Wednesday at the New York Post

Just as an important general benefit of the Obama presidency has been an intellectual revival of conservatism, as conservatives of all stripes have risen up in unison against the horrors of Obama’s legislative program, a particular benefit of the Obama presidency has been a revival of the opinion pages of the New York Post as a place of interesting and useful political writing.

Wednesday’s Post has several worthwhile pieces:

In a staggering column, Michelle Malkin tells how the ACLU has been spying on covert CIA agents to help Muslim terrorists identify them so as to sue them for “torture.” The left’s four year long phony outrage over the non-exposure of the non-covert agent Valerie Plame has been forgotten.

Arthur Herman exposes the utter disgrace of the British and Scottish governments in the “compassionate” release of the Lockerbie mass murderer al-Megrahi. The Brits thought they would be winning credits with world opinion and getting an in with Libya, but instead have made themselves into an object of international contempt. Scottish Justice Minister “Kenny” (why use his last name? doesn’t his use of his childish nickname in place of his real name say it all?) and British Prime Minister Gordon the Original Dead Man Walking Brown (I’m not joking, I mean he literally looks as if he’s dead) may both be in danger of losing their jobs.

Internist Marc Siegel reveals the evil of Obamacare in preventing doctors from caring for their patients, even as Obama has the chutzpah to claim that Obamacare is a moral and ethical imperative and that its critics are bearing “false witness” against it. Isn’t it amazing how every single time a left-liberal quotes or paraphrases the Bible, he gets it wrong and turns it into a leftist idea? In this instance Obama has perverted God’s command against bearing false witness, meaning against falsely charging a fellow human being with a criminal offense, into a command not to criticize socialism. Like the aliens in The Invasion of the Body Snatchers who replace ordinary people one by one with non-human Pods which look exactly like the humans they are replacing, the alien-in-chief and his fellow leftists seek to replace all ordinary and traditional morality with socialist ideas, by using the familiar and beloved words of traditional morality while putting socialist meanings into those words. The tactic has two effects: (1) the authority of traditional morality is transferred to the socialist program, and (2) no one notices that this is being done. Except that this time, thankfully, because Obama’s lies have been so gross and obvious, people do seem to realize that it’s being done.

Dick Morris and Eileen McGann tell us that Sen. Joseph Lieberman has come out against Obamacare, not on the basis of anti-socialism or fears of increased costs, but on the basis that in a time of recession and staggering deficits the country simply cannot take on huge new spending obligations. The authors say that Lieberman’s argument may win over people in the middle.

Jeffrey Anderson has an article about the deficit results of Obamacare that I didn’t find that interesting, except for its arresting opening sentence:

DEMOCRATIC members of Congress are now trying to decide whether they’re better off abandoning ObamaCare and inviting the administration’s wrath—or supporting it and inviting their constituents’ wrath.

Finally, here’s the Post’s lead editorial, “OBAMA’S ABYSS”:

President Obama’s budget folks yesterday upped their estimate of the fiscal hole they plan to dig over the next 10 years from $7 trillion to $9 trillion.

No biggie, right? In an era of hope and change, what’s a couple of trillion between friends?

If only.

But who can imagine a trillion bucks—particularly since Washington has been tossing around the greenbacks as if they were Zimbabwean dollars?

Play money, that is.

In truth, such prolonged, out-of-control deficit spending will have financially and socially corrosive consequences on American life for decades.

You know: A trillion here, a trillion there …

Think about it: Yesterday’s $2 trillion “adjustment” in anticipated cumulative red ink is twice the size of the entire decade-long price tag for the House version of ObamaCare.

It’s roughly equal to all the money spent by the US government in 2001.

Now tack the $2 trillion uptick onto the original $7 trillion gap estimate. The result: a mind-numbing $9 trillion hole—nearly doubling the nation’s current debt.

That’s worth repeating: Obama & Co. plan to overspend by more in the next 10 years than America has chalked up in deficits for 233 years—combined.

We’re talking gaps of nearly $1 trillion a year—for an entire decade.

Should Americans be worried?

More like scared out of their wits, we’d say.

Indeed, the Obama folks themselves have said that, to be safe, red ink shouldn’t exceed 3 percent of Gross Domestic Product—yet the new figures put it at 5.1 percent a year, on average.

This will launch the nation into truly uncharted waters: In each of the next 10 years, outlays will outstrip revenues by more than under any other president in US history.

This year alone, the red ink will more than triple the national record.

Where will all the money come from?

From lenders, like China, who—so far—have been willing (and able) to take America’s IOUs.

Or so one hopes.

But such loans will surely divert capital from the private sector, drive up interest rates and throttle the very economic growth that can spur new tax revenues—and help pay for all the spending.

The deficits will also fuel massive inflation, wiping out life savings, devastating those on fixed incomes and creating incalculable economic havoc.

There’s more: Whatever debt is left after inflation will need to be repaid by future taxpayers—stealing their hard-earned income and dragging down the economy further still.

“If anyone had any doubts that this burden on future generations is unsustainable,” warned Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, “they’re gone.”

This must end.

Now.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at August 26, 2009 11:58 PM | Send