What We Learned from Rand Paul, and Must Continue to Learn

Morning Jolt – March 8, 2013 By Jim Geraghty Happy Friday! Here's your Morning Jolt. Jim What We Learned from Rand Paul, and Must Continue to Learn Phil Klein on Rand Paul's filibuster, and what it revealed about Obama: A lot of the outpouring of conservative support for Paul's filibuster on Obama's drone policy went beyond the libertarian and anti-interventionist blocs of the movement who were also deeply troubled by Bush era counter-terrorism policies. Even those conservatives who may not agree with all of Paul's views on presidential war powers were supportive if for no other reason than they relished seeing a conservative win a messaging war with Obama. It was impossible to dismiss this as just a right-wing Tea Party attack, because a lot of liberals agree with the substance of Paul's criticism. This filibuster had to get under Obama's skin. As much as anything else, he was elected on a promise to turn the page on the Bush era and conduct the war against terrorism with greater concern for civil liberties. Watching Paul's filibuster last night, I couldn't help but think that this is how Obama imagines himself –  a principled crusader for justice. When Bush and Cheney were running the show, whatever could be said about them, at least they were consistent in supporting broad presidential powers in the realm of national security. But it's hard to look back at the pre-2009 Obama and see him as anything other than an arrogant hypocrite now — somebody who thinks a muscular executive branch is okay so long as he's running it. Many – not all, but many – folks on the right looked at Obama early on and figured that it was all or mostly a pose, that the junior senator with the messianic media coverage was not leading public opinion but riding it and adjusting himself to fit its preferences.  As some of us pointed out, all statements from him come with an expiration date, which is the moment those statements become politically inconvenient. Or, as one of my favorite writers pointed out in May 2009: Moderates thought they were electing a moderate; liberals thought they were electing a liberal. Both camps were wrong. Ideology does not have the final say in Obama's decision-making; an Alinskyite's core principle is to take any action that expands his power and to avoid any action that risks his power. As conservatives size up their new foe, they ought to remember: It's not about liberalism. It's about power. Obama will jettison anything that costs him power, and do anything that enhances it — including invite Rick Warren to give the benediction at his inauguration, dine with conservative columnists, and dismiss an appointee at the White House Military Office to ensure the perception of accountability. Now, let's all take positioning and messaging notes from Paul. He fought his battle on the most favorable territory possible: that the U.S. president cannot assert the authority to kill an American citizen who is on U.S. soil with a drone without a trial. He didn't oppose all use of drones, at least in this filibuster. He didn't even oppose the use of drones to kill American citizens overseas, like Awlaki. By the way, apparently Senator Dick Durbin paid absolutely no attention to any of that, because in his objection to Rand Paul, he kept invoking Osama bin Laden. Who isn't an American citizen. Who wasn't on U.S. soil. Who was, in fact, indicted in U.S. court. Understaffed America One of the first victims of the Great Recession was service. I don't know about you, but with disturbing regularity I get seated in restaurants . . . and we sit there . . . waiting for someone to greet us, bring menus, ask if we want anything to drink . . . and we're left waiting for a seemingly interminable time. It's as if our waiter suddenly retired. Or, you know, it's like we're in Europe. Peggy Noonan is noticing the same thing. It's not a debt and deficit crisis, it's a jobs crisis. The debt and the deficit are part of it, part of the general fear that we're on a long slide and can't turn it around. The federal tax code is part of it—it's a drag on everything, a killer of the spirit of guts and endeavor. Federal regulations are part of it. The administration's inability to see the stunning and historic gift of the energy revolution is part of it. But it's a jobs crisis that's the central thing. And you see it everywhere you look. I'm in Pittsburgh, making my way to the airport hotel. The people movers are broken and we pull our bags along the dingy carpet. There's an increasing sense in America now that the facades are intact but the machinery inside is broken. The hotel has entrances on two floors. I search for the lobby, find it. Travelers are milling about, but there's no information desk, no doorman, no bellman or concierge, just two harried-looking workers at a front desk on the second level. The man who checked me in put his phones on hold when I asked for someone to accompany me upstairs… Things are getting pretty bare-bones in America. Doormen, security, bellmen, people working the floor—that's maybe a dozen jobs that should have been filled, at one little hotel on one day in one town. Everyone's keeping costs down, not hiring. What that hotel looked like is America without its muscle, its efficiency, its old confidence. There are a lot of reasons for this . . . but we've added one more reason for a company to try to hobble along with fewer workers than they normally would: Under ObamaCare, employers with 50 or more full-time workers must provide health insurance for all their workers, paying at least 65% of the cost of a family policy or 85% of the cost of an individual plan. Moreover, the insurance must meet the federal government's requirements in terms of what benefits are included, meaning that many businesses that offer insurance to their workers today will have to change to new, more expensive plans. ObamaCare's rules make expansion expensive, particularly for the 500,000 US businesses that have fewer than 100 employees. Suppose that a firm with 49 employees does not provide health benefits. Hiring one more worker will trigger the mandate. The company would now have to provide insurance coverage to all 50 workers or pay a tax penalty. …Under the circumstances, how likely is the company to hire that 50th worker? Or, if a company already has 50 workers, isn't the company likely to lay off one employee? Or cut hours and make some employees part time, thus getting under the 50 employee cap? Indeed, a study by Mercer found that 18% of companies were likely to do exactly that. It's worth noting that in France, another country where numerous government regulations kick in at 50 workers, there are 1,500 companies with 48 employees and 1,600 with 49 employees, but just 660 with 50 and only 500 with 51. If service industries cut the staff any deeper, it's going to start looking like the sets of The Walking Dead in this country. And Now, an Extended Look at the Comedic Horror That Is Dudes A couple Jolts ago, I mentioned Dudes, a spectacularly bad idea that Cam Edwards and I came up with one late Thursday night. The show was our sitcom answer to HBO's Girls, -- inspired by his Twitter chats with Kurt Schlichter. We admit, we don't know what it's like to be a hapless young woman stumbling her way into delayed adulthood in the era of the Obama economy. We know what it's like to be a thirty or forty-something guy, still trying to play by the Reagan-era rules and values, in an Obama economy and Kardashian culture. Cam and I envisioned a very Kurt-like protagonist, a successful lawyer, red state in his values in a blue-state city, a bubbling teapot of incredulity at the standards, expectations, and mentality of the modern world around him. We would meet Not-Kurt dealing with a client who wanted to sue someone for writing nasty things about him on the Internet. NOT-KURT What you're talking about is a troll. I don't sue trolls. Do you know why? BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO MONEY. When you get libeled by a millionaire with a mansion and a yacht, then call me. He would later lament our litigious society . . . while admitting it's a good way to make a living. People are willing to sue each other over the most inane and inconsequential things! It is ridiculous, it is destructive to our society, and it is going to make me an embarrassingly rich man. Not-Kurt would have a hapless legal assistant, who falls in with every what-are-they-thinking fad and trend that comes down the pike – " meggings," "guy-liner" and "man-scara," perhaps even being a Brony. Separate from the inanity of the trends, Not-Kurt would regularly chew his assistant out for his willingness to follow every silly idea proclaimed as stylish, concluding every grow-up-think-for-yourself-and-be-a-man lecture with, "Go fetch me a latte." Not-Kurt would have some regular friends/partners-in-crime. One would be the Mike Greenberg to his Mike Golic, a guy who's slightly less at war with the spun-off-its-axis world around him, but befuddled nonetheless. He's the one who would offer the rant: I'm a married middle-aged guy with a house in the suburbs who goes to work, pays his taxes and takes care of his kids. When the hell did I turn into the villain in society? Chris Brown still walks the streets! In the time it's taken me to finish this sentence, "Shawty Lo" has impregnated three more women and Kim Kardashian's been on four more magazine covers! I think one of 'em's a fishing magazine! Yet somehow Madison Avenue considers me to be their go-to stereotype as a doofus, I'm the butt of every joke, sneered at for unsophisticated tastes, dismissed as a relic of a fading past, accused of not paying my fair share in taxes and insufficiently globally conscious because I'm only taking care of what's directly in front of me instead of glaciers or the Gaza Strip. How am I the problem in the world today? What the hell did I ever do? We wanted Nick Searcy, star of FX's Justified, conservative Twitter star, and host of "Acting School" videos, to guest star as a professional "manscaper." We envisioned a show that was not quite explicitly political, but certainly would echo some of the cries of disbelief we've heard among the conservative grassroots about the state of the world today.  At some point they would encounter some Occupy type, and Not-Kurt would dismiss the Occupier's complaint that "corporatist attitudes about what constitutes value" were at the heart of what ails the society: You're never going to get my respect. You would loudly proclaim that you don't care about that, and perhaps you shouldn't. Hey, maybe what I think of you doesn't really matter. But what the economy as a whole is willing to pay you to do does matter, a lot. And absolutely no amount of protesting or chanting or giant puppets can make you more useful to someone else who has the money to pay you to do something. And of course, every odd phrase would coincidentally be the name of an obscure band from the early 90s that Kurt saw open up for Right Said Fred in 1992. Tell me you wouldn't watch that. Photo courtesy Kurt, so you know, buy his e-book or something. ADDENDUM: Remember when I said I was going to get more visual? I was pretty pleased with yesterday's effort: This format is very useful for reaching the voting public that isn't interested in reading beyond two sentences. Get all the latest news, 24/7, at www.NationalReview.com Save 75%... Subscribe to National Review magazine today and get 75% off the newsstand price. Click here for the print edition or here for the digital. National Review also makes a great gift! Click here to send a full-year of NR Digital or here to send the print edition to family, friends, and fellow conservatives. Conservatives – stay healthy! Get plenty of Vitamin Sea on the next National Review cruise. Visit www.NRCruise.com for complete information. National Review, Inc. Remove your email address from our list. We respect your right to privacy. View our policy. This email was sent by: National Review, Inc. 215 Lexington Avenue, 11th Floor New York, NY 10016 561