BCT Editorial – 9/19/08

This page was last updated on September 27, 2008.

Degrees; Editorial; Beaver County Times; September 19, 2008.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“We’re all socialists now.”

[RWC] Wow, this editorial admits the Times has been socialist all along! I wonder if that was the intent.

“The Bush administration’s bailouts of private and semi-private financial institutions in recent days, weeks and months and the Federal Reserve’s desperate attempts to manipulate the U.S. economy prove beyond a doubt that laissez faire, capitalism and free enterprise are American myths and have been for more than a century.”

[RWC] Though the editorial referred to “semi-private financial institutions,” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are more correctly identified as government sponsored enterprises (GSE). These GSEs were created in 1938 (Fannie Mae) and 1968 (Freddie Mac) by Democrat presidents FDR and LBJ and Democrat-majority Congresses. Given the Times love of government programs, it’s understandable why the editorial would use the “semi-private” euphemism instead of the real description that includes “government.”

You may be interested to know my search of Times editorials since at least 2005 found no mention of the problems with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac until they were seized, bailed out, et cetera in late August 2008. Even then the editorials have not yet correctly identified Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as GSEs. Instead, Times editorials simply refer to them as “giant mortgage companies,” “semi-private financial institutions,” or don’t label them at all in order to obscure their origins. Indeed, none of the editorials noted the origins of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

“As historian John Lukacs, a true conservative, has pointed out, the difference between socialist Democrats and socialist Republicans is a matter of degree. Republicans are more nationalistic than socialistic, while Democrats have been more socialistic than nationalistic.”

[RWC] When a leftist refers to someone as “a true conservative,” take it with a grain of salt. Remember, the Times considers members of Congress with Americans for Democratic Action liberal quotients of 90% to be “centrists.” I’m not familiar with Mr. Lukacs so I don’t know if the editorial’s assertion is correct.

Note, however, the editorial shifted from talking about principles (conservatism) to political parties and attempts to tar all Republicans as socialists to some degree. “Socialist Republicans” are what conservative Republicans call Republicans in name only (RINO).

Whether intentional or not, when the editorial told us “Democrats have been more socialistic than nationalistic”, the editorial asserted Democrats are more committed to socialism than to their country. While I don’t believe that’s true for most rank-and-file Democrat voters, it’s been true for Democrat party activists and leaders for quite a while. It’s nice to see the Times finally admit it.

“They’re both socialistic, though, as the recent bailouts prove beyond a shadow of a doubt.”

[RWC] Again the editorial ducks the central issue that the current mess was caused by GSEs birthed and promoted by Democrats (and opposed by most Republicans) for 70 years. I could be wrong, but I doubt we’ll see a truthful “How we got here” editorial on this topic.