Restraint, the hidden virtue.

A lot of people have devoted a lot of time to critiquing President Obama’s State of the Union address. Even I spent most of last night’s show dissecting it and lamenting over so many of the elements in it. However (and this is a massive however), I want to give credit in as lavish a way possible to the President for the one most notable omission from his speech.

In the aftermath of the Tucson shootings, the most normal thing for a liberal Democratic President to do on Tuesday would have been to talk about gun restrictions. I’m sure many people urged him to do so, wanting to see him use this moment to advance their agenda. But he didn’t. He completely avoided it.

And bravo!

See, it’s rare that we give people credit for their restraint, but in this case it’s well-deserved. After all, conservatives have been for weeks criticizing liberals for exploiting the assassination attempt as a pretext for gun control. And if we would so loudly criticize them when they do this, then we must be equally as vocal in praising someone when he doesn’t.
Posted by at

3 comments:

Naum said...

State of the Union: The Things Obama Did Not Have to Say - But Did Anyway
Yet, this is about so much more than science and technology. Last night’s speech hinted that the President at last understands; the “war on science” is only the most blatant, surface manifestation of a general campaign against all of our professional castes. Name one that isn’t under fire from the new-right! Scientists, teachers, university professors, attorneys, civil servants, diplomats, journalists... heck even cops! And yes, if you have watched carefully, or know anything about the “miracle of 2006”-- even the brilliant men and women of the United States Military Officer Corps have been under assault, for years. Why? Why has such a broad campaign to discredit (almost) every highly skilled and educated expert class become the centerpiece of conservatism? A hijacked version of conservatism that has Barry Goldwater spinning in his grave? You have only to look at the few centers of elite expertise that have been left alone! Those that are spared this all-out onslaught. The financial industry, industry lobbyist associations, and the hyper-rich. A select group who are spared attack by Fox News. Now why would these groups want to fund propaganda aimed at undermining all other intellectual elites? Unless... in order to the power of those with the skill and fact-based knowledge to notice and point fingers at outright lies....?

Fantasy role-playing games
The function of the abortion/slavery analogy, in other words, is fantasy role-playing. It’s a game of make-believe, of dress-up and pretend. Let’s pretend that we’re heroic. Let’s pretend that we are good and brave and principled just like the abolitionists were. Let’s pretend that we are even more good and brave and principled, because we’ll pretend that if we had been around in the 19th Century that we would have been even more active, determined and effective in the struggle than Douglass or Tubman or Garrison. Let’s pretend that our unremarkable lives of quiet desperation are actually epic quests in the service of something meaningful. Let’s pretend our lives are driven by some purpose. Let’s pretend we are engaged in the great moral struggle of our time — that we are opposing some massive and twisted evil. Let’s pretend that this struggle requires courage and commitment and let’s pretend that we possess those things. Let’s pretend that we are all that stands between this country and brutal chaos — that we and we alone are the ones keeping it all together.

January 27, 2011 at 8:36 PM
Naum said...

Meanwhile in Iraq…
... Another horrific attack on Shiites today. Reuters reports that at least 35 people were killed when a car bomb ripped through the mourning tent at a funeral in the predominantly Shiite Baghdad neighborhood of Shula. The neighborhood was once dominated by members of Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army, though I don't know its status today. Reuters also reports that angry residents on the scene protested the lack of protection from the security forces and that clashes broke out between the police and local gunmen in the wake of the attack. There's been a steady uptick in attacks on civilians in recent weeks. Last week, as Shiite pilgrims gathered around Karbala for Arbain, about 50 people were killed in two separate car bombs. Earlier this week, at the culmination of the mourning period for Imam Hussein -- a grandson of the Prophet Mohammed revered by Shiites -- about 18 pilgrims were killed in attacks. And earlier this month, a suicide attack on a police post in Baqouba killed 15 people, while a suicide blast at a police recruiting center in Tikrit claimed about 50 lives.

What Would Ronnie Do?
Ronald Reagan scored a comfortable victory in 1980, promising a new day in Washington and the nation. Then Reaganomics ran into brick wall. Unemployment—7.4 percent at the beginning of his term—was heading toward 10 percent by the summer of 1982. The gross domestic product declined 1.8 percent. On Election Day, voters punished him by taking 27 House seats from his Republican Party, including most of the ones gained in 1980. That gave the Democrats a 269–166 seat advantage—far greater than the 51-seat advantage Republicans enjoy today. The day after that woeful election, Reagan’s aides sent him into a press conference with defensive talking points. He tore them up. “We’re very pleased with the results,” he said, claiming that the GOP had “beat the odds” for off-year elections (he went back to 1928 to make the claim). “Wasn’t he in worse shape for 1984?” he was asked. “I don’t think so at all,” he replied. Hadn’t it been a historically uncivil campaign? He agreed—because of all the opposition did to “frighten voters.” Barack Obama gave a press conference the day after his “shellacking” too. The contrast to Reagan couldn’t have been more stark. Ignoring the fact that the electorate had pretty much been switching their party preference every two years since 1992, he conceded the loss as an epochal sea change. “I did some talking,” he said of his meeting with Republican leaders the night before, “but mostly I did a lot of listening.” When asked about jobs, he talked about the deficit. He then boasted that when it came to what was essential to recovery, he really didn’t have essential principles at all: the answers were not to be “found in any one particular philosophy or ideology.”

January 27, 2011 at 8:36 PM
Naum said...

Every technological marvel post WWII was created by an act of government -- the internet, the transistor, modem, etc.. -- either by government or by state sanctioned monopoly (i.e, AT&T / Bell Labs).

January 27, 2011 at 8:38 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)