Back on the grid

Well that was a great vacation. I spent a few days ignoring politics as much as I could; I didn't read a newspaper item about politics, despite subscribing to the LA Times and the Financial Times; didn't check a blog or news Website of any kind.

It lasted about three days. Maybe four. Then I started feeling the urge again.

But it was a wonderful three or four days. Really cleared my head. It was particularly useful to take a step back from the partisanship on both sides. Much as I agree with the progressive/liberal side, I also very clearly remember the political correctness of the 1980's, and sort of still have some scars from that. So I am very sensitive to liberals enforcing ideological purity, particularly with invective and sarcasm aimed at people on their side with different approaches or ideas for reaching a similar goal. Not a big fan of that.

So what did I miss? Some guy named Joe Wilson embarrassed himself and his party by heckling Obama during his speech to Congress. I still haven't watched that, but plan to. I think the House did the right thing by voting formal disapproval. I am a big fan of respecting your ideological opponents, but self-respect also demands that you stand up for yourself occasionally, and I think that's what the Democrats did. I would like to think that I would have the same position if the situation were reversed. I would like to go on record as advocating the same penalty for a Democrat if he/she heckles a Republican president.

The healthcare debate is crystallizing. Is Max Baucus a fool or a hero? Right now, it depends on the time of day, and where you stand on the public option. At the very least, Republicans cannot say that they were not given an opportunity to have their voices heard - Baucus gave them every chance to contribute. If they don't like the final product, that's fine, but they can't claim that Democrats shoved it down their throats.

But if the bill passes without some kind of public option, liberals, particularly the Kossacks, are going to crucify Baucus for giving away the store and not getting anything back. That does look like a questionable strategy.

Obama imposed tariffs on Chinese tires. My question is: was this justified by treaty and/or international law? I haven't been able to find out. I'm assuming it's a bump in the road - I have seen many other trade disputes flare up and then dissipate. My guess is that that will happen here.

Doha round collapses

The Doha round of trade talks, under the auspices of the World Trade Organization, have collapsed. I'm not surprised, and I don't think many people were. Free trade is not exactly a popular cause these days.

I blame Bush. I haven't followed the talks closely enough to assign him blame for a particular reason, but America's reputation in the world clearly has not helped. People do not want to give up ground to a bully, and that's how Bush is perceived around the world.

There are two things here that conservatives have not come to terms with. First, George Bush simply is not a very good politician. One reason conservatives lionize Reagan is that he was a great politician. For me, that's a compliment, not an insult. Evaluations of political ability are, for me, value neutral. A good politician can be a good or bad person, just like a good quarterback might be a good or bad person. The ends for which a politician uses their ability is different from that ability itself. Reagan was a great politician because he was able to work with people he disagreed with, and because he was able to maneuver himself to take advantage of political developments. Reagan had a fine sense of what was possible at what moment, and how far he could push something. Bush has no clue on that score. He just does what he wants, and damn the consequences. He's also incompetent at explaining complex ideas. But what is particularly damning about Bush is that his opponents simply don't trust him. They assume that he is out for his own good, and does not care about them. His refusal to compromise on so many things gives others very little incentive to compromise with him.

The second thing conservatives have not come to terms with is a corollary of the first: the fact that Bush is not a good politician has caused immense damage to the causes that conservatives hold dear. The failure of the Doha round is a big deal, particularly for American corporations, and they will be disappointed in Bush. There is no possible way that Republicans can blame Democrats for this, try as they might (and I'm sure they will try). This has been a project of the Bush administration, and its failure is Bush's fault. And with this failure, the cause of free trade is going to lose significant momentum. It is always ironic to me that Clinton was actually a far more effective proponent of free trade than Bush.