The Dash To Dumb: A Double Entry From David Broder

David Broder writes the dumbest thing I have seen all week, then exceeds himself a few paragraphs later.  Here is his first entry in the Dash to Dumb:

OH, YES, I know that Democrats have fallen into a peck of trouble and may lose control of Congress. But even if they do, Obama can still storm back to win a second term in 2012. He is that much better than the competition.

In what respects is he enduringly superior? Let's start with the basics. He is much smarter than his challengers in either party, better able to read the evidence and come to the right conclusions.

Obama may very well be smarter than either Sarah Palin or Christine O'Donnell (the left's favorite chew-toy just now).  But is there any reason to think he is smarter than Mitt Romney or Tim Pawlenty?  Can anyone keep a straight face and insist that Obama is clearly smarter than Gen. Petraeus, who may yet emerge from the wilds of Afghanistan to rally Republicans (although I don't expect it)?

Or on his own merits and by way of example, how smart did Obama look when he announced thathe did not know the facts of the Skip Gates controversy, but he didn't need facts to conclude the police acted "stupidly"?  How smart did he look while dithering on Afghanistan, or the BP oil spill?  How smart did Obama sound when he urged Latino voters to "punish" their enemies?

Ahh!  After my blood pressure settled back into the high-normal range I pressed on, only to encounter this second entry in the Dash to Dumb sweepstakes:

But if Obama cannot spur that [economic] growth by 2012, he is unlikely to be reelected. The lingering effects of the recession that accompanied him to the White House will probably doom him.

Can Obama harness the forces that might spur new growth? This is the key question for the next two years.

What are those forces? Essentially, there are two. One is the power of the business cycle, the tidal force that throughout history has dictated when the economy expands and when it contracts.

And the other force?  Brace yourself:

What else might affect the economy? The answer is obvious, but its implications are frightening. War and peace influence the economy.

Look back at FDR and the Great Depression. What finally resolved that economic crisis? World War II.

Here is where Obama is likely to prevail. With strong Republican support in Congress for challenging Iran's ambition to become a nuclear power, he can spend much of 2011 and 2012 orchestrating a showdown with the mullahs. This will help him politically because the opposition party will be urging him on. And as tensions rise and we accelerate preparations for war, the economy will improve.

Oh, brother, its the old "Look at FDR and WWII" card.  How dumb is this?

 - A war with Iran would require nothing like the level of national mobilization required in WWII, so the stimulative effect would be much less.  (Blogging at FP, Blake Hounsell uses the word "crazy" to describe this, and notes that the resulting higher oil prices would impede global recovery.  Drill, baby drill!)

 - Why stop with looking at WWII?  Why didn't Korea get Harry Truman re-elected back in 1952?  Why didn't the escalation of Vietnam get Johnson re-elected in 1968?

 - Closer to home, does Broder think that Iraq, rather than low interest rates, bailed out the US economy in 2003?  Why didn't the surge help us out in 2007/2008?  And why did the genius Obama withdraw troops from Iraq during the weak economy of 2009 when he could have put more troops into both Iraq and Afghanistan?

 - Will the Republicans really play along with a phony war intended to re-elect Obama on a 'Rally round the flag' effect?  Is there no Republican anywhere who would feel chastened by the debacle in Iraq and skeptical of Obama's motives and commitment?  Why couldn't this play out like Kosovo in 1999, when the Republican House and Senate got very balky about following an anti-war President into battle.

 - Lest we forget, we are talking about Obama.  He is not opposed to all wars - in his famous 2002 speech about Iraq he boldly supported both the Civil War and WWII, although he waffled on Afghanistan and was mute on Korea, the Revolutionary War, and others.  But Obama leads an anti-war party, rose to that leadership by dint of his view on Iraq, and is risking that leadership by escalating in Afghanistan (although he promised to cut and run by next summer.)  He will not even begin to try and rally Democrats for a war with Iran.

 - Stimulate, baby, stimulate: WWII was a massive federal spending program with broad public support.  Hire people to do something popular that doesn't involve bullets, death and destruction and Obama can still revive the economy.  Of course, he would need to rally public support, but he is still a genius orator, yes?

I can quit anytime.  So which was dumber, the idea that Obama is clearly smarter than any Republican out there, or the idea that Hope and Change will morph into Blood and Guts?  Tough call!

Comments

[Extraneus]

Sufficient evidence exists to demonstrate how smart Obama is; namely, his SAT and LSAT scores. Yet, we haven't seen them. Unlike Gore's, Bush's and Kerry's, Obama's SAT scores are secret. Would that be the case if they showed what Broder wishes they did?

Sarah Palin should start calling for Obama's standardized test scores.

(I'd put money on MarkO's IQ being double that of Obama's, btw.)

[peter]

Ted Sorenson is dead. I never realized he was so young when he wrote Profiles in Courage, or JFK's speeches. Only 82, lun

[daddy]

Fascinating but audacious ad on local TV.

It is Lisa criticizing Miller for attacking Journalists. And this on the heels of Fagan yanked off the air due to complaints from Murcowskee Campaign folks, and the CBS smear job.

It is fascinating to me that our paper of record, the ADN, still has not posted a story about the KTVA CBS Reporters inadvertently recorded discussing how to smear Joe Miller with their CBS soapboxes prior to the Election. Welcome to 1984.

But I must post this for Narciso: Andrew Halcro stands up for Fagan. 1st">http://www.andrewhalcro.com/1st_amendment_saving_dan_fagan">1st Amendment: Saving Dan Fagan

Halcro is Lisa's right hand man, but he is a former radio host and knows Fagan well. He is probably doing this somewhat as damage control to distance Lisa from the Fagan debacle.

The Lefty Blog, ">http://alaskadispatch.com/voices/medred/7344-dan-fagan-v-free-speech"> Alaska Dispatch had their man Craig Medred do a hit piece on Fagan, so I politely posted Halcro's different perspective of the matter in a comment and asked for Medred's opinion about the appropriateness of CBS's recorded conversations, since he was so all indignant about Fagan.

That resulted in them making a separate post on Halcro, but I am still politely hammering them on getting Medred to have to make a statement about was the CBS recording business appropriate, in light of his animus towards Fagan's actions. No response.

As for the Rove thing. He did not help us out up here. My view is that he could have and that Joe had a decent shot at getting elected. In a 2 way race I am confident Miller would have beaten McAdam's. But maybe Rove has different info than me. He definitely seems to have a diferent goal than I do.

Regardless, up here, I view his negative comments towards Sarah Palin, Miller's biggest supporter, only a week before the election, as unnecessary and extremely detrimental to Miller and the Tea Party. Just like his comments about O'Donnell. If he needed to slam her, then slam her on November 3rd.

I suspect that Rove, as JMH suggested, would rather have Murcowskee win than risk losing to McAdam's. I view that as a terrible policy, but oh well---I'm not an "Intellectual".

KayyyyyyyyyyyyyRoooooooooooooo!

Navy Jane!

[Thomas Collins]

For North Carolina Tar Heel fans, Brandon Tate just caught a sixty-five yard toychdown pass from Tom Brady. Tate, who was running a short pattern, noticed that Brady was scrambling, made a great move and got himself wide open. Nice heady move by Tate. 14-10 Pats.

[RichatUF]

Sowell had this back in 2008: Make no mistake, the political rhetoric of FDR was great. For those who admire political rhetoric, as so many of Barack Obama's supporters seem to, FDR was tops. For those who go by actual results, FDR's track record was abysmal.

Although the Great Depression of the 1930s began under Herbert Hoover, unemployment during Hoover's last year in office was not as high as it became during each of the first five years under FDR.

During the eight years of FDR's first two terms as president, there were only two years in which unemployment was lower than it had been under Herbert Hoover-- and not by much.

World War II has been credited by some with getting the United States out of the Great Depression. What the war did was put an end to the New Deal, as national survival became the top priority and replaced FDR's anti-business and class warfare rhetoric.

Senator Obama's rhetoric today is the anti-business and class warfare rhetoric that worked so brilliantly in a political sense for FDR in the 1930s. But Obama is following an opposite course from FDR when it comes to recognizing threats to American national security.

[Kathy Kattenburg]

Oh my, Tom. First-rate post. Excellent post. I've agreed with you before (albeit not often), but never as unreservedly as here. This is a really, really good post. Well done.

[bunky]

Daddy: does Miller have any chance?

[MarkO]

"For North Carolina Tar Heel fans . . .."

None here, one hopes.

[Extraneus]

Miller's ahead, bunky.

Here's from
nyt, right sidebar.

[narciso]

The problem with that poll is that it uses pollsters like Cracium and Moore, who have
spectacularly oversampled the Democratic vote
in 2006 and 2008, respectfully, So I would say he's closer to 10 rather than 5 ahead

[bunky]

Ex: thanks, lot of crap on the air today.

[Extraneus]

right. when nyt says he's up, he's up. not to mention the extra step to write her in, which has t be worth a few points.

[Thomas Collins]

Obama doesn't draw well in Cleveland. See LUN.

[sammy small]

re: the original topic:

Ever notice how Obama supporters keep having to state how smart he is? Must be that we're all too dumb to see it, and he just doesn't make it so evident, you know.

[Extraneus]

drudge is having fun with pics again.

[Danube of Thought]

Thanks for that, daddy--a real beauty.

[bunky]

No Palin in Delaware today. Rumor was she was coming to O'Donnel rally.

[Jack is Back!]

This is a strange election season compared to any I have known and participated. For some reason, there is a lot of openly hostility I have never seen before. Usually most people I know are always reticent to talk politics. You know, in polite company you don't talk religion or poltics. But not this year. Even people we have here from Minnesota, true blue DFLers are pissed and openly. WoW!

Actually, I am meeting people on the driving range, at the church, in the car rider line, the guys bagging at Publix, the car wash, down at the bank, in the wine shop, all over and everyone is talking about this election. I have never seen that any time before and I moved a lot both in the military and in my business life. Never. This is something different. Don't underestimate anything this year. Nothing will surprise me especially how wrong the polls and pundits have been. It may not be cataclysmic but it could be bigger than anything we have expected. Of course, I could be Santa Claus and we all know how that works out.

[Rob Crawford]

The purpose of a society is to take care of all its members.

No, it's not. The members of a society have a responsibility to take care of themselves to the extent of their abilities. If you can work enough to feed, clothe, and house yourself, you must. If you cannot, then we can talk.

[RichatUF]

Ex-

A popcorn guide, I should print that off. Bielat Beats Barney, Pubs Pound Progs?

sammy s-

Dennis Miller had it right: Instead of giving Obama the benefit of the doubt, doubt the benefit. Obama has said too many things that a smart man just wouldn't say.

Cecil-

I have nothing else to add. I think I misunderstood your point and then I started to drone on. The book is "The Start Up State" though and looks at Israeli political economy through a systemic vulnerability lens (thought the authors do not call it that).

[Threadkiller]

JiB, openly hostile and a driving range go hand-in-hand with me.

[Sue]

Obama says this election is not a referendum on him. I'm telling you, this should be played over and over and over on Wednesday...

"We cannot have another year-long debate about this," he said, rejecting Republican calls to scrap the Democrats' legislation. "So the question that I'm going to ask myself and I ask of all of you is, is there enough serious effort that in a month's time or a few weeks' time or six weeks' time we could actually resolve something?"

"And if we can't, then I think we've got to go ahead and make some decisions," the president said, "and then that's what elections are for."

[Sue]

This got left off...

Concluded the president: "We have honest disagreements about -- about the vision for the country and we'll go ahead and test those out over the next several months till November. All right?"

[Ignatz Ratzkywatzky]

--Obama, as Carter was once called, is a clever but basically unintelligent man.--

Yep. The facile mind without depth is one of the most destructive and deceptive forces in the universe.

[Rob Crawford]

Once or twice I have been provoked and have asked the company how many of them could describe the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The response was cold: it was also negative. Yet I was asking something which is the scientific equivalent of: Have you read a work of Shakespeare's?

Anyone else get the feeling that today, the answer to both questions would be "no"?

Seriously -- do you think the new "elite" reads anything but what counts as a class marker?

[Extraneus]

And the incompetent who doesn't know it is one of the most dangerous and vindictive.

[Janet...off the couch & sportin Tea Party chic]

Ever notice how Obama supporters keep having to state how smart he is? Must be that we're all too dumb to see it, and he just doesn't make it so evident, you know

exactly sammy small...exactly.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Anyone else get the feeling that today, the answer to both questions would be "no"?

Positive. Hell, I got started at PJM writing pieces in which I explained the arithmetic that some RC member didn't. But you could make the argument that the whole socialist enterprise is an attempt to refute the First and Second Laws.

BTW, thanks Daddy --

[Jane]

Daddy,

I just watched 2 minutes of Hardball. Matthews had on those 2 authors of "Gamechange" he is so in love with. When asked about the CBS audio pledging to link Miller to child molesters Halpern said: "I haven't heard the audio but CBS denies it so it can't possibly be true."

[Janet...off the couch & sportin Tea Party chic]

Lots of trick or treaters this year...good weather, & we live in a neighborhood with tons of kids.
One family on the neighborhood listserv was pushing unicef boxes, so there are more than usual. I always say "No, I only hand out candy on Halloween". Even as a kid in the 60s my Mom wouldn't let me trick or treat for unicef. I was raised right!

[Captain Hate]

"For North Carolina Tar Heel fans . . .."

None here, one hopes.

daddy's a Hole (a good one but still...) and I believe ChaCo spent some time in Chapel Hell.

[Extraneus]

Bush has guts. After throwing the perfect WS opening pitch in 2001, he's going to risk it again tonight. Uncommon guts.

[Captain Hate]

"I haven't heard the audio but CBS denies it so it can't possibly be true."

Liars lying for liars caught in lies. Maybe Tweety should get Rather and Mapes to come on Blueballs for some extra credibility

[narciso]

"KTVA, don't know them, better check the cables" you would think they would have a little shame, not to embarass themselves so openly,

[jimmyk]

the whole socialist enterprise is an attempt to refute the First and Second Laws.

And the basic laws of arithmetic. I tell my students that a lot of economics is just that: keeping track of all the pluses and minuses so you don't come off sounding like a politician who thinks you can get something for nothing.

[Ric Locke]

[Soros] is swimming up the wrong river in every way.

No. Remember where he got the biggest part of his money: by forcing the British to devaluate, and cashing in on short positions.

Imagine where he'll be when the dollar gets devalued.

I don't believe, and have never believed, that there is a Socialist cell in Soros's brain. He's good at using the memes to support his actions, but the money is what he's after.

[Sue]

Shep just tried that same line with Chris Wallace, CBS affiliate is denying, blah, blah, blah. Chris says, uhhh..nope, something happened and we will leave it to our viewers to decide whether CBS affiliate is lying or not. Didn't use the word lying, but implied it.

[Captain Hate]

Obama doesn't draw well in Cleveland.

I hope Ann takes note of this because this was a rally for the Twitch. I know there was a counter rally so I'll have to check the reports to see how that went. My theory all along has been that the donks consider Ohio a lost cause and it won't hurt anything to send the purple lipped imbecile nattering around here.

[Captain Hate]

Is it true that Fox just offered Shemp a huge new contract? If so, does Rupert have a red ink wish?

[Jack is Back!]

jimmyk,

An Economist is an educated person whose guesses are as good or bad as your's or mine:)

[Sue]

Dear Gussie, why on earth is Fox playing a hip hop song before the World Series? Only old fogies like me are watching it, according to Neilsen.

[Pagar]

"Ever notice how Obama supporters keep having to state how smart he is?"

It's like all of these "Obama is a Christian" statements. There must be a reason that the leftists have to keep saying it over and over. Like if they say it enough, someone might believe it.

[sbw]

Just played "Are you ready for some football?" on my iPod instead.

[Sue]

Pagar,

Well it worked when they repeated Bush was stupid.

[Thomas Collins]

Three Laws of Thermo:

1. You can't win.

2. You can't break even.

3. You can't get out of the game.

[MarkJ]

Two words that prove "the walking dead" really do exist.

David.Broder.

[Sue]

George HW Bush and George W. Bush. Both receiving standing ovations. Yeah, Texas.

[Sue]

My youngest daughter just sent me a text saying how cute are the Georges? ::grin::

[sbw]

And Barbara and Laura.

[Sue]

Drudge is teasing...

NYT LEAD MONDAY: Both parties see possibility of bigger Republican wins in House than either side was talking about -- even few days ago... Developing...

I am so ready for Tuesday. Or rather Wednesday.

[Sue]

sbw,

I know. Barbara had her camera. So sweet.

[Pagar]

"Both parties see possibility of bigger Republican wins"

Here is a Zero Hedge thread that is interesting. My Vote.

I've got a feeling the politicans just don't understand how mad voters are.

[Jane]

I can't wait either Sue. How were the pitches? I'm rooting for your team!

[Janet...off the couch & sportin Tea Party chic]

Here is The Pitch

God bless W!!!!

[PaulY]

Ignatz Ratzkywatzky, The influx of gold mentioned in article you linked was the hard currency UK & France was spending in US starting in 1938 when winds of war were blowing in Europe. Nothing that the government did even after seeing that tax increases hurt economy in 1937-8. Industrial production increased and US taxpayers were not paying for it. Sucked for UK and France.

[Melinda Romanoff]

For those who are interested, Barrons and the WSJ have some discounts going on.

Not an ad by me, I just thought I would share a link to some thing I'll try and milk.

[Jane]

Pagar,

That was a fascinating article, particularly where he said "Fiscal conservatism will become credible now." It wasn't before.

But boy that really indicates a Tsunami.

[Ignatz Ratzkywatzky]

--The influx of gold mentioned in article you linked was the hard currency UK & France was spending in US starting in 1938 when winds of war were blowing in Europe.--

Paul,
Not saying it didn't contribute, just that it was not the only thing responsible.

[Boatbuilder]

I'm still waiting for Obama to demonstrate how smart he is by actually doing something smart.

TM you've got to get out of Fairfield County every once in a while. Putting Sarah Palin and Christine O'Donnell in the same category in terms of intelligence tells me you've been influenced way too much by the hive.

[PD]

The purpose of a society is to take care of all its members. Why bother otherwise?

Okay. You give me your stuff, I'll say, "Thank you," and we'll call it even.

[PaulY]

my point was it was not deficit spending by FDR that helped, but exports paid by allies.
Paul Krugman is unable to acknowldege that fact.

[Thomas Collins]

Palin has bested her foes again. By using the term "corrupt bastards" she has put the corrupt bastards in a box. If they lambaste her for using that phrase, it will simply draw more attention to the hit job the reporters were planning on Miller.

[narciso]

Their answer is amusing, we did say it, but we didn't mean what we clearly meant, this is in tandem with yet another anonymous Politico
hitpiece, against her

[Ignatz]

--my point was it was not deficit spending by FDR that helped, but exports paid by allies--

Agreed.
Here's a link to the UCLA economists who Amity Shlaes relikes on for the problems FDR produced through his labor market disrotions. Good read.

[Ignatz]

OK. Here's a link.

[Porchlight]

Obama says this election is not a referendum on him.

I missed him saying that - was that today? Damned busy Halloween weekend - I need some serious computer time tomorrow to get ready for Tuesday...

Anyway, he's full of it, but the slower he figures out how wrong he is, the better for 2012.

[Johann]

test

[Cecil Turner]

I have nothing else to add. I think I misunderstood your point and then I started to drone on.

No worries. I think we're in fair agreement on the fundamentals here anyway.

The only point I was trying to make was that the relative reduction of defense spending (as a proportion of either GDP or total spending) makes it less important than it was back in the day. In particular, the FP folks seem to be stuck in the "military industrial complex" days when defense spending was >50% of total outlays. Now that defense is hovering at 17-19% of government spending, it's obviously got far less relative impact (a consideration that also applies to the stimulative effect of defense spending, but that wasn't my main point).

[anduril]

Washington Post Idiocy: Calls for War With Iran to Save America's Economy

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/

As many writers have documented, the corporate media is usually pro-war. See this.

And so Washington Post hack David Broder's op-ed arguing that war with Iran will save America's economy is not all that surprising.

Of course, China and Russia might not sit idly by and let their ally, Iran, be attacked. So there's the wee complication that bombing Iran could start WWIII.

And, of course, attacking Iran would increase the level of terrorism.

But forget politics and national security.

Broder is also plain wrong on the economics.

In a blog entry entitled "Has David Broder Lost His Mind?," Foreign Policy managing editor Blake Hounshell writes that Broder's proposal is "crazy for a number of reasons."

One is that markets don't like tensions, and certainly not the kind that jack up oil prices. Second, World War II brought the United States out of the Great Depression because it was a massive economic stimulus program that mobilized entire sectors of society. Today's American military has all the tools it needs to fight Iran, and there isn't going to be any sort of buildup. Hasn't Broder been reading his own newspaper? The Pentagon is looking to find billions in cuts as it confronts the coming world of budget austerity.

And as I have repeatedly pointed out, "military Keynesianism" - that is, launching wars to stimulate the economy, doesn't work.

For example, as I wrote in August:

Nobel-prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has said that war can be very bad for the economy. For example, in 2003, Stiglitz wrote:

War is widely thought to be linked to economic good times. The second world war is often said to have brought the world out of depression, and war has since enhanced its reputation as a spur to economic growth. Some even suggest that capitalism needs wars, that without them, recession would always lurk on the horizon.

Today, we know that this is nonsense. The 1990s boom showed that peace is economically far better than war. The Gulf war of 1991 demonstrated that wars can actually be bad for an economy.

Stiglitz has said that this decade's Iraq war has been very bad for the economy. See this, this and this.

And as the New Republic noted last year:

Conservative Harvard economist Robert Barro has argued that increased military spending during WWII actually depressed other parts of the economy.

Also from the right, Robert Higgs has done good work showing that military spending wasn't the primary source of the recovery and that GDP growth during WWII has been "greatly exaggerated."

And from the left, Larry Summers and Brad Delong argued back in 1988 that "five-sixths of the decline in output relative to the trend that occurred during the Depression had been made up before 1942."

As I noted in January:

All of the spending on unnecessary wars adds up.

The U.S. is adding trillions to its debt burden to finance its multiple wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, etc.

Two top American economists - Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff - show that the more indebted a country is, with a government debt/GDP ratio of 0.9, and external debt/GDP of 0.6 being critical thresholds, the more GDP growth drops materially.

Specifically, Reinhart and Rogoff write:

The relationship between government debt and real GDP growth is weak for debt/GDP ratios below a threshold of 90 percent of GDP. Above 90 percent, median growth rates fall by one percent, and average growth falls considerably more. We find that the threshold for public debt is similar in advanced and emerging economies...

Indeed, it should be obvious to anyone who looks at the issue that deficits do matter.

A PhD economist [Michel Chossudovsky] told me:

War always causes recession. Well, if it is a very short war, then it may stimulate the economy in the short-run. But if there is not a quick victory and it drags on, then wars always put the nation waging war into a recession and hurt its economy.

You know about America's unemployment problem. You may have even heard that the U.S. may very well have suffered a permanent destruction of jobs.

But did you know that the defense employment sector is booming?

As I pointed out in August, public sector spending - and mainly defense spending - has accounted for virtually all of the new job creation in the past 10 years:

The U.S. has largely been financing job creation for ten years. Specifically, as the chief economist for BusinessWeek, Michael Mandel, points out, public spending has accounted for virtually all new job creation in the past 10 years:

...

[I R A Darth Aggie]

I'm not convinced that The Won is particulary smart. I don't think he's smarter than I am, for instance.