Sure, I disagree with a number of his assumptions, for example that it's wise to
- use taxpayer dollars to keep jobs in the U.S
- further expand redistributive "justice"
- ask taxpayers to pay yet more into the public education system. Research has not shown spending more to yield more learning.
- guarantee "higher ed for all." I believe that will translate into lining the pockets of higher education. If tuition is more affordable, colleges will simply raise tuition more, which is what has happened every time government increases financial aid to students.
But those issues are, for now, beside the point. I predict that Obama's inordinate oratorical gifts, strong intelligence and personal charisma, in concert with his outstanding behind-the-scenes team and a besotted media, will get him elected in a landslide, giving him a broad mandate for his big-government approach.
While my best judgment is that, on average, private sector/small-government approaches ultimately do the most good for the most people, I believe no one can with great confidence assert whether, at this point in history, that's true. The question is affected by too many factors to predict with certitude.
But Obama is a far better--indeed an inspiring--standard bearer for the big-government approach than McCain is for small government. And after eight years of an inept, hubristic Republican, the public wants--well--change.
And they're going to get it: America's most liberal senator as president, a liberal congress, and a more baldly liberal media than any in history will create a perfect storm for a grand experiment on the efficacy of big government.
I am curious to see how it works out, and, of course, wish Obama well.