7thriv

Ho Hum. So Obama's "closed" GITMO. More accurately, he has ordered that the offices that must coordinate the consideration of the possible need to look into the ramifications of the fervently desired closing of a prison of war camp that was the best possible alternative at the time. Good luck with that. But, doesn't bitching about GITMO seem awfully 2006-ish? The War of Terror isn't exactly "over" and we haven't exactly "won," but in a lot of ways GITMO has served its purpose. At present, it sits half empty, its Lazy-Boyz and halal cafeteria gathering dust. 

Is al-Qaeda (or the jihadist philosophy) still dangerous? Hell, yeah. But they are definitely in the "wound licking" "reconstitution" phase. GITMO was all about holding stateless actors for whom the law could not account. Things aren't as settled as Andrew McCarthy might like, but American law has readjusted so we can better deal with these people. 

And, let's get real. Nothing's changed as of today. GITMO is still open. The trials have been suspended. Virtually all of George Bush's legal innovations have been generally approved by the courts, and have not been altered (publicly). Oh, we can't waterboard ... unless Obama gives special permission. 

But the truth is, I don't sit around worrying about Osama bin Laden or Iraq like I might have 18 months ago. What we should worry about is the crash of '08, and the gathering depression that we will simply need to get through over the next few years.

Obama can close all the GITMO'S he likes, but there is harder work, and more interesting questions to deal with NOW, such as: what sort of financial regulations are we going to have going forward? Maybe no one wants to hear from investors, and what we would like to see, but clarity in those rules and regulations are an absolute necessity before there can be any recovery. Except for vague calls to "regulate" hedge funds, or increase the SEC's budget, I have not heard much in the way of concrete proposals. What is the SEC going to do? Are we going to prosecute some of the leaders of US finance who denied there were problems at their institutions until their employees and shareholders lost everything? And, how are we going to to replace what has become an outmoded system (regulatory framework developed in the Thirties married to a business plan cooked up in the Eighties)?

Another question I would be more interested in hearing an answer to is: "who is going to pay for this?" Because I hope we all realize it's not just our taxes. Bill Clinton famously complained about how he couldn't believe that the success of his economic plan should depend on the opinions of the bond markets. But, that's because government, like the rest of us, must meet the everyday realities of competing for scarce resources. And, at least Clinton's bondholders lived here. Now, we have to rely on a lot unfriendly foreign $$ to fund our trillion dollar budgets. How long can that go on? No one knows the answer, but I think we all realize, deep down, that the answer is not "forever."