P.T. Barnum once said that you can fool some of the people all the time, all of the people some of the time, but you can never fool all of the people all of the time. The last part of the quote by Barnum is becoming less and less true. It does appear that you can fool most of the people most of the time. Look no farther than the most recent election for proof.
The GOP, Tea Party and the conservative press rallied the American voter to the cry of government should be smaller and spend less. It was a simple message that many could not argue with. We were and continue to spend more money than we take in as a government. The budget has only been balanced in one administration in the past 40 years. The rally cry has become so strong that the right is going to take a shot at repealing the Heath Care Bill, legislation that every President back to Nixon has publicly shown support for.
But running for office is one thing, being in office is another. It is the same old story. Two items have come up in the past two weeks since the election: Will you stop asking for earmarks, known as "pork" and subsidies to farmers and big oil, for example who receive billions in support for sometimes not growing a crop? The answer to that question has been remarkably muted. It would seem that those who have been among the most vocal and powerful in saying that spending is out of control are now backing away from pledges of spending less when it comes to representing their own districts or states even if it means continuing to spend. The premise in the first place is ridiculous. A representative's job is to bring back money and jobs to their district or state. THAT is one of the primary functions when sent by us to Washington.
But when you say that you are going to Washington to clean up the corruption and stop the out of control spending and then still want the same old money for your district, nothing has changed. That is nothing more the pure hypocrisy. The loudest squawkers were once again the Republications. For the past two years they have sat with their hands crossed refusing to help bail out the economy. They railed against the stimulus and even pledged very publicly not to participate in it. But when it came to actually getting the money, they lined up quietly and took it like everyone else. They went back to their districts and states and stood in front of the golden shovels as the ground was being broken, posed for the photos that appeared in the local paper and took credit for all the great new projects happening locally. Then they went back to Washington and criticized the administration for spending too much money. This is speaking out of both sides of your mouth at its best.
But now that the Republicans are no longer the minority party in the House of Representatives and have added to the seat count in the Senate their actions are going to be more visible.
So let's start with Mitch McConnell (R) Kentucky. He recently said that his biggest priority was to get Obama out of the White House in two years. You would think that he would be a big opponent of earmarks and higher spending. Well, if you have ever seen him on a Sunday morning political talk show, you know that he is a master of dodging questions and issues. McConnell has requested 158 separate earmarks during the past two years totaling just over $957 billion. He recently said that stopping these earmarks would not save any money but reluctantly said that he will heed the wishes of the GOP and Tea Party and support a ban on these very same earmarks.
13 Democrats on the House Farm Committee lost their jobs earlier this month. Among the new crop of new congresspeople, Vicki Hartzler of Missouri supported by the Tea Party. The Hartzlers own a farm equipment business and a farm and received $750,000 in over the past 15 years. She beat Ike Skelton Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Speaking out of both sides of her mouth, she said that she is committed to reduce government spending but added that farming is a matter of national security. Food needs to be grown in the US. If you take that tact isn't pretty much everything a matter of national security? Health care, Jobs, manufacturing. After all isn't "Life, Liberty and the Persuit of Happiness" in our Bill of Rights?
Next up further proof you can really fool some of the people in Minnesota all of the time. Michelle Bachmann. She herself is a critic of farm subsidies but her family has received as much as $50,000 in farm subsidies. She listed the subsidies on her personal income statement as part of the Bachmann family farm. He father in law has received as much as $250,000 in farm subsidies although Bachmann herself has not been involved. Good for Michelle. She recently stated that she is for extending the Bush tax cuts for the most wealthy but would oppose an extension on jobless benefits. Let them eat cake, right Michelle?
The last two, freshmen representatives somehow got away with unseating their opponents railing against government spending while themselves being on the government dole. Newly elected representative Kristi Noem (R) South Dakota has taken $3 million over the past 15 years although gave up her share in the ranch that received the subsidies just last year. Finally the last newly minted representative, gospel singer Stephen Fincher of Tennessee. His family has taken $3.2 million in the past ten years.
Isn't it great that when poor folks get a handout it is called welfare. But when farmers or oil companies get a handout it is a subsidy. Where are these free market Republicans when money is getting passed out to big business? The reality is that if they contribute to you at election time, you better contribute to them!
The good news is that a new five year Farm Bill is up for debate in 2012. This bill known for subsidizing farmers and guaranteeing them a price and in some cases paying them for NOT growing crops will be contentious. Call on Bachmann, Noem, Hazler and Fincher will be the first to say that we should end subsidies for farmers and all who are committed to a free market economy. If you are concerned about socialism or communism this is where you might just want to begin.
But the you've got to be kidding me award actually goes to the private sector. The Ricketts family owns the Chicago Cubs. Daddy Joe was founder of TD Ameritrade. So all that stock market money you made and lost last decade allowed Joe and son Tom to purchase the Chicago Cubs. Tom runs the Cubs as Chairman. Tom wants $300 million in taxpayer money in the form of bonds to renovate Wrigley Field. Now this would be only mildly irritating if the story stopped there. But dad Joe took part of your money lost in the stock market and now his money in the form of commissions and profits and put it to good use: he has been an outspoken critic of taxpayer earmarks. In a matter of fact he put his money where his mouth is and founded Taxpayers Against Earmarks. The sole purpose of this foundation is to educate americans about wasteful spending in government. Perhaps he should start with a stern lecture to his son.
Who is to blame for allowing this hypocrisy to continue? The press. It is their job to ask tough questions and get answers that are direct. It is all too often that the questions are just dodged or not asked at all.
Remember, we are entitled to the best government we deserve.
Monday, November 15, 2010
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Congratulations Republicans
It is the day after. It is a different type of hangover. What happened last night? There is no way to positively spin it. The democrats, with the exception of California, took a beating last night. What happened and why, this blogger will leave to the pros to spin in either direction.
But what is worth looking into is where we have been and where we are going between now and the next big election in 2012 which is just two short years from now.
Two years ago: The stock market was at lows not seen in decades. Americans' 401K and IRA values melted like ice in a tavern urinal on St. Patrick's Day. Stocks like General Electric were at historic lows. The American banking system was about three days away from collapse making the dollar worthless (think about THAT!). General Motors, an employer of half a million people was bleeding cash and would file bankruptcy. Chrysler was in danger of shutting its doors forever and shedding nearly sixty-thousand jobs. Between these two iconic automobile companies and Ford, nearly two-thousand dealerships across America were closed because cars were not selling. American jobs were being lost at a monthly rate unseen since the Great Depression. We were also fighting a war in Iraq that was costing billions and many felt was unwarranted. Most importantly there was no plan to turn any of this around.
Today: As this is written the stock market is over 11,000 and the Fortune 500 have record amounts of cash on hand. Bailed out banks and insurance companies are paying back the money lent to them by the government and our financial system has been stabilized. Once the money is all paid back, it will be done so at a PROFIT to the American taxpayer. General Motors most recently reported a profit and Chrysler is now part of one of the largest car companies on the planet, Fiat, and continues to produce vehicles and employ workers. While few would argue that job creation and unemployment is where is needs to be, this country is no longer bleeding jobs and jobs are being created. As for the war in Iraq, we are no longer involved in day-to-day combat operations in that country. All this and we now have a health care program in place that for starters makes health care available to 30-million people who would not be able to afford it. Insurers can no longer cancel or disallow the insured for existing conditions and children up to the age of 26 can now remain on their parents' policies.
IF YOU THINK THIS IS SPIN, GOOGLE EACH OF THESE ITEMS. Now I ask when had so much been done for so many in such a short time? It was accomplished with the refusal of the Republicans to participate in any meaningful way.
You really have to hand it to the Republicans though. How can these accomplishments in the past two years by a Democratic Executive and Legislative branch be woven into a negative story, sold by the Republican who were largely responsible for the economic meltdown in the first place, and roll to a landslide victory last night? I will leave that to each of you. But I have a pretty good idea about what will happen over the next two years.
I am reminded of the 1972 movie, The Candidate starring Robert Redford. At the end of the movie, Redford playing lawyer turned just elected candidate Bill McKay standing in a closet and asks "What do we do now?"
A friend of mine, a conservative told me how happy they were that the Republicans were going to win in this election cycle. But they added, "they better come up with a plan because I have not heard any plan from the Republicans." This pretty much sums up the blind devotion and blind faith that so many conservatives, independents and the misguided so-called tea partiers had during this election. If we do not make progress in the next two years, blame gridlock. Because that it was was voted for last night. There was no plan by the Republicans during the past two years (and extending back to the Bush administration) and there is no plan now.
So what will happen in the next two years? Well a friend of mine put it best: "The Republicans are great at winning, and bad at governing." So see them continue to campaign for the presidency in the next two years. They will continue to be the party of "no." But now that they control the lower house of Congress, they will not allow any legislation to pass that has any meaningful consequence. As the election cycle kicks in for 2012 they will blame the Obama administration for doing nothing and the continued suffering of the American people. Whether they can sell that in 2012 remains to be seen.
If history is any indication though, Democrats may have a glimmer of hope. A very similar political scenario played out in the mid-1990's. Bill Clinton was trying to clean up the Reagan/Bush 1 mess of the 1980's. It was no easy task either. He also lost Congress in 1994. By the turn of the century we were seeing unprecedented growth from a Democratic Executive branch and a Republican Legislative branch so there is some hope in a positive future. But times have changed. Back then the American people's well being seemed to be the common denominator between the two parties.
With a have/have-not mentality today of the conservative movement, that commonality may be gone.
From the middle what can we do? Demand an agenda from the Republicans. Ask your elected officials Democrat or Republican what they are going to do. How are they proposing to make America a better place in this irreversible global economy? Hold them accountable. If you are going to reduce government spending, where are you going to reduce it from? Ask them if they plan to reduce taxes, how are we going to pay off the debt that they are so adamantly against?
Ask tough questions and get direct answers. If nothing else we deserve that.
But what is worth looking into is where we have been and where we are going between now and the next big election in 2012 which is just two short years from now.
Two years ago: The stock market was at lows not seen in decades. Americans' 401K and IRA values melted like ice in a tavern urinal on St. Patrick's Day. Stocks like General Electric were at historic lows. The American banking system was about three days away from collapse making the dollar worthless (think about THAT!). General Motors, an employer of half a million people was bleeding cash and would file bankruptcy. Chrysler was in danger of shutting its doors forever and shedding nearly sixty-thousand jobs. Between these two iconic automobile companies and Ford, nearly two-thousand dealerships across America were closed because cars were not selling. American jobs were being lost at a monthly rate unseen since the Great Depression. We were also fighting a war in Iraq that was costing billions and many felt was unwarranted. Most importantly there was no plan to turn any of this around.
Today: As this is written the stock market is over 11,000 and the Fortune 500 have record amounts of cash on hand. Bailed out banks and insurance companies are paying back the money lent to them by the government and our financial system has been stabilized. Once the money is all paid back, it will be done so at a PROFIT to the American taxpayer. General Motors most recently reported a profit and Chrysler is now part of one of the largest car companies on the planet, Fiat, and continues to produce vehicles and employ workers. While few would argue that job creation and unemployment is where is needs to be, this country is no longer bleeding jobs and jobs are being created. As for the war in Iraq, we are no longer involved in day-to-day combat operations in that country. All this and we now have a health care program in place that for starters makes health care available to 30-million people who would not be able to afford it. Insurers can no longer cancel or disallow the insured for existing conditions and children up to the age of 26 can now remain on their parents' policies.
IF YOU THINK THIS IS SPIN, GOOGLE EACH OF THESE ITEMS. Now I ask when had so much been done for so many in such a short time? It was accomplished with the refusal of the Republicans to participate in any meaningful way.
You really have to hand it to the Republicans though. How can these accomplishments in the past two years by a Democratic Executive and Legislative branch be woven into a negative story, sold by the Republican who were largely responsible for the economic meltdown in the first place, and roll to a landslide victory last night? I will leave that to each of you. But I have a pretty good idea about what will happen over the next two years.
I am reminded of the 1972 movie, The Candidate starring Robert Redford. At the end of the movie, Redford playing lawyer turned just elected candidate Bill McKay standing in a closet and asks "What do we do now?"
A friend of mine, a conservative told me how happy they were that the Republicans were going to win in this election cycle. But they added, "they better come up with a plan because I have not heard any plan from the Republicans." This pretty much sums up the blind devotion and blind faith that so many conservatives, independents and the misguided so-called tea partiers had during this election. If we do not make progress in the next two years, blame gridlock. Because that it was was voted for last night. There was no plan by the Republicans during the past two years (and extending back to the Bush administration) and there is no plan now.
So what will happen in the next two years? Well a friend of mine put it best: "The Republicans are great at winning, and bad at governing." So see them continue to campaign for the presidency in the next two years. They will continue to be the party of "no." But now that they control the lower house of Congress, they will not allow any legislation to pass that has any meaningful consequence. As the election cycle kicks in for 2012 they will blame the Obama administration for doing nothing and the continued suffering of the American people. Whether they can sell that in 2012 remains to be seen.
If history is any indication though, Democrats may have a glimmer of hope. A very similar political scenario played out in the mid-1990's. Bill Clinton was trying to clean up the Reagan/Bush 1 mess of the 1980's. It was no easy task either. He also lost Congress in 1994. By the turn of the century we were seeing unprecedented growth from a Democratic Executive branch and a Republican Legislative branch so there is some hope in a positive future. But times have changed. Back then the American people's well being seemed to be the common denominator between the two parties.
With a have/have-not mentality today of the conservative movement, that commonality may be gone.
From the middle what can we do? Demand an agenda from the Republicans. Ask your elected officials Democrat or Republican what they are going to do. How are they proposing to make America a better place in this irreversible global economy? Hold them accountable. If you are going to reduce government spending, where are you going to reduce it from? Ask them if they plan to reduce taxes, how are we going to pay off the debt that they are so adamantly against?
Ask tough questions and get direct answers. If nothing else we deserve that.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Where Were These Idiots Five Years Ago?
As election 2010 is just days away it is unbelievable how the country continues to be polarized. It amazes me how right the right wing has become. If there was a "wing tip," that is where some of these geniuses would be standing.
I had the good fortune to run into one of these wing nuts last night. He started by saying that one of the politicians running was a loser and would always be a loser. In my neighborhood he probably thought I would just join the chorus. He seemed surprised when I took issue with his characterization. "We should run the government like a business."
Then he just started spewing the conservative line. "Taxes are unconstitutional." I just shook my head and asked him if he liked roads?
"Roads are OK I guess."
What about infrastructure? He thought about that for a second and was not convinced that this was mandated in the Constitution. Neither were schools.
I asked him about the poor. "F**k the poor" was his answer. And schools are not mentioned in the Constitution either. The poor are living right at the level that they want to be."
Everything Republican was good and everything Democrat was bad. He hated everything Obama has done in the past two years but would not acknowledge what a poor job his predecessor had done. I asked him to name one achievement between 2001 and 2008. Nothing. Then came the line that I hear from most of my Republican friends these days. "I did not like Bush either." No accountability. When was the last time a Republican president balanced the budget? Richard Nixon.
But what is worse is how these new Constitutionalists think that all of a sudden that we can turn the clock back to 1776 and that if it is not written in the Constitution then we should not be concerned with it. Someone should have told that to George W. Bush when he invaded Iraq in 2002 without reason or provocation. Maybe these same idiots would have you believe that no laws should be made or created other than those that exist in the Ten Commandments.
We live in a modern society. It is 2010. No one has ever seriously questioned that public education should not exist. It has been the greatest single common denominator in America's rise to economic prominence in the past 100 years. This is the difference between what exists in the third world and what exists here. I have never met anyone who said that they love to pay taxes. But I have also never met anyone who complains about modern plumbing and their poop disappearing when they flush the toilet. Taxes pay for that. We take that for granted. But in other countries modern plumbing is a luxury. Is that the lowered bar we are aspiring to because we are that adamantly opposed to giving up a little so that we can live in a sophisticated society? That is not socialism, that just common sense and the way our country has been set up.
If we were done once the Constitution was written, why was there a Bill of Rights? Why are there amendments to those Bill of Rights? Why was a Legislative branch established in the Constitution if it were not to make new laws as the times warranted. Why was a Judicial branch established to interpret those laws if there were not a reason to warrant interpretation. The reason we are even asking these questions and have to address them is that people in prominent positions and many who run for public office these days do not seem to have a basic understanding, high school level, of our governmental process.
75% of our national budget is taken up with two items: Social Security and the military. So if you think that you are paying too much in taxes, you should probably start there. Privatize Social Security? Be happy that this did not happen in 2005 as G.W. Bush wished (and recently said was his biggest regret). The military. Well, maybe we could start by not invading countries that we have no real issue with. Or maybe if we are to be the rest of the world's protector ask those that need protecting to foot at least part of the bill. That would be a nice start for those who think that the country should run more like a business. Remember G.W. said that Iraq would be paid for with oil money? What ever happened to that? The remaining 25% is not much to speak of. It is running our government and keeping our infrastructure from crumbling.
No one likes to pay taxes, but come on...get real.
I had the good fortune to run into one of these wing nuts last night. He started by saying that one of the politicians running was a loser and would always be a loser. In my neighborhood he probably thought I would just join the chorus. He seemed surprised when I took issue with his characterization. "We should run the government like a business."
Then he just started spewing the conservative line. "Taxes are unconstitutional." I just shook my head and asked him if he liked roads?
"Roads are OK I guess."
What about infrastructure? He thought about that for a second and was not convinced that this was mandated in the Constitution. Neither were schools.
I asked him about the poor. "F**k the poor" was his answer. And schools are not mentioned in the Constitution either. The poor are living right at the level that they want to be."
Everything Republican was good and everything Democrat was bad. He hated everything Obama has done in the past two years but would not acknowledge what a poor job his predecessor had done. I asked him to name one achievement between 2001 and 2008. Nothing. Then came the line that I hear from most of my Republican friends these days. "I did not like Bush either." No accountability. When was the last time a Republican president balanced the budget? Richard Nixon.
But what is worse is how these new Constitutionalists think that all of a sudden that we can turn the clock back to 1776 and that if it is not written in the Constitution then we should not be concerned with it. Someone should have told that to George W. Bush when he invaded Iraq in 2002 without reason or provocation. Maybe these same idiots would have you believe that no laws should be made or created other than those that exist in the Ten Commandments.
We live in a modern society. It is 2010. No one has ever seriously questioned that public education should not exist. It has been the greatest single common denominator in America's rise to economic prominence in the past 100 years. This is the difference between what exists in the third world and what exists here. I have never met anyone who said that they love to pay taxes. But I have also never met anyone who complains about modern plumbing and their poop disappearing when they flush the toilet. Taxes pay for that. We take that for granted. But in other countries modern plumbing is a luxury. Is that the lowered bar we are aspiring to because we are that adamantly opposed to giving up a little so that we can live in a sophisticated society? That is not socialism, that just common sense and the way our country has been set up.
If we were done once the Constitution was written, why was there a Bill of Rights? Why are there amendments to those Bill of Rights? Why was a Legislative branch established in the Constitution if it were not to make new laws as the times warranted. Why was a Judicial branch established to interpret those laws if there were not a reason to warrant interpretation. The reason we are even asking these questions and have to address them is that people in prominent positions and many who run for public office these days do not seem to have a basic understanding, high school level, of our governmental process.
75% of our national budget is taken up with two items: Social Security and the military. So if you think that you are paying too much in taxes, you should probably start there. Privatize Social Security? Be happy that this did not happen in 2005 as G.W. Bush wished (and recently said was his biggest regret). The military. Well, maybe we could start by not invading countries that we have no real issue with. Or maybe if we are to be the rest of the world's protector ask those that need protecting to foot at least part of the bill. That would be a nice start for those who think that the country should run more like a business. Remember G.W. said that Iraq would be paid for with oil money? What ever happened to that? The remaining 25% is not much to speak of. It is running our government and keeping our infrastructure from crumbling.
No one likes to pay taxes, but come on...get real.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Run Sarah Run
Has there ever been a better candidate to represent the Republicans in 2012 than Sarah Palin? A week ago she was welcomed by the Tea Party movement as their key note speaker. It became very apparent that she should be the nominee for the Republican Party in 2012.
From all of us with a brain used to reason with, there would be no better candidate to go up against than Sarah Palin. She has an impeccable resume starting out as the Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska with a population of 5469 in 2000 when the last census was taken. She was then thrust into the Governor’s mansion where she did not complete her full first term (just over 2 ½ years) before resigning. During her time in office she was chosen by then presidential candidate Senator John McCain in what now seems like a last act of desperation in trying to win the presidency. While not done completely single handedly she was a major contributor in helping him self-destruct. While spending a whole 90 days on the campaign trail she not only stole the spotlight from McCain, there were rumors that she was more concerned with her wardrobe than she for was preparing interviews with the national media who wanted to understand her where she stood on the issues in perhaps the most important election of our time. When asked by CBS’s Katie Couric as question as simple as can you tell me about some of the books and magazines you read she responded by saying that she would get back to her on that.
Jimmy Carter had his brother capitalizing on his brother political success by producing beer and occasionally getting himself into trouble in his home state. Ronald Reagan had his daughter and his son who questioned his ideology publically while in office. While Barak Obama seems to have a pretty quiet family, his adversary, Sarah Palin, is dogging him like a long lost illegitimate half sister.
What is just beyond comprehension is Sarah Palin’s view of reality. The first being that she is a relevant politician. She has held one major office, the Governorship of Alaska, and could not even complete that. She is nothing more than a pretty face, winning a former Miss Alaska pageant. Congratulations. She was a sportscaster in her home state reading off of a TelePrompTer yet she criticizes her half brother, Obama, for doing the same. Every President in the modern age has used a TelePrompTer to give speeches. Yet to her this must be some type of new invention because at every turn she seems to think that this device is some type of chief executive novelty. This was made even more evident during her time on the podium when rather than using a TelePrompTer; Palin used her hand as a speech making aid while speaking and during the question and answer session.
But while the issues of the Tea Party participants are very real, the horse they have hitched their wagon to is lame. Political celebrity Palin is clueless on the issues and full of glittering generalities offering no new ideas to help the most unfortunate who have been left behind by the Republican leadership during the past nine years. Yet, if you think Palin is really one of those who you can identify with as “one of us Tea Partiers,” she took $100,000 of your money to speak at your convention in an attempt to further her own ambitions. After resigning her position as governor in Alaska, few details emerged as to why. But one detail slipped though her PR machine: Sarah Palin was going to pen a book on her illustrious political career and 90 day run as a Vice Presidential candidate. That book and subsequent speaking engagements would make her an instant multi millionaire.
So you say that Sarah Palin is a smart, patriotic savvy politician and business woman. Do not tell that to Ms. Palin. She seems to have something against a good education; especially a higher education. Yet Palin herself attended four institutions of higher learning including private, public and junior colleges before getting a B.S. from the University of Idaho in 1987. While many in this country would aspire to attend a college but are prevented by in doing so by academic requirements or funding, Palin seems to think that people running this country should not be well educated. She seems to take swipes at our current president every chance she gets for completing a Harvard education and being a former professor at an institution of higher learning. Perhaps she forgets that the previous president, one from her own party was educated at another pretty good school, Yale. She also forgets that our current president worked in some of the poorest neighborhoods in Chicago helping those who were the most desperate of the desperate.
Could you imagine President Palin going up again Vladimir Putin, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or Hugo Chavez to name just a few of the crazies we deal with on a daily and weekly basis? Maybe just once we would match crazy with crazy; But maybe not. It would not be long before we would be speaking Farsi, Russian and Spanish. Palin to date has little or no foreign policy experience. McCain aids said that during debate preparation in 2008, Palin was completely uninterested and had little feel or interest for foreign policy subject matter. She had no idea of why we were in Afghanistan. She explained to her debate preparation team that she did not realize that Iraq and Sadam Hussein were not responsible for the holocaust on 911. While she does understand that Russia is not too far away from Alaska, her first speaking engagement after resigning as governor was to a group in Japan so that she could appear to become more internationally focused. Of course that speech was not open to the press.
While being coy about running for president in 2012 she is beefing up her conservative credentials by joining, “Fair and Balanced” Fox News as a contributor. In a fair and balanced analysis she called for Obama’s Chief of Staff to resign for calling Congress “retards” while excusing her patron saint Rush Limbaugh for using the same term to describe personnel in the White House. She called Limbaugh’s tirade “satire.” Sarah, it looks like you found a running mate. Yet when comedian David Letterman told a joke about her daughter in what clearly was satire she spent days in public forums demanding an apology from him. Rather than let the circus continue, Letterman finally apologized. Congratulations and good luck in 2012.
Has there ever been a better candidate to represent the Republicans in 2012 than Sarah Palin? A week ago she was welcomed by the Tea Party movement as their key note speaker. It became very apparent that she should be the nominee for the Republican Party in 2012.
From all of us with a brain used to reason with, there would be no better candidate to go up against than Sarah Palin. She has an impeccable resume starting out as the Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska with a population of 5469 in 2000 when the last census was taken. She was then thrust into the Governor’s mansion where she did not complete her full first term (just over 2 ½ years) before resigning. During her time in office she was chosen by then presidential candidate Senator John McCain in what now seems like a last act of desperation in trying to win the presidency. While not done completely single handedly she was a major contributor in helping him self-destruct. While spending a whole 90 days on the campaign trail she not only stole the spotlight from McCain, there were rumors that she was more concerned with her wardrobe than she for was preparing interviews with the national media who wanted to understand her where she stood on the issues in perhaps the most important election of our time. When asked by CBS’s Katie Couric as question as simple as can you tell me about some of the books and magazines you read she responded by saying that she would get back to her on that.
Jimmy Carter had his brother capitalizing on his brother political success by producing beer and occasionally getting himself into trouble in his home state. Ronald Reagan had his daughter and his son who questioned his ideology publically while in office. While Barak Obama seems to have a pretty quiet family, his adversary, Sarah Palin, is dogging him like a long lost illegitimate half sister.
What is just beyond comprehension is Sarah Palin’s view of reality. The first being that she is a relevant politician. She has held one major office, the Governorship of Alaska, and could not even complete that. She is nothing more than a pretty face, winning a former Miss Alaska pageant. Congratulations. She was a sportscaster in her home state reading off of a TelePrompTer yet she criticizes her half brother, Obama, for doing the same. Every President in the modern age has used a TelePrompTer to give speeches. Yet to her this must be some type of new invention because at every turn she seems to think that this device is some type of chief executive novelty. This was made even more evident during her time on the podium when rather than using a TelePrompTer; Palin used her hand as a speech making aid while speaking and during the question and answer session.
But while the issues of the Tea Party participants are very real, the horse they have hitched their wagon to is lame. Political celebrity Palin is clueless on the issues and full of glittering generalities offering no new ideas to help the most unfortunate who have been left behind by the Republican leadership during the past nine years. Yet, if you think Palin is really one of those who you can identify with as “one of us Tea Partiers,” she took $100,000 of your money to speak at your convention in an attempt to further her own ambitions. After resigning her position as governor in Alaska, few details emerged as to why. But one detail slipped though her PR machine: Sarah Palin was going to pen a book on her illustrious political career and 90 day run as a Vice Presidential candidate. That book and subsequent speaking engagements would make her an instant multi millionaire.
So you say that Sarah Palin is a smart, patriotic savvy politician and business woman. Do not tell that to Ms. Palin. She seems to have something against a good education; especially a higher education. Yet Palin herself attended four institutions of higher learning including private, public and junior colleges before getting a B.S. from the University of Idaho in 1987. While many in this country would aspire to attend a college but are prevented by in doing so by academic requirements or funding, Palin seems to think that people running this country should not be well educated. She seems to take swipes at our current president every chance she gets for completing a Harvard education and being a former professor at an institution of higher learning. Perhaps she forgets that the previous president, one from her own party was educated at another pretty good school, Yale. She also forgets that our current president worked in some of the poorest neighborhoods in Chicago helping those who were the most desperate of the desperate.
Could you imagine President Palin going up again Vladimir Putin, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or Hugo Chavez to name just a few of the crazies we deal with on a daily and weekly basis? Maybe just once we would match crazy with crazy; But maybe not. It would not be long before we would be speaking Farsi, Russian and Spanish. Palin to date has little or no foreign policy experience. McCain aids said that during debate preparation in 2008, Palin was completely uninterested and had little feel or interest for foreign policy subject matter. She had no idea of why we were in Afghanistan. She explained to her debate preparation team that she did not realize that Iraq and Sadam Hussein were not responsible for the holocaust on 911. While she does understand that Russia is not too far away from Alaska, her first speaking engagement after resigning as governor was to a group in Japan so that she could appear to become more internationally focused. Of course that speech was not open to the press.
While being coy about running for president in 2012 she is beefing up her conservative credentials by joining, “Fair and Balanced” Fox News as a contributor. In a fair and balanced analysis she called for Obama’s Chief of Staff to resign for calling Congress “retards” while excusing her patron saint Rush Limbaugh for using the same term to describe personnel in the White House. She called Limbaugh’s tirade “satire.” Sarah, it looks like you found a running mate. Yet when comedian David Letterman told a joke about her daughter in what clearly was satire she spent days in public forums demanding an apology from him. Rather than let the circus continue, Letterman finally apologized. Congratulations and good luck in 2012.
Saturday, January 30, 2010
The Year in Review Part II
This past week President Obama gave his State of The Union Speech. Many pundits thought that this was his opportunity to start over again. Here is what took place in the past year.
While legislation was passed prior to Obama taking the reins, it was up to his administration’s team and to that of The Federal Reserve’s Ben Bernanke to lead the country out of the financial mess we had built for ourselves. While hundreds billions of dollars were lent to the banking and insurance sectors to get their shops in order, the term “too big to fail” was coined. The conservatives who voted for the stimulus package under the former President Bush were now heard criticizing the plan because they said that this money would never be paid back and that we were mortgaging our kid’s futures. Just under a year later all the large banks have paid back the money lent to them. While the banks do not lay blameless and played a large role in economic meltdown, what can be said is that one year after Obama became president, the US taxpayer is no longer an investor in big banking. As a footnote it should be said that the banks did no one but themselves a favor during this time charging scathingly high rates for credit cards and being all but totally uncooperative toward the consumers which help build their institutions. The banks in conjunction with the government put themselves in a no lose situation. If they refused to lend the government was bailing them out. If they did lend, it was to only those who could qualify and rates that were uncompetitive to those they borrowers were paying presently. Banks that have become too big to fail should not become too big. But for now, though fragile our financial system seems to have stabilized. Grade B.
Because of the financial situation or perhaps in a show of early bipartisanship and reaching out to the conservatives, President Obama left in place the sitting Bush administration Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates who it was announced this week has just agreed to stay on for another year. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have in the past year been largely unchanged. Iraq is winding down. Whether or not things are better there or not, we hear little about what goes on there day to day. Afghanistan is another story. In the late summer a very public debate took place between the sitting general in the region Stanley McChrystal and The President. McChrystal wanted 40,000 troops to complete the still largely undefined mission in Afghanistan. Obama, who has been largely criticized by the conservatives, led by the former Vice President, gave McChrystal 30,000 additional troops and 18 months before saying that he will begin a troop draw down in that region. Will it help? Will it make a difference? History is not on our side and no one really knows at this point. Now we have Yemen as the base for the latest terrorist threat. Grade C+.
Every major decision seems to draw the opposition out against the Obama administration. One recent firestorm was the decision by the Justice Department to try some of the September 11 terrorists in open court in New York City close to where the twin towers fell. This, as opposed to trying them in a military court. The same critics that wanted these trials held behind closed doors are many of the same ones that applauded the former president for prosecuting these terrorist the same way. Yet they call Obama weak on the war on terrorism. But when it comes to the Constitutional rights granted us by our founders, they are all too quick to relinquish those in the name of security. While we are at war with terrorists and terrorism we are not at war with a sovereign nation state. Therefore to grant a military trial recognizes terrorists as a sovereign body; a nation state. It gives them a defacto political status. By trying these people in open court not only re enforces our fair and open system of justice but does not lend legitimacy to the ideals for which they claim to be fighting for. The previous administration left the messy ordeal of trying terrorists to the new administration after holding them in Cuba for nearly seven years. But again our former vice president is quick to react to what his administration and many would say he would not do himself; set a trial venue, determine a method of justice and move forward. Grade: B.
In 2008 our auto industry was in a tailspin. Ford was shedding subsidiaries like Jaguar (to India), Aston Martin (private investors and Kuwait) and had put up Volvo for sale. Ford was in the best shape of the big US automakers. Chrysler was legitimately bankrupt and GM an icon of US business for the past 75 years was bleeding cash an unable to sell cars. It was unprecedented that a population of 300 million people could not sustain three auto companies and the Japanese, our largest competitors were healthy by comparison. As a symbol of how out of touch this industry had become, each company head traveled to Washington D.C. without a plan on their own private aircraft and naively asked for hundreds millions of dollars to right themselves. They were turned down flatly. A year later Ford asked for no government funding , is building cars that people are buying and is committed to being profitable by 2011. GM received loans and has recently committed to paying the money back to get the tax payer out of their board room. This week they say that they may be profitable this year. Chrysler was saved from receivership, largely to save jobs, by the Obama administration that pumped money into the company. Chrysler was later purchased by Fiat, Italy’s largest automaker that will be re entering the US market after being gone from our market for 25 years. In late summer as part of the stimulus package the Obama administration implemented the Cash for Clunkers program which jump started the auto industry if not just temporarily. As Obama enters the second year of his first term, the auto industry is not out of the woods but it is no longer endangered as it was a year ago. What can be said is that we still have an auto industry in this country a year later which was truly a question as we entered 2009. Grade: B+.
What is yet to materialize is a jobs recovery. This week a jobs report came out and it was not particularly encouraging. People are out of work and continue to lose jobs. It is happening across all sectors in all areas of the country. Small business is suffering, big business has continued to lay off thousands of people. This trickles down to the retail sector and no one is spending money. “It’s the economy stupid,” was coined a generation ago by Ronald Reagan and the economy either good or bad is based on whether or not you are employed. Certain inner cities are seeing unemployment in the area of 16%. California is seeing an unemployment rate of over 10%. One thing is certain: Our economy will not recover until our employment numbers improve dramatically. All the good that has been done on a national level will not mean much unless people are working. The Obama administration has implemented the cash for clunkers program and has poured billions of dollars into infrastructure repair and while both are needed and in the case of rebuilding crumbling infrastructure, overdue, these jobs created are as good as the long as the jobs are active. They largely benefit the construction sector. Some trickle down effect is felt with suppliers but not widespread. More, much more needs to be done in 2010 when it comes to creating jobs and incentives to get employers to hire. One such suggestion is a real tax break for employers to hire, companies to purchase capital equipment , and continue with research and development. The Obama administration could also provide incentives to emerging technologies such as the green sciences and industry, nano technology and bio sciences. All of these areas provide a future for our children, our economy and the world. Grade: C-.
A note to republicans. Whether you agree or disagree with the policies, as Americans you should want America to succeed. An argument can certainly be made that we “failed” under the policies of the previous administration. Right after Obama was inaugurated, the republicans started in on the wild spending policies of the democratic president. The eight year run of George W. Bush, A REPUBLICAN, caused a deficit and wild spending of unprecedented proportions. They did this while they had a majority in both houses of Congress. That included pork barrel spending as well. No one party can no lay claim that they are fiscally conservative.
A lot of crazy stuff has been said in the past year. It started days after the president was sworn in. The best was that once Obama was sworn in, he would be recruiting a national police force to implement martial law. Fringe groups called Obama a Kenyan and a secret Muslim. Conservative talk show hosts shed tears. The most remarkable statement made by talk show host Rush Limbaugh in the early days of the Obama presidency was that he wanted Obama to fail. That meant his show would continue to flourish with added ditto heads. Good for him, bad for us.
Before then and since, continued opposition by the conservatives have organized rallies against the administration vowing opposition to Obama’s health care policy and policies for economic recovery even before the details were known. What was so brilliant about these demonstrations were that were being popularized by the right’s media personalities and attended by the very people that the administration was trying to help. The republicans have not been on board with a single Obama initiative even though many of them began in the waning days of the Bush administration. Just saying no makes you look at best stupid and at worst uncaring toward a populous that you represent. Pork project benefiting a few are part of our legislative process. But no one party can claim virtue on this issue. It is an unfortunate part of our political process. But Obama and his people were charged with implementing many of the programs and policies initiated by Bush and the democratic Congress in the waning days of his administration . One has to wonder if the opposing party is more concerned about winning back power than actually helping the country overcome its problems. They should provide legitimate opposition and an alternative proposals which is their job. No substantive proposals regarding any of the primary issues have been proposed during the past year. They simply say no.
We are in a crisis that this country has not seen in generations. Partisan bickering which was business as usual should not be tolerated by the electorate. But this situation is not unique. Democratic bickering happens when the republicans are in power too. It just seems as time goes on the nastiness is taken to a whole new level. This helps no one. Could things be better right now? Yes. Governing is not an exact science. Call it an average performance this past year. But could they have been much much worse? Yes. We were headed down that road just 12 months ago. Whether or not you agree with the measures that were implemented in the past year to halt the recession, at least the problems were met head on and were being addressed. While some, even in his own party are not satisfied with the Obama leadership, a sense of reasonableness should prevail. A lot has been done over the past year. A lot still needs to be done. We have many problems that need to be addressed. But if nothing else we have a chief executive that is engaged in the problems of our time.
This past week President Obama gave his State of The Union Speech. Many pundits thought that this was his opportunity to start over again. Here is what took place in the past year.
While legislation was passed prior to Obama taking the reins, it was up to his administration’s team and to that of The Federal Reserve’s Ben Bernanke to lead the country out of the financial mess we had built for ourselves. While hundreds billions of dollars were lent to the banking and insurance sectors to get their shops in order, the term “too big to fail” was coined. The conservatives who voted for the stimulus package under the former President Bush were now heard criticizing the plan because they said that this money would never be paid back and that we were mortgaging our kid’s futures. Just under a year later all the large banks have paid back the money lent to them. While the banks do not lay blameless and played a large role in economic meltdown, what can be said is that one year after Obama became president, the US taxpayer is no longer an investor in big banking. As a footnote it should be said that the banks did no one but themselves a favor during this time charging scathingly high rates for credit cards and being all but totally uncooperative toward the consumers which help build their institutions. The banks in conjunction with the government put themselves in a no lose situation. If they refused to lend the government was bailing them out. If they did lend, it was to only those who could qualify and rates that were uncompetitive to those they borrowers were paying presently. Banks that have become too big to fail should not become too big. But for now, though fragile our financial system seems to have stabilized. Grade B.
Because of the financial situation or perhaps in a show of early bipartisanship and reaching out to the conservatives, President Obama left in place the sitting Bush administration Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates who it was announced this week has just agreed to stay on for another year. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have in the past year been largely unchanged. Iraq is winding down. Whether or not things are better there or not, we hear little about what goes on there day to day. Afghanistan is another story. In the late summer a very public debate took place between the sitting general in the region Stanley McChrystal and The President. McChrystal wanted 40,000 troops to complete the still largely undefined mission in Afghanistan. Obama, who has been largely criticized by the conservatives, led by the former Vice President, gave McChrystal 30,000 additional troops and 18 months before saying that he will begin a troop draw down in that region. Will it help? Will it make a difference? History is not on our side and no one really knows at this point. Now we have Yemen as the base for the latest terrorist threat. Grade C+.
Every major decision seems to draw the opposition out against the Obama administration. One recent firestorm was the decision by the Justice Department to try some of the September 11 terrorists in open court in New York City close to where the twin towers fell. This, as opposed to trying them in a military court. The same critics that wanted these trials held behind closed doors are many of the same ones that applauded the former president for prosecuting these terrorist the same way. Yet they call Obama weak on the war on terrorism. But when it comes to the Constitutional rights granted us by our founders, they are all too quick to relinquish those in the name of security. While we are at war with terrorists and terrorism we are not at war with a sovereign nation state. Therefore to grant a military trial recognizes terrorists as a sovereign body; a nation state. It gives them a defacto political status. By trying these people in open court not only re enforces our fair and open system of justice but does not lend legitimacy to the ideals for which they claim to be fighting for. The previous administration left the messy ordeal of trying terrorists to the new administration after holding them in Cuba for nearly seven years. But again our former vice president is quick to react to what his administration and many would say he would not do himself; set a trial venue, determine a method of justice and move forward. Grade: B.
In 2008 our auto industry was in a tailspin. Ford was shedding subsidiaries like Jaguar (to India), Aston Martin (private investors and Kuwait) and had put up Volvo for sale. Ford was in the best shape of the big US automakers. Chrysler was legitimately bankrupt and GM an icon of US business for the past 75 years was bleeding cash an unable to sell cars. It was unprecedented that a population of 300 million people could not sustain three auto companies and the Japanese, our largest competitors were healthy by comparison. As a symbol of how out of touch this industry had become, each company head traveled to Washington D.C. without a plan on their own private aircraft and naively asked for hundreds millions of dollars to right themselves. They were turned down flatly. A year later Ford asked for no government funding , is building cars that people are buying and is committed to being profitable by 2011. GM received loans and has recently committed to paying the money back to get the tax payer out of their board room. This week they say that they may be profitable this year. Chrysler was saved from receivership, largely to save jobs, by the Obama administration that pumped money into the company. Chrysler was later purchased by Fiat, Italy’s largest automaker that will be re entering the US market after being gone from our market for 25 years. In late summer as part of the stimulus package the Obama administration implemented the Cash for Clunkers program which jump started the auto industry if not just temporarily. As Obama enters the second year of his first term, the auto industry is not out of the woods but it is no longer endangered as it was a year ago. What can be said is that we still have an auto industry in this country a year later which was truly a question as we entered 2009. Grade: B+.
What is yet to materialize is a jobs recovery. This week a jobs report came out and it was not particularly encouraging. People are out of work and continue to lose jobs. It is happening across all sectors in all areas of the country. Small business is suffering, big business has continued to lay off thousands of people. This trickles down to the retail sector and no one is spending money. “It’s the economy stupid,” was coined a generation ago by Ronald Reagan and the economy either good or bad is based on whether or not you are employed. Certain inner cities are seeing unemployment in the area of 16%. California is seeing an unemployment rate of over 10%. One thing is certain: Our economy will not recover until our employment numbers improve dramatically. All the good that has been done on a national level will not mean much unless people are working. The Obama administration has implemented the cash for clunkers program and has poured billions of dollars into infrastructure repair and while both are needed and in the case of rebuilding crumbling infrastructure, overdue, these jobs created are as good as the long as the jobs are active. They largely benefit the construction sector. Some trickle down effect is felt with suppliers but not widespread. More, much more needs to be done in 2010 when it comes to creating jobs and incentives to get employers to hire. One such suggestion is a real tax break for employers to hire, companies to purchase capital equipment , and continue with research and development. The Obama administration could also provide incentives to emerging technologies such as the green sciences and industry, nano technology and bio sciences. All of these areas provide a future for our children, our economy and the world. Grade: C-.
A note to republicans. Whether you agree or disagree with the policies, as Americans you should want America to succeed. An argument can certainly be made that we “failed” under the policies of the previous administration. Right after Obama was inaugurated, the republicans started in on the wild spending policies of the democratic president. The eight year run of George W. Bush, A REPUBLICAN, caused a deficit and wild spending of unprecedented proportions. They did this while they had a majority in both houses of Congress. That included pork barrel spending as well. No one party can no lay claim that they are fiscally conservative.
A lot of crazy stuff has been said in the past year. It started days after the president was sworn in. The best was that once Obama was sworn in, he would be recruiting a national police force to implement martial law. Fringe groups called Obama a Kenyan and a secret Muslim. Conservative talk show hosts shed tears. The most remarkable statement made by talk show host Rush Limbaugh in the early days of the Obama presidency was that he wanted Obama to fail. That meant his show would continue to flourish with added ditto heads. Good for him, bad for us.
Before then and since, continued opposition by the conservatives have organized rallies against the administration vowing opposition to Obama’s health care policy and policies for economic recovery even before the details were known. What was so brilliant about these demonstrations were that were being popularized by the right’s media personalities and attended by the very people that the administration was trying to help. The republicans have not been on board with a single Obama initiative even though many of them began in the waning days of the Bush administration. Just saying no makes you look at best stupid and at worst uncaring toward a populous that you represent. Pork project benefiting a few are part of our legislative process. But no one party can claim virtue on this issue. It is an unfortunate part of our political process. But Obama and his people were charged with implementing many of the programs and policies initiated by Bush and the democratic Congress in the waning days of his administration . One has to wonder if the opposing party is more concerned about winning back power than actually helping the country overcome its problems. They should provide legitimate opposition and an alternative proposals which is their job. No substantive proposals regarding any of the primary issues have been proposed during the past year. They simply say no.
We are in a crisis that this country has not seen in generations. Partisan bickering which was business as usual should not be tolerated by the electorate. But this situation is not unique. Democratic bickering happens when the republicans are in power too. It just seems as time goes on the nastiness is taken to a whole new level. This helps no one. Could things be better right now? Yes. Governing is not an exact science. Call it an average performance this past year. But could they have been much much worse? Yes. We were headed down that road just 12 months ago. Whether or not you agree with the measures that were implemented in the past year to halt the recession, at least the problems were met head on and were being addressed. While some, even in his own party are not satisfied with the Obama leadership, a sense of reasonableness should prevail. A lot has been done over the past year. A lot still needs to be done. We have many problems that need to be addressed. But if nothing else we have a chief executive that is engaged in the problems of our time.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
The Year In Review Part I
If there might be one thing that democrats and republicans would agree on, it is that the last year has been a busy year in Washington. Our current president was voted into office a year ago with a wave of optimism and hope that had not been seen since the Kennedy era. The country was reeling from what everyone feared (and soon to be officially confirmed) was the worst recession since the Great Depression. There was an undercurrent of hope that a new leader would somehow bring us out of this national funk that had existed for the past several years.
How would you grade the president’s performance as a leader since taking office in January 2009? What has he done and what is still left to do for him to be considered a mediocre, good or even a great president? What events could take place that would have him as one of the more forgettable leaders of our time? Would he quiet his critics who said that he had little or no executive experience? Could he begin to make a case for a second term?
It is fair to say that leaders do not succeed or fail in a vacuum. They have help. We have had average presidents who have surrounded themselves with great people and therefore became great. We have had very intelligent chief executives who have been pounded by the opposition and by circumstances largely not of their own making and been forgotten.
Pounded by the opposition is a fair way to describe what happened to Obama in the weeks after he took office. The Republican Party reeling from a defeat where they lost both the Executive Branch in 2008 and both houses of Congress in 2006, began their attack of the new president as soon as he and his family moved into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. His detractors on the right were many. But the most vocal in the early days was conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh who simply said that he wished the President “would fail.” Conservatives branded him a socialist and even some democrats questioned the amount of money lent to the financial sector and others under the guise of a stimulus. To many it looked like a big giveaway to the biggest and greediest banks in the country who some accused of starting this financial crisis.
But these are unusual times. There were few similarities in the first six months between our former president and Barack Obama. George W. Bush inherited a relatively healthy America. Though peaked by 2000, Bush had been voted into office in the most robust economic climate in a generation. Our country’s economy was stable with a balanced federal budget and a deficit dating back to the Reagan administration that had been erased. Some of the administrative oversight seen in the previous democratic administration was relaxed in favor of a self regulation. Bush in the early days of his administration laid out a conservative agenda that included a stem cell research ban and announced it as a priority to crackdown on pornography in the United States headed by his newly confirmed Attorney General John Ashcroft. Some said that he would be a “caretaker president” who simply presided over a calm and self-sustaining American economy. Though the President of the United State never really gets a full vacation, within the first eight months George Bush took 96 days of vacation. The only president with more vacation time under his belt was his father George H.W. Bush. Of course the Bush agenda changed with 911.
Contrast this with Barack Obama’s first six months in office. The president, from the moment he took office was under siege by an economic meltdown. Our stock market was dropping like a rock. The auto industry was failing. Our real estate market, long the bell weather for our economy was in an unprecedented slump not seen since the great depression and our banking system was in a shambles. This was just the beginning. Unemployment was rising at an unchecked rate. Small business and Main Street were badly wounded with consumer spending and confidence down dramatically. AIG, among the largest insurers in the world was in need of a government bailout because of bad investments by just a few unchecked employees. Our national debt was exploding to levels never seen before. This and we were fighting wars on two fronts one of which we were mired in with no defined mission or exit strategy. Our economic problems interconnected with European and Asian economies. Their economies were following ours with rising unemployment and an economic downturn. It was a perfect storm of devastatingly bad news worldwide. While candidate for President John McCain called the “fundamentals of our economy essentially strong,” few could look at the glass as half full.
In the past we had sectors of poor performance in the economy while others did well. But our country had seen nothing approaching an assault of our economy of this scale in our generation. Muslim extremists went as far as saying that it was the crumbling of the Infidels’ Western Civilization built around capitalism.
These were the conditions that existed in the US economy in January, 2009. If you had money, it was a great time to buy. But few had any wealth to speak of. Stock values and personal portfolios dropped. Home equity evaporated. Manufacturing had disintegrated. New orders for goods and capital expenditures came to a halt. The real estate industry which had been flying high just a year and a half before was laying off agents and brokerages were closing. Foreclosures were at levels not seen since the Great Depression. Mortgage brokers and departments were being eliminated. You counted yourself lucky if you had a job.
In the next week, we will examine the steps taken to turn around the faltering economy. How far have we come in the past year and what is left to accomplish to turn around the faltering American economy? How has America rebounded in the past year? What is left to do and how well would you grade the existing administration in attempting to fix our economy? What about the President's agenda to move our country forward? The answers in part II.
If there might be one thing that democrats and republicans would agree on, it is that the last year has been a busy year in Washington. Our current president was voted into office a year ago with a wave of optimism and hope that had not been seen since the Kennedy era. The country was reeling from what everyone feared (and soon to be officially confirmed) was the worst recession since the Great Depression. There was an undercurrent of hope that a new leader would somehow bring us out of this national funk that had existed for the past several years.
How would you grade the president’s performance as a leader since taking office in January 2009? What has he done and what is still left to do for him to be considered a mediocre, good or even a great president? What events could take place that would have him as one of the more forgettable leaders of our time? Would he quiet his critics who said that he had little or no executive experience? Could he begin to make a case for a second term?
It is fair to say that leaders do not succeed or fail in a vacuum. They have help. We have had average presidents who have surrounded themselves with great people and therefore became great. We have had very intelligent chief executives who have been pounded by the opposition and by circumstances largely not of their own making and been forgotten.
Pounded by the opposition is a fair way to describe what happened to Obama in the weeks after he took office. The Republican Party reeling from a defeat where they lost both the Executive Branch in 2008 and both houses of Congress in 2006, began their attack of the new president as soon as he and his family moved into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. His detractors on the right were many. But the most vocal in the early days was conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh who simply said that he wished the President “would fail.” Conservatives branded him a socialist and even some democrats questioned the amount of money lent to the financial sector and others under the guise of a stimulus. To many it looked like a big giveaway to the biggest and greediest banks in the country who some accused of starting this financial crisis.
But these are unusual times. There were few similarities in the first six months between our former president and Barack Obama. George W. Bush inherited a relatively healthy America. Though peaked by 2000, Bush had been voted into office in the most robust economic climate in a generation. Our country’s economy was stable with a balanced federal budget and a deficit dating back to the Reagan administration that had been erased. Some of the administrative oversight seen in the previous democratic administration was relaxed in favor of a self regulation. Bush in the early days of his administration laid out a conservative agenda that included a stem cell research ban and announced it as a priority to crackdown on pornography in the United States headed by his newly confirmed Attorney General John Ashcroft. Some said that he would be a “caretaker president” who simply presided over a calm and self-sustaining American economy. Though the President of the United State never really gets a full vacation, within the first eight months George Bush took 96 days of vacation. The only president with more vacation time under his belt was his father George H.W. Bush. Of course the Bush agenda changed with 911.
Contrast this with Barack Obama’s first six months in office. The president, from the moment he took office was under siege by an economic meltdown. Our stock market was dropping like a rock. The auto industry was failing. Our real estate market, long the bell weather for our economy was in an unprecedented slump not seen since the great depression and our banking system was in a shambles. This was just the beginning. Unemployment was rising at an unchecked rate. Small business and Main Street were badly wounded with consumer spending and confidence down dramatically. AIG, among the largest insurers in the world was in need of a government bailout because of bad investments by just a few unchecked employees. Our national debt was exploding to levels never seen before. This and we were fighting wars on two fronts one of which we were mired in with no defined mission or exit strategy. Our economic problems interconnected with European and Asian economies. Their economies were following ours with rising unemployment and an economic downturn. It was a perfect storm of devastatingly bad news worldwide. While candidate for President John McCain called the “fundamentals of our economy essentially strong,” few could look at the glass as half full.
In the past we had sectors of poor performance in the economy while others did well. But our country had seen nothing approaching an assault of our economy of this scale in our generation. Muslim extremists went as far as saying that it was the crumbling of the Infidels’ Western Civilization built around capitalism.
These were the conditions that existed in the US economy in January, 2009. If you had money, it was a great time to buy. But few had any wealth to speak of. Stock values and personal portfolios dropped. Home equity evaporated. Manufacturing had disintegrated. New orders for goods and capital expenditures came to a halt. The real estate industry which had been flying high just a year and a half before was laying off agents and brokerages were closing. Foreclosures were at levels not seen since the Great Depression. Mortgage brokers and departments were being eliminated. You counted yourself lucky if you had a job.
In the next week, we will examine the steps taken to turn around the faltering economy. How far have we come in the past year and what is left to accomplish to turn around the faltering American economy? How has America rebounded in the past year? What is left to do and how well would you grade the existing administration in attempting to fix our economy? What about the President's agenda to move our country forward? The answers in part II.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
The Fix
So what can be done to begin to fix just a few of the problems we are facing today both at home and abroad? Perhaps ironically our problems abroad can be fixed by focusing our resources domestically. The United States needs a domestic energy program that will sustain itself for the next generation and the generations beyond. We also need a healthcare system that will allow those in need to be covered whether for the flu or the most life threatening disease. We need to shore up our social security system; a system that everyone agrees is broken but no one has the courage to fix. We need to strengthen our economy and realize that we simply cannot outsource ourselves to prosperity. Finally, our elected officials cannot be exclusively beholden to those who have the means to buy themselves influence.
Leadership with regards to a national energy policy has been lacking for the past 20 years. While our leaders have given lip service to the need for an energy policy, the reality is that our energy policy is to drill for and seek additional sources for oil. This policy is so well re-enforced, in the early days of the Bush administration that our vice president held a secret meeting with executives from the energy industry that to this day the agenda and the participants are still unknown. Alternative energy for day to day use is just now becoming a reality for some. While green energy sources are available they continue to be expensive to the average energy consumer. It is a fact that while the US is a leading producer of solar energy systems, those systems are exported to countries like Germany, a leader in the use of solar electricity. With actions dating all the way back to the Reagan administration, tax breaks for wind driven energy were cut while today we publicly enhance oil company profits with generous tax incentives.
Technology is available to assist us in becoming less dependent on oil. It is naive to think that oil will be completely eliminated as an energy source nor should it be. Oil is plentiful. But much of it resides in hostile, remote or unstable regions of the world. Oil needs to be part of an overall equation that makes up our domestic energy policy. It should become a diminishing part of that equation. The same incentives given to the large oil companies should be instituted down to the consumer level for those who deploy energy means not dependent on oil. This should include conservation as well as fossil fuel alternatives. Just as the modern version of the combustion engine has changed so to will the oil independent alternatives.
We should not wait for the best alternative but rather use what is available and the market will evolve with better and more efficient alternatives to oil. Incentives should also be given to those who wish to invent and create better and more efficient ways of producing and transporting energy. We need to change the way we think about our use of energy. Our parents had the luxury of a limitless supply of energy. Our children will not have that same luxury. This generation is wrestling with how to make the transition while not impacting our way of life. It is important that we learn from other countries around the world on how to save our resources. Many of those countries are well ahead of us when it comes to alternative energy sources and conservation. What we do poorly is look to other cultures and countries as examples of what we could do better. We also need to insist that the international community step up and join us as partners worldwide. The US cannot continue to go at it alone. Finally, our leaders should lead. We elect them not only as representatives but as examples. They should not only use, but be leaders in promoting visible and high profile methods off alternatives to oil. Would it be nice to hear a story about how our elected officials were not jockeying for a bigger plane in their new position, but rather about how they were considering an alternative to travel to bring them closer to their constituents?
It is time for our leadership to make difficult decisions. It is said that we cannot kill off the domestic oil industry that employs hundreds of thousands if not millions of people world-wide. We have already done this to our manufacturing sector under the guise of globalization. It would seem that we are more reluctant to decimate the white collar jobs that makes up much of oil industry. The good news is that much of this sector could easily be re-employed innovating new alternatives to energy. Furthermore, the oil companies while chasing drilling sites all over the world could themselves be private sector leaders in alternative energy sources.
Finally, we need to take a good hard look at ourselves. While somewhat changed during the past year, we need to ask ourselves why the view of America falls so quickly in the eyes of the world community? One answer is that we make up a very small percentage of the world’s population yet we consume a disproportionate amount of the world’s resources. That may have worked for us sixty-five years ago right after World War II, but the world has evolved since then and our foreign policy has not.
Another answer may be that rather than continuing to pillage the world’s resources, we now compete with emerging countries such as India and China on the open market for these same limited resources. Finally, much resentment seems to have come through globalization which has brought American products to foreign countries displacing local shopkeepers, store owners and proprietors of food and lodging establishments. Is this really the way to spread the American way of life? Just as we wish to preserve our heritage, others wish to do the same. Does might make right? If we continue to spread one form of democracy, one form of capitalism and tell others that they should be more like us, we can only expect what we get when it is asked “why do they hate us?”
So what can be done to begin to fix just a few of the problems we are facing today both at home and abroad? Perhaps ironically our problems abroad can be fixed by focusing our resources domestically. The United States needs a domestic energy program that will sustain itself for the next generation and the generations beyond. We also need a healthcare system that will allow those in need to be covered whether for the flu or the most life threatening disease. We need to shore up our social security system; a system that everyone agrees is broken but no one has the courage to fix. We need to strengthen our economy and realize that we simply cannot outsource ourselves to prosperity. Finally, our elected officials cannot be exclusively beholden to those who have the means to buy themselves influence.
Leadership with regards to a national energy policy has been lacking for the past 20 years. While our leaders have given lip service to the need for an energy policy, the reality is that our energy policy is to drill for and seek additional sources for oil. This policy is so well re-enforced, in the early days of the Bush administration that our vice president held a secret meeting with executives from the energy industry that to this day the agenda and the participants are still unknown. Alternative energy for day to day use is just now becoming a reality for some. While green energy sources are available they continue to be expensive to the average energy consumer. It is a fact that while the US is a leading producer of solar energy systems, those systems are exported to countries like Germany, a leader in the use of solar electricity. With actions dating all the way back to the Reagan administration, tax breaks for wind driven energy were cut while today we publicly enhance oil company profits with generous tax incentives.
Technology is available to assist us in becoming less dependent on oil. It is naive to think that oil will be completely eliminated as an energy source nor should it be. Oil is plentiful. But much of it resides in hostile, remote or unstable regions of the world. Oil needs to be part of an overall equation that makes up our domestic energy policy. It should become a diminishing part of that equation. The same incentives given to the large oil companies should be instituted down to the consumer level for those who deploy energy means not dependent on oil. This should include conservation as well as fossil fuel alternatives. Just as the modern version of the combustion engine has changed so to will the oil independent alternatives.
We should not wait for the best alternative but rather use what is available and the market will evolve with better and more efficient alternatives to oil. Incentives should also be given to those who wish to invent and create better and more efficient ways of producing and transporting energy. We need to change the way we think about our use of energy. Our parents had the luxury of a limitless supply of energy. Our children will not have that same luxury. This generation is wrestling with how to make the transition while not impacting our way of life. It is important that we learn from other countries around the world on how to save our resources. Many of those countries are well ahead of us when it comes to alternative energy sources and conservation. What we do poorly is look to other cultures and countries as examples of what we could do better. We also need to insist that the international community step up and join us as partners worldwide. The US cannot continue to go at it alone. Finally, our leaders should lead. We elect them not only as representatives but as examples. They should not only use, but be leaders in promoting visible and high profile methods off alternatives to oil. Would it be nice to hear a story about how our elected officials were not jockeying for a bigger plane in their new position, but rather about how they were considering an alternative to travel to bring them closer to their constituents?
It is time for our leadership to make difficult decisions. It is said that we cannot kill off the domestic oil industry that employs hundreds of thousands if not millions of people world-wide. We have already done this to our manufacturing sector under the guise of globalization. It would seem that we are more reluctant to decimate the white collar jobs that makes up much of oil industry. The good news is that much of this sector could easily be re-employed innovating new alternatives to energy. Furthermore, the oil companies while chasing drilling sites all over the world could themselves be private sector leaders in alternative energy sources.
Finally, we need to take a good hard look at ourselves. While somewhat changed during the past year, we need to ask ourselves why the view of America falls so quickly in the eyes of the world community? One answer is that we make up a very small percentage of the world’s population yet we consume a disproportionate amount of the world’s resources. That may have worked for us sixty-five years ago right after World War II, but the world has evolved since then and our foreign policy has not.
Another answer may be that rather than continuing to pillage the world’s resources, we now compete with emerging countries such as India and China on the open market for these same limited resources. Finally, much resentment seems to have come through globalization which has brought American products to foreign countries displacing local shopkeepers, store owners and proprietors of food and lodging establishments. Is this really the way to spread the American way of life? Just as we wish to preserve our heritage, others wish to do the same. Does might make right? If we continue to spread one form of democracy, one form of capitalism and tell others that they should be more like us, we can only expect what we get when it is asked “why do they hate us?”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)