor:

The temptation to smack back and argue that we deserve to seat Sotomayor because Thomas was a lousy affirmative-action pick who turned into a third-rate justice is hard to resist. But it's flat wrong. Liberals achieve nothing by suggesting that Thomas' elevation to the high court was preposterous on its face or that his tenure there has been a disgrace....

Claims that Thomas is too stupid to ask questions and in constant peril of embarrassing himself at the court are just not that different than claims that Sotomayor is mediocre. Nobody who has followed Thomas' 18-year career at the Supreme Court believes him to be a dunce or a Scalia clone. Whether you accept Jan Crawford Greenburg's claim that Thomas' constitutional theories are so forceful that they have shaped Scalia's or you believe the more common view that Thomas has a deeply reasoned and consistent judicial philosophy that differs dramatically from those of the court's other conservatives, accusations that he's been a dim bulb are just false. They also reveal that the name-calling that originates now, during the confirmation process, engenders a mythology that can never be erased.

It's nice to see Lithwick make this point (even if she has done a little name-calling of her own). Whether you agree with his opinions or not, Thomas has quite obviously proven himself on the Court. Yet the ridiculous idea that he's less capable than his fellow justices still persists, even among people that ought to know better.

Geithner told China yesterday that the Obama Administration was committed to bringing down the US deficit.
Really?

Barack Obama will quadruple the deficit this year.

Geithner also told China that Team Obama wants to bring down the deficit next year from 12.9% of GDP this year to 3% of GDP next year (a near impossibility)...
Or, in other words, back into Bush territory.

In response, China told Geithner to show them some numbers!
Bloomberg reported, via Bizblogger:

In an interview with Bloomberg Television May 21, Geithner said the administration?"s goal is to cut the budget shortfall to 3 percent of gross domestic product or smaller. That would be down from a projected 12.9 percent this year.

Seventeen of 23 Chinese economists polled in connection with Geithner?"s visit said holdings of Treasuries are a ?Sgreat risk? for the nation?"s economy, according to a Chinese state media report yesterday. Still, the majority argued against quickly cutting them, the Beijing-based Global Times reported.

Geithner, 47, needs to show how the U.S. can prevent the value of China?"s investment from being eroded by a weaker dollar or by the inflation that might be stoked by the stimulus money being pumped into the U.S. economy, according to Yu.

?SIt will be helpful if Geithner can show us some arithmetic,? he said.

...The Treasury released a transcript May 30 of a briefing Geithner gave last week at the Foreign Press Center in Washington. In it, he said he will stress with Chinese officials that he?"s intent on maintaining the dollar?"s strength.

?SI will, of course, make it clear that we are committed to a strong dollar, that we are committed to bringing our fiscal deficits down over the medium term to a sustainable place, to a sustainable level,? Geithner said in the briefing May 27. ?SWe believe in a strong dollar. A strong dollar is in the U.S. interest.?

This doesn't sound good at all.
No wonder China is concerned.

The US has lost 16,000 jobs each day since Obama signed the Spendulus Bill and sunk the US economy further into debt.

Over at NRO I have an article suggesting that the Tea Party movement adopt as its program what I am calling “Reagan’s Unfinished Agenda.”? In one sentence, it describes a way of going on offense, and getting out of the defensive crouch that is the dominant posture of conservatives at the moment.

… starting in 1987, Reagan offered a more comprehensive package he called the ?SEconomic Bill of Rights.? In addition to the balanced-budget and line-item veto amendments, Reagan proposed three additional amendments that would impose a federal spending limit, require a two-thirds vote of the House and Senate for any tax increases, and prohibit wage and price controls.

Robert Samuelson finds that the American media's infatuation with Barack Obama is one of the great unreported stories of our time. He observes that Obama has inspired a collective fawning ; Samuelson manfully seeks to rectify it. He observes that the main check on Obama's power comes from congressional Democrats, who largely share his goals. The infatuation matters, Samuelson writes, because Obama's ambitions are so grand.

James Lewis agrees. "Stalin himself couldn't have wished for a more slobbering press corps," writes Lewis. For contrast with the American media, Lewis presents Telegraph "polemical commentator" Gerald Warner: "Barack Obama: all the bad guys are giving President Pantywaist the finger." To be fair, however, Ralph Peters had much the same to say yesterday in the New York Post.