For nearly eight years we heard the left scream, “Bush Lied!” over the decision to invade Iraq.  One decision and the same refrain repeated over and over again.  Where is the scrutiny of the truth police where President Obama is concerned?

In his State of the Union address he took the unprecedented step of calling out the Supreme Court and encouraging his minions to give that rebuke a standing ovation.  Shameful.  This is not to say that Obama cannot criticize other branches of government, but there is a time and a place.  When Joe Wilson called out “LIAR!” during a previous speech by President Obama he was roundly criticized and rightly so.  Not for the criticism, but for the time and the place.  Joe Wilson called the president to apologize.  Did Obama do the same?

The timing of the act was bad enough, but the accusation he made was not true, as Samuel Alito could be seen saying, if you can read lips.  In the midst of his constitutional duty to report to Congress on the State of the Union, he uses a blatant lie to attack his guests. But that wasn’t all.  His speech was sprinkled throughout with falsehoods, not least of which was his statement on jobs.

Counting the Uncountable

To try to put a positive spin on his porkulus bill, he had to make up a statistic that no reputable economist can endorse, “jobs saved”.  In his State of the Union speech and on the Sunday morning talk show circuit, Obama and his team talked about 2 million jobs created or saved. But they weren’t all on the same page, some said 1.8 million, but regardless it is blatant dishonesty.

Jobs created is a real statistic.  As a small business owner I can tell you that when you hire someone there are a number of government agencies that you have to report it to and you have a deadline in which to do so.  There is also some paperwork involved when you eliminate a job.  But I have never, never had to report to any agency when I thought about eliminating a job and then changed my mind.  After all wouldn’t that be the definition of a job saved?

If I never thought about eliminating the position, then the job is not “saved” it just continues to exist.  If I thought about eliminating the position and did so, it would not be a job “saved” it would be a job eliminated, no?  So it is this two step process of thinking about the action and then not following through that could reasonably be thought of as a “job saved”.  How do you measure that thought process?  Hiring someone is an observable action.  Eliminating a job is an observable action.  Saving a job are two related thought processes not externally observable, they can only be “reported” by the decision maker and it cannot be independently verified.  Is that the kind of statistic upon which you want your government to base billions of dollars in spending decision?   The only added feature of Obamanomics is that some money changes hands.  Money that comes from you, dear taxpayer, and goes to the businessman.  Can you see why such a statistic is ridiculous?

Which One Is It Mr. President?  Mr. Biden? Anyone?

Let’s pretend for a moment that “jobs saved” is a real statistic.  If the president has a figure in his head of 2 million jobs created or saved, and for the aforementioned reasons the number of jobs created is a hard number reported to some agency, then the number of jobs saved should be a matter of simple math.  2 million minus the number of jobs actually created equals the number of jobs saved.  So why not report it as such?  100,000 jobs created and 1.9 million jobs saved, for example.  Why lump them together?  Because when you lump them together its harder to tell how big of a lie the president is telling.

Stimulus recipients previously reported that they had directly “created or saved” 640,329 jobs by Sept. 30, but their filings were criticized after it emerged that some people had reported saving jobs when they had actually spent the money on pay raises or paying employees who were not in danger of being laid off.

In December, the White House Office of Management and Budget changed its guidance, telling recipients they should start counting every worker whose salary was funded with stimulus money, rather than guessing whether the jobs would have existed in the absence of the federal plan. Opponents of the program accused the administration of “moving the goal posts” to make the plan appear more successful. — Wall Street Journal, Latest Stimulus Report Fuels Jobs Pressure, Feb. 1 2010

So companies using stimulus money to give people raises was counted as jobs saved!  We have 10%-17% of our workforce idled and taxpayers are being fleeced to give people raises and this administration is calling that successful policy.  When do we start firing people in this administration?  How about Janet Napolitano?  How about Eric Holder?  or are we saving their jobs too so that the numbers look good?  The other reports are just as galling: $1000 purchase of a lawn mower is credited with saving jobs;  using stimulus money to purchase boots with each boot (left and right) being counted as a job saved because someone had to make the boots; stimulus money going to create jobs in Congressional districts that do not exist.  Does anyone have any confidence that this administration has a clue about how to run a government?  This is beyond embarrassing.

The Next Stimulus

But fear not, since the first stimulus was so successful, President Obama is teeing up the next one, but don’t worry this one is only $100 billion.  Doesn’t that just make you feel warm all over?

The Joke is on You

Joe Biden just held a press event to reveal how he was going to help the middle class.  The man who has a hard time reaching into his own pocket for more than $1 a day in charity to give to his fellow man, has no problem reaching into your pocket and give the fruit of your labor to someone else.  It’s a win-win.  It doesn’t cost Joe Biden and it helps him keep getting elected and drawing a salary that you pay for.

Here is what he revealed:

1. Nearly Doubling the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit — in an economy that has over 10% unemployment this administration is focusing on helping those who already have a job and income.  I’m all for tax cuts, but not targeted cuts.  Cut income tax rates and jobs will be created.  I don’t believe this administration knows how to aim anything well enough to hit a target
2. Limiting a student’s federal loan payments to 10 percent of his/her income above a basic living allowance — the administration is concerned about how much debt students leave college with.  Does it have any concern about how much debt they are piling on everyone, not just college graduates?  Biden pointed to the average indebtedness of around $25,000 for college graduates.  The federal debt is about $35,000 for every man, woman and child in America, not just college graduates and this administration shows no signs of stopping it.
3. Creating a system of automatic workplace IRAs — government first got involved in retirement with Social Security.  That system is bankrupt and this administration has no interest in fixing it.  When Republicans floated the idea of taking a portion of the Social Security payroll tax and diverting it to higher return private savings, the Democrats savaged them.  So the Democrat solution is to ignore the bankrupt Social Security system and start telling business what to do.
4. Expanding tax credits to match retirement savings and enacting new safeguards to protect retirement savings — again with Social Security bankrupt, they want to put more tax dollars into retirement.  How different is this than the Republican plan to take what exists and allow it to get better returns than the paltry rate it currently gets within the Social Security system? The difference is that the Republican plan wouldn’t cost anything extra.  The Democrat plan will either increase payroll taxes or increase the deficit.  Surprise!!!
5. Expanding support for families balancing work with caring for elderly relatives –I thought the Democrats had fixed this with “end of life counseling” in their health care plan, coupled with bringing back the Death Tax next year.

Fumbling and Stumbling

The way to create jobs is to let the job creators keep their money to invest in their business and expand.  Small business owners are stuck waiting to learn how much all of Obama’s social re-engineering is going to cost them and until they know that, hiring is the last thing they will do.  The only thing this administration seems to know how to do is bash business and spend money and the more they spend the longer the recover will take.  They are now planning another stimulus plan to follow the last stimulus plan that didn’t work, and the deficit continues to grow and grow and grow.

President Obama wants to create a bipartisan panel to recommend how to reduce the deficit.  He gives the back of his hand to bipartisanship when it comes to workable solutions to real problems, but he loves bipartisanship when it gives him political cover to make unpopular decisions.  All of his supporters love to say that experience doesn’t matter and that President Obama is the smartest guy in the room.  If that is true, he should not be afraid to propose bold spending cuts and shrinking government and be smart enough to explain it to Congress on his own.  If he does so, I am sure many Republicans would support him and vote for it (and almost all Democrats vote against it).  But he wants it both ways, he wants Republicans to yield to tie spending cuts to tax increases and put the package to an up or down vote.  He will then take that on the campaign trail to tell the world how Republicans voted for tax increases.  If you don’t believe me, look to history.  George Herbert Walker Bush, of the “no new taxes” pledge, got Congress to agree with spending cuts in return for a tax increase.  Bill Clinton clubbed him to death, like a baby seal, with that pledge and then enjoyed Bush’s restraint upon Congress on the spending side to generate budget surpluses.  Let President Obama take the lead.  Wasn’t that why he was elected?  Because he was a different kind of leader?  So, lead away.

There was a commercial not too long ago where a young man looked out his window to the village green where a bundle of money had just fallen.  He calls his wife/girlfriend over to show her.  She suggests running down and getting it, but he says, no, let’s wait.  Next you see a frizzy headed guy down on the green who screams, “MONEY!!!!”  In seconds, people came out of the woodwork and scoffed up all the money while the young couple looked on.

The image of that commercial popped into my head as I considered the job summit being led by President Obama.  To me, the young couple represented the government pondering how to direct the economy to achieve this specific goal or that.  The mob on the green was the free market.  While the government dithers over what kind of legislation to write, which special interest groups to pay off to pass it, how to develop incentives to get private industry to do this or that, if they would just cut taxes and get out of the way, the free market would get to work creating jobs where they are needed, not where some bureaucrat thinks they should go.

Uncertainty

The biggest cloud overhanging this economy is uncertainty.  The Obama administration is slamming through enormous changes: a $787 billion Porkulus package, cap and trade, health care.  Businesses look at this combined with the accumulation of massive government debt, tax increases rather than cuts (yes letting the Bush tax cuts expire is a tax increase, not just the expiration of tax cuts as Speaker Pelosi tries to spin it) and they don’t know what hiring that extra employee is going to cost, let alone what it will cost to keep the employees they already have.  So they don’t hire until the dust  settles and they can calculate the impact.

“Tax incentives for job creation are “worthy of further consideration,” he said, while adding that the administration is also set on making a big push in the area of green jobs.” – President Obama at Jobs Summit

“Worthy of further consideration”?  Since conservatives have been calling for tax cuts for a year now, this kind of statement in Obama-ese translates thusly, “I have to make a nod to the right, to acknowledge that I heard them, but it ain’t happening.”  Couple that with the “big push in the area of green jobs.”  We are in the midst of the scientific scandal that the “settled science” of man-made global warming could be the greatest hoax since Bernie Madoff, and Obama wants a big push in the area of green jobs.  What if that area collapses because the urgency that Al Gore has been screaming about is no longer urgent?  It’s government planning on the order of Soviet five-year plans or Mao’s Great Leap Forward programs.  It harkens back to Jimmy Carter’s giant Synfuels project that was going to convert coal into oil, until oil prices fell and the project imploded, but not before billions of tax dollars were poured into that rat hole.

How Simulating!

If you listen to Joe Biden, the stimulus plan is working better than expected.  But let’s take a closer look.  As of about three weeks ago only $120 billion of the stimulus money had been spent. (So why is Congress looking at another stimulus with over $600 billion left to spend in the first one?)  Of that money, 80% went to the Department of Education, Health and Human Services, and the Department of Labor.  What about all the “shovel ready” projects?  Only about $4 billion has gone to the Department of Transportation.  Feel better?

Jobs Summit Attendees

So who is meeting with President Obama at the jobs summit?  Well first let’s look at who was not invited:

• U.S. Chamber of Commerce — they have butted heads with Obama over health care and climate change policies
• National Federation of Independent Businesses

I don’t know about you, but I think they might have an idea or two about how to create conditions that let the free market create jobs.  As for the attendees:

• Service Employees International Union (SEIU) officer
• President of the American Federation of Teachers — a union of workers in a government run monopoly
• United Food & Commercial Workers International Union
• CEOs of some Fortune 500 companies

How many jobs do unions create, not occupy, create?  Think of the auto industry, steel industry, public K-12 education, the Postal Service, and government in general.  Do they bring images of thriving, vibrant, engines of job creation?  Or is the image more of the basket cases of the U.S. economy?  This is not a slight against the union workers themselves, but rather of their leadership who create so many restrictions on job rules to artificially create the need for more jobs.  There motto is: why have three people do the work, when you have five do it?

As far as big business is concerned, let me dispel the thought that conservatives and big business go hand in hand.  In many cases big business looks to cut deals with the government to protect their industries and markets from upstart companies.  They have gotten big and lethargic, rather than nimble and vibrant.  Small businesses create about 80% of the jobs in the U.S. and they didn’t have a seat at the table.

So was the jobs summit about creating jobs or just jive talk?  If you want a real jobs summit see what American Solutions was hosting in Cincinnati, Ohio and Jackson, Mississippi.  They actually discussed ideas that would work.

Just what is a czar anyway?  And I am not talking about the Russian royal family.  A czar is essentially a presidential advisor.  Take a moment to think about that.  Why does President Obama need to appoint 32, give or take, czars in his administration?  Could it be that he really, really needs a lot of advising?

In the campaign, the main stream media, somehow diverted the attention away from Obama’s glaring lack of experience as the Presidential candidate and put all their focus on Sarah Palin’s “lack of experience.”  Sarah Palin had more executive experience as a sitting governor and I emphasize executive experience, than Obama, Biden, and McCain combined.

But the media tut-tutted, and said “it’s only Alaska,” as for her mayoral experience, “it was a very small town.”  When Obama slipped his teleprompter and tried to claim he was running a very large organization, his campaign, it was laughable.  But don’t worry, he had Joe Biden to lean on.  I feel better.

Presidents and The Experience They Brought With Them

Let’s take a look back at past elected presidents and the executive experience they brought to office:

• George W. Bush — Governor of  Texas
• Bill Clinton — Governor of Arkansas
• George H. W. Bush — Vice President of the United States, Head of the CIA
• Ronald Reagan — Governor of California
• Jimmy Carter — Governor of Georgia
• Richard Nixon — Vice President of the United States
• Lyndon Johnson — Vice President of the United States
• John F. Kennedy — None.  He was a legislator and his inexperience nearly got us annihilated with the Cuban Missle Crisis, following the Bay of Pigs, and an embarrassing showdown with Khrushchev
• Dwight D. Eisenhower — Five star general in command of all Allied Forces in Europe in World War II
• Harry Truman — Vice President of the United States
• Franklin D. Roosevelt — Governor of New York , Secretary of the Navy
• Herbert Hoover — Secretary of Commerce
• Calvin Coolidge — Vice President of the United States, Governor of Massachusetts
• Warren G. Harding — Lieutenant Governor of Ohio
• Woodrow Wilson — Governor of New Jersey, President of Princeton University
• William Howard Taft –  Secretary of War
• Theodore Roosevelt — Vice President of the United States, Governor of New York, Assistant Secretary of the Navy

Legislators Versus Executives

So, from the beginning of the 20th Century until the election of Barack Obama, only once has a  president with only legislative experience been elected, John F. Kennedy.  Nikita Khrushchev took advantage of Kennedy’s inexperience in their first summit in Vienna, and then there was the aborted Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba and the attempted overthrow of Castro.  On top of those two building blocks we got the Cuban Missile Crisis, which brought us closer than we have ever been to thermonuclear obliteration.

The Eternal Campaign

President Obama is no different.  He has the least experience of any president since 1900.  He effectively was only a United States Senator for two years, as he was busy campaigning for the next two years and resigned his last two years after being elected president.  So what does he do?  He does what he is comfortable doing and what he is good at, campaigning.  He has held more press conferences in six months than his predecessor did in eight years.  Who is running the show while Obama is running around?  Is it Nancy Pelosi?  Rahm Emmanual?  His programs are falling apart.  The stimulus isn’t working and more Americans say that it has hurt the economy rather than helped it (31%-25%) and that the rest of it should be canceled.  His cap and trade plan is opposed by most Americans (56%) who don’t want to pay more in taxes to fight global warming.  His government takeover of our health care is opposed by most Americans (53%-44%) and yet he presses on, figuring that with enough campaigning the American people will be won over.

This may be a long slog, waiting for 2012 and hoping our country does not get destroyed by all the power grabbing characters in Congress, who don’t care a whit about us, only about increasing the powerful control they have over our lives.  We have tothe fight of our lives on our hands preventing the taking of our liberties.

a “wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.”  — Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address

“It’s not that I want to punish your success. I want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance for success, too.  My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom up, it’s gonna be good for everybody. I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”  — Barack Obama speaking to Joe “The Plumber” Wurtzelbacher and explaining the virtue of taxing successful businessmen and women more.

“We want to take money and put it back in the pocket of middle-class people.” “It’s time to be patriotic … time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut.”  — Joe Biden in an interview during the presidential campaign [emphasis added].

Now, tell me, which of the three quotations above move you?  Which of them speaks to you of the greatness of America?

Thomas Jefferson

Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence speaks eloquently about freedom.  While recognizing the need for government he believed that that which governs least governs best.  Government’s main purpose is to “restrain men from injuring one another.”  So we need some basic laws for to protect freedoms of the minority while recognizing the right of the majority to govern.  For that we have the Bill of Rights.  We need some basic laws to be able to create and enforce contracts.  We need national defense to protect us from enemies foreign and domestic.  Some pretty basic things.  Other than that which is spelled out in the Constitution, stand back and let each man and woman live in freedom to pursue their own happiness.

Barack Obama

Obey

Contrast that to Barack Obama’s conversation with Joe Wurzelberger.  Joe asked him why, as he works 10 to 12 hour days with no guarantee of success or income to build his business and create jobs, candidate Obama, should he become president, would want to take more from Joe in taxes.  Obama says, it’s not that he wants to punish Joe, but he needs to take the fruit of Joe’s labor and give it to someone else so that they can be successful too.  He doesn’t ask Joe for the secret of his success.  He doesn’t ask him how he can keep going for 10 to 12 hours per day.  He basically says, this is going to be a new America and you keep working, Joe, but remember part of what you make, I take, and I give it to whom I decide needs it more than you do, because we won.

Joe Biden

Joe “Buck a Day” Biden, doesn’t even try to spin what they plan on doing.  He basically gets in your face and says he is going to take money from those who are successful and put it in the pocket of the middle class and then tries to shame the audience by saying it would be un-patriotic to object.  This comes from a millionaire who gives about $1 per day to charity from his own pocket.  He doesn’t define who the middle class is, that is for the political class and his cronies to decide, most likely based on where the most votes are to keep them in power.

The Decline of America

When you consider the heights of principle from which this country was founded, with ideals enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, to the depths we have sunk today, with little more than bag men going around shaking down legitimate businesses and citizens to pay for a massive expansion of government and control over our lives, with the smug, pompous politicians in Washington directing the smallest detail of our lives.  It is truly sad.

Lady Liberty weeps.

Joe Biden hit the airwaves on Sunday to try to damp down the growing feeling that Americans have that their president is not Barack Obama, but Bernie Madoff.  Sold a bill of goods that the urgently needed stimulus package of $787 billion would cap unemployment at 8% and prevent it from reaching 9% in the absense of said stimulus, the American people are realizing they were fleeced.  Here’s Joe:

“Vice President Joe Biden said on a Monday conference call with reporters that it was “above [his] pay grade” to explain in detail the methodology the White House uses to estimate the number of jobs created or saved by the economic stimulus legislation, but stressed that there had been no “reasonable” challenges to the estimates.”

Biden used the same coy formulation as his boss used to answer the question concerning abortion and when life begins, i.e., “above my pay grade.”  Well, then let’s wheel in the person in the next paygrade up to explain it to you, Joe.  This is the guy who Obama put in charge of watching how the stimulus money is spent.  So as to really put you at ease, Joe added this gem:

“I’m sorry I’m not an economist,” Biden said as he was describing the methodology. “My background is foreign policy and the constitution.”

Just when you thought it was safe to believe that on the job training for President Obama might be working, his sidekick lets go with that thigh slapper. So who’s watching foreign policy and the constitution?  This president insists that $787 billion of your tax dollars are needed to boost the economy and it is left in the hands of a man who admittedly doesn’t know what he’s doing.

You Have to Spin It to Win It

45% of the American people, according to a Rasmussen poll, believe the remainder of the stimulus package should be cancelled.  Uh-oh, start the spin machine.  So Joe Biden says,

“Vice President Joe Biden said Sunday that “everyone guessed wrong” on the impact of the economic stimulus, but he defended the administration’s spending designed to combat rising joblessness.”

Everyone, Joe?  If I’m not mistaken every Republican Congressman voted against that odious bill and only three Republican senators, including Arlen Spector, who has moved over to your team.  So, Joe, you should modify that to “every Democrat guessed wrong, while the Republicans were spot on.”    And if that’s not bad enough, Rasmussen tells us that 48% of Americans do not believe new stimulus spending will create more jobs.  So membership in your “everyone club” is getting mighty lean.

Rubbing Salt in the Wound

If that’s not bad enough for Joe and his team, consider this: a new Rasmussen poll says that 51% of Americans favor an across-the-board tax cut for ALL Americans to stimulate the economy.  So much for soak the rich and class warfare.  Most Americans know that we are all in this together and we all need to pitch in to get out.  Tax cuts work.  Spending doesn’t.

The neatly dressed man from Washington, tapped Joe the Plumber on the shoulder and said, “Good news, sir, you’re part of the stimulus program.”

“How, so?” Joe asked.

“Well, you’re a plumber, right?”

“Yes.”

The man from Washington grinned and snapped open his attache case and pulled out a contract.  “We need to have the Community Pool repaired.  It’s a ’shovel ready’ project that will get the country moving again.  But we need to start right away.  So sign here.”

Joe’s business was a little slow so he looked over the contract, felt confident he could meet the requirements, signed on the dotted line and said, “I’ll get started right away.”

A Few Weeks Later

Joe was walking around the project with the building inspector, getting the final approval on the project.  As they completed their circuit, the man from Washington showed up.  “How’s it going?”

“It’s looks like we passed the inspection,” Joe said, “and we’ll be cleaning up now.”

“Great,” the young man said pulling two envelopes out of his attache case.  “Here, you go.”

Now Joe recognized what looked to be a check so he opened that first.  “Wow, that was fast.”  Smiling, he folded it over and put it in his shirt pocket.  He then looked down at the other envelope, and glanced quizically at the government man, who was looking at the pool, “What’s this?”

“That? Oh, that’s your tax bill.”

“Tax bill?  What tax bill?”  Joe ripped open the envelope. “$19,000!!! What the hell is this?”

The Washington man looked sadly at Joe.  “Well how did you think the stimulus package got funded?  The Federal government gets its money from taxes.”  Getting no reaction from Joe, he burst out laughing, “Did you think Uncle Sam was sitting on some massive inheritance? Do the math: $800 billion bailout, 3.5 million jobs, that’s $228,000 per job.  Since you only got one month’s work out of this we divided it by 12, thus $19,000″

“How am I supposed to pay for this?”

The Washington man looked genuinely insulted.  “Don’t worry about it.  There’s no time limit.  What you can’t pay, your kids will pay, and then your grand kids.”  He snapped closed his briefcase, shook his head as he turned to walk away and muttered, “What an ingrate.”

Here’s where we are four weeks after the election:

1. Appointments — With the Thanksgiving shortened week, it was mostly packaging of the previously announced appointments.  Monday was going to be the big day, with the formal announcement of Hillary and Holder.  They had to get Bill Clinton’s ducks in a row, and have him measured for a leash.
2. Dow Jones Industrial Average — Up 675 points. Team Obama finally got a win.  One of the reasons is that Obama has stopped talking about eliminating the Bush tax cuts early, but letting them expire in 2010.  Also, he seems to be assembling an experienced economic team, well known to Wall Street, which doesn’t hurt.
3. The New Leader – Obama has answered critics who say the team he is assembling looks a lot like the old Clinton White House, by saying that they are “Experienced, Yet Fresh.”  He is facing grumblings on his left, which brings into question how is he going to keep this team of wild horses under control?

The Challeng for Obama

Where is Obama’s base of support?  Where can he fall back on for strength?  He may well be pulling together a team of experienced hands for the various departments, but not all of them are cut from the same mold and there will be some tugging and pulling.  How does he keep them in check and how does he get them back in line?  In other words, where are his reinforcements.

In another post, I mention how past presidents, most of whom had executive experience as governors, brought some of their loyal people with them.  These were people who believed in their candidate and had been with him for a number of years.  That loyalty can be called in, like chits, when you need to win a battle.

It took Johnson a while, about two years, to get his people in the administration since he had inherited the Kennedy team when he ascended to the presidency, but he did have eleven years in the House and twelve years in the Senate, including six years as Senate Majority Leader.  So he had a lot of markers to call in if he needed them.

Kennedy was probably closest to Obama in lack of experience including no executive experience outside of the Navy, but he did have eight years in the Senate.  In addition, he had Papa Joe Kennedy, who had many strings of his own including being a former Ambassador to England; he had his own blood brother as Attorney General; and another brother Ted would be elected to the Senate two years later.  So while Jack Kennedy may not personally have had a lot of pull, his family had plenty.

Nixon was a former two term Vice President.  Ford had been House Minority Leader.  Carter had been governor and was able to bring some of his former team with him, as was  Reagan who had served two terms as governor of California, and Bill Clinton who was both Attorney General and Governor of Arkansas.  George Bush Senior was Vice President, and George W. was governor of Texas.  They all had many connections and a lot of political IOUs.

But what does Barack Obama do, after the glow of history is replaced by the hard work of governing?  It is more likely that Barack Obama wrote a lot of political IOUs rather than him holding them.  Many of his confidents uncovered during the campaign, turned out to be less than appealing to the nation as a whole.  When the going gets tough, who’s going to have Barack Obama’s back?  Who can he turn to and say, I need this one and because of thus and so, without having to say it, you owe me?  He has very little history with his team.  So when he needs a favor, he will have to deal almost from the get go.  Whose career has he made, such that he can ask for payback?

Experience Counts

Experience counts not just in knowing how to do a job, but it also counts in terms of who you know.  Rarely in our history has there been someone who has so little experience inside or outside the beltway.  This may well result in a very weak president.  For all of our sakes, I hope I am wrong.

For all the Bush bashing that has gone on since September 11, 2001, it is a pretty sure bet that when he leaves office on January 20, 2009, part of his legacy will be that he kept us safe for the last seven years.  The fundamental difference between the polices of the Bush administration and those of Clinton and Carter was that Bush saw it as a war, Clinton and Carter as crimes.  On a war footing, you take the battle to your enemies with the objective of destroying them.  On a law and order footing, you investigate the crime after the fact, arrest suspects, give them their Miranda rights, put them on trial, and if you are lucky, they may spend some time in jail.

Law and Order

In 1979, where it all started, Iranian “students” took over the U.S. Embassy and held it for over 400 days.  Jimmy Carter tried to negotiate a settlement, sponsored a botched rescue, and saw the hostages finally released his last hour in office.  The Iranians didn’t want to be holding American hostages when Ronald Reagan was president.  Reagan would have seen the taking of the U.S. Embassy as an invasion on U.S. soil, which is what our Embassies are.  He would not have tolerated a ragtag bunch of radical students occupying U.S. soil.

From that, and Somalia, Osama bin Laden saw the U.S. as a paper tiger that would cut and run if hit hard.  Clinton’s law and order approach can be seen in the response to the first World Trade Center bombing and the constructing of a “wall” between the CIA and the FBI.

War Footing

President Bush saw the attacks on the U.S. as a war.  He mobilized the country and struck back hard.  By going on offense rather than hanging back playing defense, he has kept the enemy pinned down in Iraq and Afganistan, while simultaneous rooting them out aggressively wherever they went.  Those captured on the battlefield were sent to Guantanamo, where they were interrogated and held.  Lawyers in the U.S. began to complain that these prisoners were being held without being charged and that was unconstitutional.  Again, that is seeing it from a law and order perspective.  On a war footing, the enemy that is captured on the battlefield is held until the end of hostilities, like we held Japanese and German prisoners during WWII.  If it takes 50 years until the war is won and hostilities ended, then they should be held for 50 years.

Rooting Them Out

In trying to prevent another attack at home, Bush also aggressively sought to disrupt their operations.  Part of that process was to intercept their communications and learn what they were up to.  This caused an uproar over eavesdropping on Americans without a warrent.  However, the program was designed to intercept international phone calls, even if one end was in the U.S.  For example, if an Al Queda terrorist is captured or killed on the battlefield but their cell phone is recovered and their cell phone has an address book in it, the administration would set up all the numbers in the address book to be monitored and calls listened to. The purpose was to keep all Americans safe.

Many on the left believe that people in the Bush administration should be prosecuted for this practice.  They call this activity criminal.

Who Are Your Enemies?

President Bush tried to prevent our enemies, those who wished to kill as many of us as possible, from doing us harm.  He knew our enemies to be deadly and ruthless.

And then you have Joe Wurzelbacher, aka Joe the Plumber.  Joe the Plumber had the audacity to ask Barack Obama a question about how Obama’s policies would affect people like Joe.  Pretty dangerous stuff, no?  Since that chance encounter, Joe the Plumber has been investigated by six Ohio state agencies.  Did you see the ACLU representative on the evening news demanding what the Obama campaign knew about this and when they knew it?  Did you see Chris Matthews slamming his hand on his desk and saying, “This is AMERICA, not the Soviet Union!  We don’t investigate citizens because of their political beliefs.”?  Did you hear Senator Dick Durban rise in the senate to decry what happened to Joe the Plumber and compare it to the Nazis, the Soviet Gulags, and Pol Pot?

Neither did I.

Apologies to Yogi Berra, but it appears that Barack Obama will be the 44th President of the United States.  He displayed extraordinary political skill on par with Bill Clinton.  As commentator Juan Williams put it on Fox News, Obama was the stealth candidate.  He spoke in platitudes about hope and change, but he was flexible on the details.  In a period of just a few weeks his famous claim of a tax break for anyone making under $250,000, became $200,000 and through other allies it continued to decrease to $150,000 (Biden) and then $120,000 (New Mexico governor Bill Richardson).

Obama campaigned furiously against George W. Bush, dispite Bush not being in the race.  McCain was no match for him as far a political skill was concerned.  McCain refused to mention Reverend Jeremiah Wright in the campaign, he failed to explain how his involvement during the bailout debate got the Republicans back in the game when Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid effectively shut them out of the discussions until McCain got involved.  Where else did he fall short?

• He failed to adequately explain his health care plan leaving him open to attacks from Obama which went largely unchallenged.
• He took a pounding from Obama and Biden who said he voted with Bush 94% of the time, but he failed to tie Obama to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi when Congress had an approval rating about half of what Bush had

The Next Four Years

As the loyal opposition we have to be on guard and speak out against the radical positions that Obama has espoused, but are out of sync with the American people, only 27% of whom call themselves liberal.  What to watch for:

1. The Fairness Doctrine — this is an effort to squelch our voice.  The Fairness Doctrine which was set aside by Ronald Reagan, required that a broadcaster provide equal time to present opposing viewpoints whenever a political position was expressed.  This would mean that if a radio station broadcast a popular show like Rush Limbaugh, they would have to broadcast three hours of an opposing viewpoint such as was heard on Air America, the liberal network that failed for lack of listeners.  Faced with this, many broadcasters would drop talk radio and go back to playing Top 40s.  Liberty under attack — The First Amendment guarantee of free speech
2. Card Check — Right now if a union wants to organize a workforce there are two methods that can be used:  a secret ballot, or by having the potential members fill out a card and give it to the union.  They choice of which method is to be used is up to the company, many of whom choose the secret ballot.  Unions want that choice to be theirs and they favor the card system.  This would allow the union to apply pressure to workers at home and other places off the job.  This is even opposed by none other than George McGovern, who has run commercials opposing the union’s position.  (McCovern Interview on YouTube) Liberty under attack — the secret ballot.
3. Redistribution of Wealth — Obama has spoken extensively, although not recently excepting the Joe the Plumber slip, about the redistribution of wealth.  Joe “Buck-a-Day” Biden, which represents how much this multimillionaire gives to charity, says that paying more taxes is our patriotic duty.  Obama scoffs at descriptions of him as a socialist, by saying that if he gave half his peanut butter sandwich to a schoolmate, he’d be called a socialist.  But sharing your peanut butter sandwich with a schoolmate is charity, having your teacher take away your peanut butter sandwich, your cell phone, and your Legos, and give them out to your schoolmates and maybe, maybe, give you half of your peanut butter sandwich back, that’s socialism.  Liberty under attack — The Fourth Amendment right to be secure in your person, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.
4. Bankrupting the Coal Industry — The United States generates 49% of its electricity through coal.  With more and more focus on electric cars and other alternatives to using foreign oil.  Obama has said that “If someone wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can.  It’s just that it will bankrupt them.”  We are the “Saudi Arabia” of coal, with an estimated 200 year supply.  To take coal off the table, would be very dangerous and increase not decrease our dependence on foreign oil.  Liberty under attack — our economic freedom.
5. Crisis — According to Joe Biden, we have about 6-8 months before we will have a crisis to test Obama.  Many liberals point to the budget surpluses of the Clinton Administration as proof of the prudent fiscal leadership of the Democrats.  However, they accomplished those surpluses mainly by gutting the military.  This led to some of the disasters of 9/11/2001 and what followed.  At a time like this and with Obama’s plans for massive increases in government spending, what will happen to our military and as a result what will happen to our ability to deal with a crisis.  Liberty under attack — providing for the national defense

This is an historic moment in American history with the election of the first African American as President of the United States.  As the loyal opposition, it is our duty to make clear whenever he and his followers stray from the principles on which this country was founded, those of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. We must make sure we fight any challenges to the First Amendment and we must preserve our ability to raise our voices and speak our mind.

God Bless the United States of America