Hank Kalet

Refighting the ’60s again

There is an eery quality to the presidential campaign, as if we’d heard this all before. I missed the debate tonight, but watching The Countdown I am struck by the focus on issues of another era, issues from the 1960s. In particular, we have watched Barack Obama have to answer for his associations with people connected to the 1960s, to a preacher who frames his arguments in black nationalist rhetoric and has an association to the leader of the Nation of Islam; to a member of Weather Underground, a ’60s group that resorted to bombings to move the revolution forward; his resemblance to Democratic losers like George McGovern, Al Gore and John Kerry. We’ve had flag pins and cocaine use and all manner of cultural touchstones of the past dragged back into the present — a line of argument that harkens back to the attacks made against Kerry and Bill Clinton.

I find it a bit ironic — wrong word, I know — that Obama, someone who came of political age during the Carter and Reagan presidencies, is now being made to carry water for the generation that came before him. Personally, I’m tired of this debate, tired of rehashing the 1960s each time we have a national issue to resolve. I’m tired of fighting over who is responsible for losing Vietnam (Vietnam was unwinnable, like Iraq is unwinnable, and the American foreign policy elite are ultimately responsible for that war). I’m tired of cultural conservatives blaming hippies for all they see as wrong. Get over it.

It has been 40 years since the Summer of Love gave way to the turmoil of 1968, 1869 and 1970. Can’t we just agree to focus on the issues of the 21st Century?

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

E-mail me by clicking here.

Empty economic rhetoric

I haven’t had a chance to do much on the McCain economic address — a bunch of nonsense, if you ask me, that offers little that will aid Americans as the economy spins deeper into recession and certainly nothing designed to reverse the downward spiral.

So I offer Matthew Yglesias on the topic, from his Atlantic Monthly blog:

John McCain’s big economic policy speech hasn’t really gotten the attention it deserves from progressive blogs. But recall that we’ve heard in earlier McCain addresses that he wants to continue the war in Iraq indefinitely and also that he thinks we need to boost baseline defense spending. In his economic speech, he does what Republicans do and proposes a huge raft of tax cuts. Naturally, being a straight-talker, he’s not afraid to tell people that a certain price will be paid for these defense hikes and tax cuts. As he explains, paying for his program will require “taking the savings from earmark, program review, and other budget reforms.”

Straight talk!

Or, in reality, obfuscation. Clearly the reforms per se aren’t going to save any money. McCain is proposing processes that could lead to program cuts. But he won’t, you know, actually name any programs that he think ought to be cut. Because, after all, if he told people what he was planning to cut, they might realize that they liked these programs. So better to refer to them in a vague way. But in essence, McCain is saying we should reduce funding for our transportation infrastructure. And that at a time of rising food prices, poor people should get less in the way of food assistance. And that the federal law enforcement apparatus should do more with less. That product safety inspections can be pared back. That maybe environmental and labor regulations don’t really need to be enforced. Or perhaps the national parks should fall into a state of disrepair. Who knows? McCain won’t tell us what’ll get the ax, but there’s just no way to do what he’s proposing to do on the tax-and-warmongering sides of the budget without seriously scaling back on domestic programs.

No need to add anything.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

E-mail me by clicking here.

Bitter over local school budgets

While a majority of school budgets apparently were approved by voters Tuesday, voters in three of the four districts we cover here in the Princeton Packet’s Dayton office nixed their budgets — Jamesburg, Monroe and South Brunswick — a rarity around here.

We’ll have full coverage over the next two days and I’ll have a column on the flaws in the process, which is part of what I think happened. All three budgets were pretty tight, but voters are angry — property taxes are the issue of the moment in New Jersey, as it should be — and the school budget is the only one they can take it out on.

So, periodically, we get these votes, even in towns with a history of supporting their spending plans.

Bruce hearts Obama

Springsteen is going to get some flack for this — he is endorsing Barack Obama for president. This is unfair, of course. First, endorsements like this have little real impact and, second, Springsteen fans shouldn’t hold the Boss to a different standard than almost any other performer. (I wrote an essay on this a while back that I’ll get up on my home

Consider: Springsteen endorses Kerry in 2004 and a mini-hailstorm breaks out over it. Brooks and Dunn appear in support of President Bush at the Republican National Convention the same year — not a word. And what of Chuck Norris and his eery presence standing behind Mike Huckabee?

In any case, Bruce offers his endorsement in a letter on his Web site:

LIke most of you, I’ve been following the campaign and I have now seen and heard enough to know where I stand. Senator Obama, in my view, is head and shoulders above the rest.

He has the depth, the reflectiveness, and the resilience to be our next President. He speaks to the America I’ve envisioned in my music for the past 35 years, a generous nation with a citizenry willing to tackle nuanced and complex problems, a country that’s interested in its collective destiny and in the potential of its gathered spirit. A place where “…nobody crowds you, and nobody goes it alone.”

At the moment, critics have tried to diminish Senator Obama through the exaggeration of certain of his comments and relationships. While these matters are worthy of some discussion, they have been ripped out of the context and fabric of the man’s life and vision, so well described in his excellent book, Dreams From My Father, often in order to distract us from discussing the real issues: war and peace, the fight for economic and racial justice, reaffirming our Constitution, and the protection and enhancement of our environment.

After the terrible damage done over the past eight years, a great American reclamation project needs to be undertaken. I believe that Senator Obama is the best candidate to lead that project and to lead us into the 21st Century with a renewed sense of moral purpose and of ourselves as Americans.

Over here on E Street, we’re proud to support Obama for President.

In the end, no one should be surprised by this.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

E-mail me by clicking here.