The Dish

Friedersdorf counters me:

I reject the notion that the United States of America is in a position so dire that it can only be saved by a particularly noble leader. Arguments for that proposition could be made for the tenures of George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and maybe even FDR. It is notable that even those men never behaved as if that proposition were true, and anyway the challenges we face, however grave, pale in comparison to their burdens. Would anyone trade our challenges today for the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, the Great Depression, or World War II? I wouldn’t even trade places with the Americans who endured the Carter Administration.

This is a caricature of my position. We sure are lucky to have a president aware of the scale of the crisis – and I think it is far worse than the 1970s. We face fiscal collapse in a way the US has almost never faced before in a global marketplace that may soon rob us of the old safety net of a reserve currency. My position anyway is that it is the collapse of any desire for the common good, the evaporation of civic virtue that is our problem. No leader can save us from that. Only we can.

"Revolutionary change does not come as one cataclysmic moment (beware of such moments!) but as an endless succession of surprises, moving zigzag toward a more decent society. We don't have to engage in grand, heroic actions to participate in the process of change. Small acts, when multiplied by millions of people, can transform the world. Even when we don't "win," there is fun and fulfillment in the fact that we have been involved, with other good people, in something worthwhile. We need hope.

An optimist isn't necessarily a blithe, slightly sappy whistler in the dark of our time.

To be hopeful in bad times is not just foolishly romantic. It is based on the fact that human history is a history not only of cruelty but also of compassion, sacrifice, courage, kindness. What we choose to emphasize in this complex history will determine our lives. If we see only the worst, it destroys our capacity to do something. If we remember those times and places–and there are so many–where people have behaved magnificently, this gives us the energy to act, and at least the possibility of sending this spinning top of a world in a different direction. And if we do act, in however small a way, we don't have to wait for some grand utopian future. The future is an infinite succession of presents, and to live now as we think human beings should live, in defiance of all that is bad around us, is itself a marvelous victory," – Howard Zinn, "The Optimism of Uncertainty," The Nation, 2004.

Even libertarian Brian Doherty pays respects to the liberal firebrand. RIP.

Jacob Sullum has details.

Timothy Kincaid notes that the RNC didn't put out an official response to the DADT pledge:

If I’m evaluating this situation correctly, the Republican Party will be expending little capital this year in opposing the change in Military policy. And it may be a stretch to read too much into this, but I think I am beginning to see a pattern emerge. It appears to me that anti-gay policies may be shifting from being Official Republican Positions to becoming the positions of Republicans.

There's an act for that.

Nate Silver connects Obama's approval ratings slide to various events:

I'm not going to be able to give you any one incredibly satisfying answer here. The most basic reason for the decline in Obama's numbers, almost certainly, is that people's expectations for what he ought to have been able to accomplish on the economy have accelerated faster than his ability to do so. But beyond

that, things are a little murky.

The periods that represent the steepest declines in Obama's approval ratings are only loosely related to the periods that provided the most disappointing economic news. Meanwhile, while I'm sure that the health care bill hasn't helped Obama any, the trajectory of that debate isn't a great fit for the trajectory of his approval numbers. Finally, factors like the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor and the seating of Al Franken may not have been terribly impactful unto themselves, but may have given rise to unhelpful narratives for Obama and the Democrats that contributed to their problems.

Spot on:

Amy Davidson is off-put by the Tim Tebow story:

The problem is the proselytizing use to which the story of his birth is being put—this is the Trig factor. There’s something gaudy about it. There will be a Super Bowl ad about the happy outcome that attends not listening to medical advice. Ignore your doctors, trust in God, and your child, too, can win a Heisman trophy. Will there be empathy in there for women who aren’t ready to risk their lives in order to be given a quarterback?

Jan Crawford, on the other hand, sees a disconnect:

According to the women’s rights groups, Pam Tebow shouldn’t be able to talk about her choice. They won’t even allow the discussion. And that shows just how much the issue of abortion has been taken out of public discourse. Because of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Roe v. Wade, you can’t even talk about it.

Palin, unsurprisingly, grabs the story with both arms. I have to say I see nothing wrong with it. But then it affirms my own position – I am pro-choice for pro-life. I believe that women should have the choice to abort in the first trimester, but I also believe that choosing life if you absolutely can is something worth celebrating.

The fourth quarter 2009 GDP report is out. Edward Harrison urges caution:

There will be a lot said about this number. But, your takeaways should be: cyclical agents like inventory changes will drive the uptick near-term. This is being bolstered by stimulus. And the end result is higher disposable personal income.  We should still look at [disposable personal income] and retail sales for signs of sustainability.

Calculated Risk:

This is very close to my expectations and shows a fairly weak economy (real PCE increase 2.0%). The question is: what happens in 2010?

Yglesias:

5.7 percent is a very good number. If we could sustain something like that for a little while then we’d start to make progress on the labor market. But the worrying thing here is that so much of the growth represents inventory shifts. The recession left firms with large excess inventories, then we had a few quarters in which inventory draw-down impeded growth, and what we saw in Q4 was the end of that process. You could imagine a bit more good inventory news in the future as firms restock, but it’s bound to be a transient thing.

Kelly Evans:

Concerns persist that the economy’s momentum could fade, but there are signs that demand is improving. Consumer spending, for example, rose at a 2.7% annualized rate in the three months through November, excluding auto purchases, which were inflated by the government’s cash-for-clunkers program.

Inventory-led growth can’t last forever. But it’s a fine way to start.

Daniel Indiviglio:

[T]his is good news, but…we don't know what the final number will actually be [after the number is revised]. I would also suggest holding off on popping the champagne to celebrate a robust U.S. economy. Most economists predicted a healthy rate of GDP in Q4-2009, but expect that to decline from there to more moderate levels through 2010. And unemployment is also expected to hover near double-digits throughout the year.

And the actual kind: