How many times are we going to hear asinine comments like the following from Zack Burgess at the Philadelphia Tribune?
Afghanistan
By now you are probably getting pretty tired of the comparisons of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama and how Obama is/would/should apply the lessons learned by Bill Clinton and coast to a second term. I, however, have always seen Bill Clinton and Barack Obama as two very different politicians with different goals.
When will our President come to the realization that the government does not have any money save that which is provided by its citizens? If he understood that, he wouldn’t have said this:
“Just as it would be a terrible mistake to borrow against our children’s future to pay our way today, it would be equally wrong to neglect their future by failing to invest in areas that will determine our economic success in this new century,” Mr. Obama said at the White House.
Let me posit a translation: we shouldn’t borrow against our children’s future, so we should borrow against our children’s future. And let me add another pet peeve and that is how the statists have redefined the word “invest”. What they really mean is spend, but invest sounds so much more grown up. However, most intelligent people understand invest to mean when you put your money into something with the belief you will get all your money back plus a premium. You don’t invest in the stock market with the idea you will never see your money again and will subsequently put more money into it next year. You invest in a house with the idea that you will sell it later for more money. You don’t invest in a house if you expect it to go down in value. But our elected representatives would have you believe that pouring money down a rat hole is an investment.
Immature and Irresponsible
Like a child caught standing over his mother’s prized china lying shattered on the floor, President Obama wants us to believe it’s not his fault, no, we are going to have trillion dollar plus deficits for the next ten years because of Bush and the Republicans. He is one year into his presidency. This is his budget, not Bush’s. If he can’t handle the job he should resign and turn it over to, er, Biden? Check that. Perhaps he can just go watch television in the White House for the next three years and leave the rest of us alone. Doing nothing would cause less damage than what he has planned. He jacked up spending 24% and then “courageously” instituted a freeze on that spending for three years. Think about it. If I gave you a 24% raise on Monday and then came back on Friday and said, “Gee, I’m really sorry to have to do this, but times are really tough. I’m going to have to freeze your new salary for the next three years. Can you ever forgive me?” Could you not burst out laughing?
We’re Going to Make Some Tough Decisions…Next Year
We are in a fiscal crisis, but don’t think for a moment you are going to see any tough decisions in an election year, particularly when so many Democrats are in danger of having to find jobs in the real world. So this year is tough talk. Next year we get busy!
Democrats or Republicans or maybe the Tea Party movement is going to have to act, sooner rather than later. Here is how the federal government breaks down:
- Medicare and Medicaid — 33%
- Social Security — 21%
- Interest on the Debt — 8%
- Defense — 20%
- Non-Defense Discretionary — 18%
The first three items continue to grow with no signs of slowing and interest will really take off when the Fed stops the easy money program. Defense can shrink as Iraq and Afghanistan stabilize, but not a lot as this is still job number one for the federal government. So do you see the problem? You can thank Democratic President Lyndon Baines Johnson for the first ticking time bomb above. You can thank Democratic President Franklin Delano Roosevelt for the second ticking time bomb. You can now thank President Barack Obama for what is becoming the third ticking time bomb and that is without his Health Care, and Cap and Trade.
So how is President Obama going to “solve” this problem? By tinkering with the last item, Non-Defense Discretionary spending. But don’t worry, he will also tax those evil rich and make sure they pay their fair share. But before he goes too far down that path I have a suggestion for him:
- Listen closely to the Beatles song “Taxman“
- Ask yourself why the members of the band moved to the United States?
High tax states like New York and California are finding that a significant number of their wealthy citizenry are moving to lower tax states, exacerbating those states’ fiscal problems. If you look at the percentage of the population that pays the lion’s share of the taxes you will quickly see that if a relatively small percentage of the population, who can afford to live anywhere, actually decide to leave the United States of Tax the Rich, the resulting fiscal problem will be very, very severe. Obama can only poke his tax stick in that cage so long before he gets a nasty reaction.
We’re All Standing On the Third Rail
Social Security has been called the third rail of politics, but the reality is that we are all standing on the third rail trying to keep our balance and if anyone slips and touches the ground, we’re all fried. We have to suck up the courage to address Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. If we can’t slow the growth of these programs so that they take a smaller amount of the budget pie each year, we are toast. None of those programs is in the Constitution, but the liberals/progressives created them with empty promises of benefits without costs. This should have been the first clue:
“Ida May Fuller worked for three years under the Social Security program. The accumulated taxes on her salary during those three years was a total of $24.75. Her initial monthly check was $22.54. During her lifetime she collected a total of $22,888.92 in Social Security benefits.”
Ida May Fuller was the first recipient of monthly S.S. checks when she retired in 1940. She lived to be 100.
She almost got paid back in full with her first check. She got 926 times more than what she paid in. That’s a 92,600% return on “investment.” Not bad, huh?
She got back almost everything she paid in with her first check. Instead of ringing alarm bells all over the country, politicians patted themselves on the back for the great system they created. We sent Bernie Madoff to jail, why should Congress be exempt? What Bernie Madoff did was child’s play in comparison. Where he fell short was that he couldn’t force people to participate through payroll taxes, and he couldn’t print money. So why is what he did criminal and what Congress is doing not? He had to get his participants to voluntarily turn over their money. He promised returns of 40% per year. Ida may got 92,600% return on her investment.
Burn the Ships
There is the story of a general who landed on a beach to face an formidable enemy. He ordered that the ships that brought them there be burned. By doing so, he knew his men would fight ferociously because there was no escape, either they fought to win or they died. Perhaps we should do the same with Congress and President Obama. Fix Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid or you join Bernie Madoff in Cell Block “C”, for running a massive Ponzi scheme. What has kept Congress from fixing this in the past is the fear of not getting reelected. Let’s raise the stakes so that not getting reelected would pale in comparison to incarceration. It’s time our elected officials started paying attention to the people and not their perks. The disaster train is going downhill and picking up speed, headed for a cliff. It’s time ALL politicians put the country first and fixed this problem that, after all, they created. It’s fun to give out the goodies, but this is a crisis that cannot be shunned. It must be dealt with head on.
Daniel Henninger wrote in the Wall Street Journal:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid tells of congratulating freshman Sen. Obama on a phenomenal speech. Without a hint of conceit, Mr. Obama replied, “Harry, I have a gift.”
In the article he also describes this observation:
Harvard Law Prof. Charles Ogletree told how Mr. Obama spoke on one contentious issue at the law school, and each side thought he was endorsing their view. Mr. Ogletree said: “Everyone was nodding, Oh, he agrees with me.”
That’s essentially how he got elected. With a heaping helping hand from the popular media, many people saw Obama as a blank screen upon which they could project their own views and see those as Obama’s own. He’s our man! He listens. He cares deeply. For a politician it is a phenomenal gift. For a legislator it is an extremely valuable gift. For an executive it is poison.
Pulling the Trigger
As a politician or a legislator you are in the role of persuader; somebody else makes the decision to vote for you or vote with you, respectively. As an executive you are in the role of the decider. You must make a decision and every decision, especially the tough ones are going to make a good many people unhappy. Perhaps that explains why, in the Illinois Senate, Obama voted “Present” so many times. Voting “Present” rather than “Yea” or “Nay” allowed him to hold that special place where everyone felt he agreed with them. Too many decisions one way or another would have tarnished “the gift”. So why is “the gift” poison for an executive? If you don’t have “the gift” and you make a decision your opponents may disagree with you, but they are not surprised. If you have “the gift” and you make a decision, those on the short side feel betrayed and angry, because they thought you agreed with them and then “sold out” and decided the other way.
Obama is in a tight spot where he has to make decisions and decisions have consequences. When you make a decision it is very hard to make it seem like everyone got their way. His complete lack of executive experience is telling. If he had some executive experience, such as a mayor or a governor, he might have had enough practice learning how to make his decisions appear to satisfy everyone, as his campaign speeches did. But that’s the thing about decisions. If everyone supports them, they’re not much of a decision, like deciding to pardon a turkey on Thanksgiving. Everyone enjoys the decision, but it’s really not what we elect presidents for.
I’ll Have the Waffles, Please
If you watch closely, you can see that Obama is struggling to preserve “the gift”. He said he is for closing Guantanamo, but not yet. He is for pulling out of Iraq, but no timetable. The general he put in charge of Afghanistan, McChrystal, said he needed 40,000 more troops, but Obama could not bring himself to say yes or no. He had to ponder, think, consult, weigh alternatives, and three months later, he gave McChrystal what he asked for. Those on the left complained that he was not pulling out. Those on the right complained that he wasted precious time while our troops were on the battlefield. His backers tried to give him the fig leaf of showing gravitas. He can’t seem to find the magic formula where everyone applauds him. From “the gift” he has gone to “the anti-gift”. Instead of satisfying everyone, he is finding that he is satisfying no one.
Move On
It’s time for Obama to “Move On”. He should put “the gift” in his trophy case right next to his Nobel Peace Prize. It got him to the White House. How much more can he ask of such a thing? So drop the pretense. We all know he is a hard left guy, so he should just be who he is. He may suddenly face a more hostile press, or they may love him more, although that would be hard to believe. But when he makes a decision he will at least please his base, and then his opponents can fight his statist goals without being branded as racists. As a hard left guy he will probably not get re-elected because America is not a hard left country, on the contrary the majority of Americans describe themselves as conservative. But by choosing he can try to do what he can within one term. It will be a battle. Obama’s poll ratings have dropped steadily since his inauguration and the Democrats are likely to lose seats in Congress this fall. As an old acquaintance once said to me, “It’s like standing in the middle of the road. Choose left or choose right, but choose; otherwise you get hit by traffic coming in both directions.”
I am sure you all recall the video played ad nauseum starring the Reverend Wright railing against America defending itself. It now seems to accurately describe the results of the new hope and change administration. After his worldwide apology tour, and banning the term “War on Terror,” replacing it with the limp “Overseas Contingency Operation,” so that, like his presidential campaign, no one would know what he actually meant or stood for, his own chickens are coming home to roost.
Actions Have Consequences
The left used to attack the Bush administration’s approach because being tough on terrorists only served to aid them in their recruiting. Maybe so, but I am less concerned about lines of recruits in Afghanistan than crazed terrorists in New York. Obama’s apology tour shows his weakness and as the terrorist mindset abhors weakness, it encourages attacks. So what would you prefer, attacks on American soil, or an uptick in recruiting on the other side of the world?
War vs. Law and Order
Bush recognized the War on Terror for what it was, a direct attack on the United States and our way of life. In a war, you go after the enemy, you don’t wait for him to come to you. You take prisoners and hold them, until the conflict is over. You dismantle their ability to wage war. It is aggressive and proactive. It is the way America has prevailed in wartime.
The Obama approach is Law an Order. Each act is seen as separate an isolated and as a crime to be investigated and prosecuted after the fact. First responders are more important than the first wave of Marines. To quote today’s Wall Street Journal:
Brian Jenkins, who studies terrorism for the Rand Corporation, says there were more terror incidents (12), including thwarted plots, on U.S. soil in 2009 than in any year since 2001. The jihadists don’t seem to like Americans any better because we’re closing down Guantanamo.
But the Obama Administration is currently considering releasing prisoners held in Guantanamo to Yemen. How long do you think it will be before they are back on the front lines trying to kill us?
Add to the mix the Obama administration’s, or should I say Eric Holder’s, decision to try the 9/11 terrorists in a civilian court. Holder’s testimony before Congress justifying his decision was painful to watch how he had no credible justification. Don’t forget to give Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, his Miranda rights and get him a good lawyer. Let’s pretend his claims to be associated with al Qaeda is just tough talk and braggadocio.
The reality is that whenever America fought a war and politicians pulled punches (e.g., Viet Nam) we lost.
Things are Working Swell
Janet Napolitano, Obama’s head of Homeland Security had this to say, according to the New York Times
“The system has worked really very, very smoothly over the course of the past several days,” Janet Napolitano, the Homeland Security secretary said, in an interview on “This Week” on ABC. Robert Gibbs, the White House spokesman, used nearly the same language on “Face the Nation” on CBS, saying that “in many ways, this system has worked.”
How chilling is that? What exactly does she mean by the system worked? She refers to the number of organizations that were alerted after the fact. How about notifications before the fact? How about listening to the terrorist’s own father who reported him to the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria. How about denying him a visa? Or is Napolitano too busy adding funeral homes to her list of organizations to notify after the fact?
Where’s Obama?
If there’s a chance Chicago might get the Olympics, don’t worry, Obama’s on a plane to give it the old presidential push! If there’s a Nobel Prize to pick up, Obama is your man! If there is a terrorist attack on our country, hey, don’t bother me I’m on vacation in Hawaii.
Some pundits on the news pointed out that President Bush didn’t speak out against the shoe bomber, Richard Reid, for several days, so cut Obama some slack. The problem is that no one doubted for a minute that Bush was engaged in the War on Terror, some even saying he was obsessed. Well that obsession kept us safe for seven years. In less than one year we have had Fort Hood and now this airline bombing.
Furthermore, why is Eric Holder making such a monumental decision regarding trying the 9/11 terrorists in New York? Why isn’t this Obama’s decision? Just like so much in this administration, Obama campaigns and gives speeches, and Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Eric Holder make policy decisions on their own.
Here’s to the Heroes
The heroes in this case were a Dutch citizen and the flight attendants, who subdued the terrorist and extinguished the fire. To quote again from the Wall Street Journal:
The lesson here is the same as Flight 93 on 9/11 and shoe-bomber Richard Reid, which is that civilians willing to act in their own self-defense are a crucial part of “homeland security.”
May I suggest that the statists drop their efforts to weaken the 2ndAmendment? As part of “homeland security” we may need to bear arms like at no time since the Civil War.
On Tuesday night President Obama gave an uncharacteristically bland speech regarding his way forward in Afghanistan. In one sentence he said he was adding 30,000 troops while shortly thereafter he said he would be removing them. It’s enough to make one nostalgic for John Kerry’s “clarification” of how he voted for the war in Iraq before he voted against it. So our Waffler in Chief has given the enemy their battle plan: hunker down; keep a low profile; don’t back me into a corner, and beginning in July 2011, while we’re packing up you can be ramping up. Bush never committed to an end date certain for that very reason. They way you defeat the enemy is by making it clear that you will finish the job, no matter how long it takes.
It’s All Karzai’s Fault!
With this administration, it’s always somebody else’s fault. But put yourself in Karzai’s shoes. If you have the U.S. on one side, and the Taliban on the other with the U.S. packing up and the Taliban sharpening their knives, who are you going to cut a deal with? They guy who plans to be there for the next 20 years or the guy who plans to be there for the next 20 months? There is one way to deal with the bad guys who plan on being there for the next 20 years and that’s to make sure they spend those next 20 years six feet under.
We had similar challenges in Iraq, but once Bush ordered the surge and the bad guys knew we were going to finish the job, they started cutting deals of their own. Many came over to our side and helped end the violence in a number of provinces. Peace through strength. It works. Weakness fires up the enemy and emboldens him. You decide which is the better strategy.
Reading one of the liberal pundit’s pan of Sarah Palin’s new book and how the reviewer harps on her inexperience, anyone with a room temperature IQ cannot help but ask, what about the guy who won? You can say she had little executive experience, only two years as governor of Alaska and two terms as mayor of 7,000 resident Wasilla. But while one may argue she had little executive experience, he had none. For that matter, neither did McCain or Biden. Legislative experience? Sure. Executive experience? No, and it shows.
Decisions, Decisions
What has he actually made a decision on? The economy? The porkulus package that is “saving” so many jobs, was put together by Pelosi. It was as if she brought it to him and said, “Here, sign,” and he did. Health care? He talked a great deal about it, but five or more proposals sprouted from different committees and like a demolition derby, banged around until there was one left, dented, but still moving.
Guantanamo? Iraq? Afghanistan? A decision, no, no, no, we need to ponder and confer more. Despite putting the commander, McChrystal, in place, Obama can’t seem to agree or disagree with his recommendation. And now, the granddaddy of them all, trying the 9/11 terrorists in New York.
Who’s the Boss?
This is what Barack Obama said:
“‘This is a prosecutorial decision as well as a national security decision.”
Er, no. This is a decision for the Commander in Chief. Don’t slough it off on some underling, no matter how lofty his title, so that at some future date you can put the blame on him. As Harry Truman (D) said, “The buck stops here.” It’s time, Mr. President, to step in, assert your constitutional authority and put a stop to this. The military tribunals were set up and authorized by Congress for just this purpose. It’s time to do the right thing. You took an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, not to bow to your left wing base.
After 9/11, President Bush kept us safe for seven and half years. Less than a year into your presidency, we have had the worst terrorist attack on our soil since then. This was preventable. But we are already starting down the slippery slope of liberal happy talk and putting all Americans in harm’s way. Consider this, if the jihadists had their way and actually defeated us and took over, the first place they would go to slaughter the devils would be Hollywood. If you don’t want to protect America because it’s what you took an oath to do, then do it to save your Hollywood friends from themselves.
There is panic in the ranks of the left this Halloween. In today’s Times, Frank Rich, does his level best to whistle past the graveyard, but the fear is clear. He astonishingly titles his piece, “The G.O.P. Stalinists Invade Upstate New York.” I guess they feel the Hitler moniker has lost its zest, so the leftists resort to calling those on the right, Stalinists. Their disorientation could not be more palpable.
What has them in such a tizzy? It centers around the special election in New York’s 23rd Congressional District. The local Republican party bosses chose a candidate, Dede Scozzafava, who would never be mistaken as a conservative, although Mr. Rich actually called her, “a mainstream conservative by New York standards.” That’s like saying David Letterman is chaste by liberal standards, as if these things are measured on a relative scale. But that’s the way liberals and statists think. If your neighbor is more promiscuous than you, then you must be celebate. If you want to make Nancy Pelosi a moderate, move her to Cuba.
Ground Shift
What has Mr. Rich and his cohorts nervously clearing their throats, is that the uprising against the entrenched statists, led by the Tea Parties, actually delivered results. Ms. Scozzafava is pro-abortion, pro-same-sex marriage, pro-Obama stimulus package, pro-card check to make it easier to form a union without a secret ballot election, and supported by ACORN. This is what Mr. Rich calls a conservative, “by New York standards.” What sticks in his craw is that the election was a win-win, for him and his friends. Elect the Republican or the Democrat and it doesn’t matter much, they both hold the same basic views. Then along came Doug Hoffman.
Doug Hoffman threw his hat in the ring on the Conservative Party line. By this Saturday, with support pouring in all across the country from true conservatives, Hoffman was in a dead heat with the conservative and the Republican Scozzafava was fading fast. So she decided to suspend her campaign, and Mr. Rich and company hit the panic button.
So how does Mr. Rich frame his argument? Well he starts by saying Hoffman has no grasp of local issues. Uh, the position is United States Congressman, not city alderman. He well understands the issues at the national level and how the policies of the Obama Administration are bankrupting the country. Those policies will negatively affect the people in his district. But leave it to Mr. Rich to scoff at Hoffman, because he doesn’t know how much pork barrel spending the district needs. A true patriotic Congressman, like John Murtha, finds a way to build an airport in the district that nobody uses and hands the bill to people in other districts like, well, New York’s 23rd. He’s going to Washington to fight those who are bleeding the Treasury dry. So Mr. Rich fights that by calling Fort Drum, home to the U.S. Army’s 10th Mountain Division, a “pork-dependent military base.” Hmmm…the last time I read my copy of the Constitution, it specifically required providing for the national defense. I couldn’t find in my copy where it required building airports no one needed so that John Murtha could get re-elected in perpetuity. I understand it is a fine distinction, but I would have thought someone employed by the New York Times would be able to make it.
Frank Rich’s Happy Talk
Mr. Rich oddly calls the developments in New York as good news. With a recent Gallup Poll, showing that for every self-described liberal there are two self-described conservatives, Mr. Rich says the ideologues that brought about the events in New York’s 23rd, may then start picking off other conservatives and destroy the party. Does he mean conservatives like Arlen Specter, Lincoln Chaffee, Olympia Snow, Susan Collins, Charlie Crist, oh my! With 73% of GOP voters saying that Congressional Republicans have lost touch with their base, this is not good news for Mr. Rich and company. What he believes is that a small cabal of conservatives will put unelectable candidates on the ballot that voters will reject and the Democrats will gleefully reap the rewards. In reality, the GOP leadership has for too long put weak candidates on the ballot that Democrats easily beat because the Republican base cannot get excited about them. McCain is a war hero and worthy of our admiration, but just look at his signature legislation: McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy. He was not a conservative on many fronts.
Nixon was a conservative, Ford was not. Reagan was a conservative, Bush 41 was not and Dole was not. George W. started more conservative than not, but then drifted to become a big spender. McCain was not a conservative. Do you see a pattern here? Conservative Republicans win.
With Obama’s approval rating going down in a virtual straight line, Mr. Rich confidently proclaims that the only politician Obama has to fear is Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan. By all means, Mr. Rich, you keep telling your pals that.
The Obama international charm offensive seems to be wearing thin. As the first U.S. President to ever lobby to win an Olympic Games, President Obama failed in his effort as Chicago was eliminated in the first round. The Olympic ideal was to divorce sports and politics and by doing so, promote peace by having athletes from around the world meet on a one-to-one basis and see each other as individuals rather than as the countries they represented.
Although Hitler used the 1936 Olympic Games to showcase the revitalized Germany, it was Jimmy Carter who was the first to directly use the Games for political purposes when he pulled the U.S. team from competing in Moscow in 1980, to protest the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan. There’s nothing like punishing your own young athletes who perhaps worked a lifetime for the opportunity to compete in an Olympic Games and perhaps never get another chance. The Soviet’s returned the favor four years later by boycotting the Games in Los Angeles in 1984.
Let’s go back to the ideal of Baron Pierre de Coubertin, who help found the modern Olympic Games:
May joy and good fellowship reign, and in this manner, may the Olympic Torch pursue its way through ages, increasing friendly understanding among nations, for the good of a humanity always more enthusiastic, more courageous and more pure.
So let’s leave the Olympic Games to the athletes and perhaps now, President Obama can get back to work.
