It hasn’t yet been officially launched, so I’ll unofficially (off the record) refer you to FRC Action’s new blog The Cloakroom, where you’ll find Tom McClusky and crew hanging out these days. That’s right, Tom has been hiding in the cloakroom. Head on over to check out their new digs.
(Remember, this is all off the record, and you never heard it from me…)
Here’s some of the buzz coming from the blogosphere today.
Watching Chris Wallace interviewing President Obama’s economics advisor, Austan Goolsbee, yesterday, I was struck by a curious phrase Goolsbee used: “the commanding heights of our economy.” Gosh, that phrase sounded familiar. Goolsbee was responding to Wallace’s question about the President’s 2010 budget message. That document is grandly titled: “An Era of Responsibility.” Actually, “an era” is too modest for this President. His budget proposals will impose crushing debts not simply on the living, but on millions yet unborn, on generations yet to come, if they come. We should be thinking at least in terms of epoch, even perhaps an Obaman Age.
Wallace quoted from the President’s budget message. “While middle class families have been playing by the rules…those at the commanding heights have not…” Goolsbee defended the use of that term: “The President is saying those at the commanding heights have not played by the rules.” Clear enough. Rep. Barney Frank was next up. “I would go back to your conversation with Mr. Goolsbee,” the chairman of the Financial Services Committee replied as Wallace pressed him for specifics. “This is an example of people at the commanding heights of the economy misbehaving, abusing the system,” Frank said.
There it was again. I knew I’d heard that phrase before. Fortunately, we have Google so I didn’t have to go rummaging through my cluttered basement—talk about torture—among my old Russian history books.
“The commanding heights” is a phrase first used by Lenin. He used it in 1922. It’s when he introduced his NEP—the New Economic Policy—in the newborn and struggling Soviet Union. Under that policy, the severity of Communism’s seizure of the land was relaxed somewhat. Lenin had little choice. “Collectivizing” the land had brought massive famine. Millions were dying.
But Lenin reassured worried Marxists all over the world that he would not betray the world’s first successful Communist revolution. His Bolshevik regime retained control over the commanding heights of the economy—the big industries.
Does this suggest some dark, secretive, Leninist plot by the new Obama administration?
No, that’s not what I’m suggesting. I do say that we are now governed by a group that is not itself fully aware of the source of their ideas.
In a free economy, there really are no commanding heights. Businesses and economic sectors rise and fall with the vicissitudes of the market. Railroads, once dominant, give way to highway trucking (and perhaps back again). An information economy supersedes smokestack industries—and the cleanup of our rivers, lakes, and skies offers testimony to the changes.
Now we are entering a period in which the majority in government view themselves-consciously or not—as occupying the commanding heights of the economy. It’s an experiment that is bound to fail. It has failed wherever it has been tried.
One simple way I tell friends to judge whether Russia is moving toward or away from liberty is to note whether they are seriously discussing burying the mostly paraffin mortal remains of Vladimir Illyich Lenin. For a time in the 1990s, removing Lenin’s body from the mausoleum in Red Square was high on the freedom agenda in the newly liberated Russian Republic. Since our current Vladimir—Putin—took power, however, Lenin’s body is firmly anchored and ritually honored in the heart of Moscow.
We can still strike a blow for liberty over here: Let’s bury Lenin’s language. Let’s bury all of Lenin’s talk of “the commanding heights.” And let’s resist those like Barney Frank who would ascend those heights the better to command the rest of us.
Here’s a preview of today’s Washington Update.
Here’s some news clips we are looking at today.
Here’s a preview of today’s Washington Update.
Here’s some other stories we are looking at today.
Jim Cramer went on The Daily Show last night to be grilled by Jon Stewart. Liberals everywhere are singing the praises of Stewart, who went in loaded for bear. (See video here-Stewart’s language is saucy: you’ve been warned.) Stewart deftly illustrated the multitudes contained within Cramer-both a loudmouth performer, and a cool, savvy Wall Street operator-and excoriated CNBC, Cramer, and market capitalism in his characteristically self-righteous and crypto-Marxist way (“When are we going to realize in this country that our wealth is work? That we’re workers…”). Apparently finance is serious business and Cramer’s goofy “Mad Money” persona makes Stewart mad. Mad enough that he felt the need to embarrass Cramer for 3 segments in front of his audience of clapping New York sycophants.
And yet, Cramer has been at this for years (I recall watching Mad Money with my friends in college because Cramer’s histrionics and questionable stock advice could be quite entertaining). Why did Jon Stewart decide to take Cramer to the woodshed on March 12, 2009? Why not a month ago-or six months ago, or a year ago, or four years ago? It turns out that Cramer and Stewart have been feuding ever since Stewart began taking shots at Rick Santelli for his “Chicago Tea Party” outburst. This feud, like Stewart’s previous one with Tucker Carlson, is predicated on his infuriating bait-and-switch routine: 1.) Sanctimoniously deliver a sucker punch about a serious political or cultural matter in which there is substantive disagreement; 2.) Respond to counter attack by saying “I’m just a comedian, don’t hold me to high standards! I make jokes! I’m no expert!” 3.) Behave like a smug expert and deliver more substantive criticism. 4.) Respond to next counter attack by saying “I’m just a clown! Watch me make funny faces!” 5.) Repeat until plaudits pour in from Gawker, Huffington Post, and other snark-mongers.
The fact is that Cramer’s shtick has not changed, and yet it is now that Stewart decides to declare Sicilian vendetta. Since Mad Money premiered, and in many ways going back to his stint on Kudlow & Cramer, Cramer has been a clown for the masses and a savant for the privileged-and Whitman-like in his ability to embrace the contradiction. What has changed is this: Cramer, like Santelli before him, went after the “wealth-destroyer,” President Obama. When the self-described liberal Jim Cramer was jumping around, biting the heads off toy bulls, yelling, “BUY! BUY! BUY!” and supporting Barack Obama, Stewart was nowhere to be found. When the self-described liberal Jim Cramer does all the same things but now dares to criticize the patently horrendous fiscal policies of the new President, that’s when Jon Stewart gets mad. Stewart insists it’s “not political,” and yet the timing is anything but.
Perhaps this explains why Obama tolerates the constant bumbling of Robert Gibbs: who needs a Press Secretary when your cult of personality is enough to turn a late-night comedy show into a camera stellata?
POSITION: ADMINISTRATOR, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
NOMINEE: Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg
BIRTH DATE: 1955
EDUCATION: She earned her M.D. from Harvard Medical School, and completed her training at the New York Hospital/Cornell University Medical Center.
FAMILY: Husband: Peter Fitzhugh Brown; two children
Clinton White House: “In 1993, Dr. Hamburg was President Clinton’s first choice for the newly created post of federal AIDS coordinator. Pregnant with her first child at that time, Hamburg declined, putting motherhood first. President Clinton selected her in 1997 to be assistant secretary for policy and evaluation at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. This time she accepted.”
[Source]
EXPERIENCE: 1986 - 1988, U.S. Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion; 1989 - 1990, assistant director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at NIH, where her work focused on AIDS research. 1990-1997, became deputy health commissioner of New York City and was named health commissioner a year later. She created an aggressive tuberculosis control program and the country’s first public health bioterrorism defense program;
1997-2001, assistant secretary for planning and evaluation at the Department of Health and Human Services in the Clinton administration, where she created a bioterrorism program; 2001 - Present, vice president for biological programs at the Nuclear Threat Initiative, a think tank focused on the threat to public safety from nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons.
On Abortion
“Dr. Margaret Hamburg, whose department runs abortion counseling and family-planning centers, and says that Giuliani’s transition team ‘would never have considered anyone who wasn’t pro-choice.’ Hamburg was one of only three commissioners initially appointed by Giuliani’s predecessor, David Dinkins, who was retained in the new administration. She served three years under Giuliani before taking an assistant secretary post in Bill Clinton’s Health and Human Services agency. Hamburg says her pro-choice preferences were a given in the Giuliani administration, and that ‘the subject of abortion never came up’ during or after the selection process. ‘The only question Giuliani asked me in my interview was whether I believed in the legalization of drugs,’ Hamburg says. ‘He was comfortable with our high-risk pregnancy and pregnancy-prevention programs, though he didn’t engage much. There were no restrictions on abortion counseling. This was not an area where there was any signal of a policy change between Dinkins and Giuliani.’” [Source]
On Abstinence Programs
“While serving as New York City health commissioner, Hamburg opposed a “morality oath” put forth by the Board of Education in 1992 when New York City was considering abstinence-only sex education. She also said that science-based public health strategies and not “moral judgment” or “wishful thinking” should be the foundation for HIV/AIDS education aimed at young people.”
[Source]
On Tuberculosis
“While commissioner Dr. Hamburg’s innovative treatment plan for tuberculosis (TB) became a model for health departments around the world. In the 1990s, TB was the leading infectious killer of youths and adults and had become resistant to standard drugs. To be effective, new drugs required patients to take pills every day for up to two years, but failure to complete the full course of treatment allowed the bacteria to mutate into drug-resistant strains. Hamburg sent healthcare workers to patients’ homes to help manage their drug regimen, and between 1992 and 1997, the TB rate for New York City fell by 46 percent, and by 86 percent for the most resistant strains.” [Source]
On Taxpayer Funded Needle Distribution Programs
“Hamburg (as New York City health commissioner) gained praise for a needle-exchange program for injection drug users that aimed to curb the spread of HIV.”
[Source]
Reaction from Pro-Abortion Groups
“As New York City Health Commissioner, Dr. Hamburg instituted a needle-exchange program to help prevent the spread of HIV, oversaw abortion counseling and family planning centers and pregnancy prevention programs. Like Dr. Hamburg, Dr. Sharfstein (nominee for Deputy at FDA) demonstrated pro-choice credentials throughout his career” NARAL Pro-Choice New York press release [Source]
New York City Abortion Statistics
“In most of the United States, 24 abortions are carried out for every 100 live births. In New York, 72 abortions occur for every 100 live births. The continuing boom in abortions-90,157 were performed in the city in 2006, the last year for which statistics are available-apparently means that many women are using abortion as their birth control method of choice. That concerns health advocates, who point out that the procedure sometimes causes complications and is more expensive than contraception. The high rate also shows that these women are not protected against AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases … 93% of the abortions in New York City are performed on city residents… An average of 250 abortions are performed in the city each day at more than 200 clinics and doctor’s offices … even though free or low-cost contraception is offered through 59 publicly funded programs at 218 sites in New York state, mostly in New York City… . In a time of fiscal constraints, abortion is costing the state at least $16 million in Medicaid spending annually, and city taxpayers still more through a city Health and Hospitals Corp. policy that provides free abortions to poor women at its facilities. The surgical costs alone are between $1,000 and $1,800 per abortion … But the biggest concern over the high abortion rate is the impact it is having on women’s health… . the high abortion figures are a sign that women in the city are putting themselves at risk of catching AIDS or other diseases… That seems to be particularly true for New York City’s African-American women. Though blacks make up about 24% of the city’s population, black women were responsible for 45% of the abortions in the city in 2006. That mirrors a national trend, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which tracks abortion numbers and found that the rate among black women is twice the national average.”
[Source]
Here’s a preview of today’s Washington Update.
Here’s some other links we are looking at today.
Yesterday, nearly 500 students from across the country visited the U.S. Capitol to lobby their legislators on retaining abstinence funding. Many of these students have directly been impacted by abstinence education programs and come from areas that have extremely high teenage pregnancy rates. These eager and enthusiastic teens listened to FRC’s own David Christensen and Valerie Huber, Executive Director of the National Abstinence Education Assocation. Rep. Lee Terry of Nebraska also stopped by the event and added his own remarks. He urged the students to enjoy their time in Washington, D.C. and briefed them about the impact that they are making by visiting their legislators to discuss retaining abstinence funding.
