The following was submitted to the Las Vegas Review-Journal:
“That man called every CEO of every bank that I know and said, ‘Look, this is important to my state. Get it done,’” MGM Mirage CEO James J. Murren said of Sen. Harry Reid in a television commercial that attempts to credit Reid for saving City Center. The real history of the project indicates that he is either exagerrating what transpired or unmasks him as a political cutthroat who uses the power of the state to strong-arm private citizens and companies into perpetuating the lending practices that led to our nation’s financial collapse.
The ad would lead you to believe that hapless Murren languished by the phone waiting for the evil bankers to return his calls. Harry Reid, hero of the story, wakes from his slumber and demands that the Scrooge McDucks of the banking world, rolling in their piles of cash and gold, bag up the treasure and ship it to MGM. As if by magic City Center and 20,000 jobs were saved but the real history shows that banks were already deeply committed to the project and demanded that the developers, including MGM, commit more of their own money to City Center.
Perhaps Sen. Reid has forgotten that banks don’t print money. Investors and depositors fund the banks, which in turn, make loans to homeowners and developers. As recent history has demonstrated, they must be careful to scrutinize the ability of borrowers or the banks themselves are prone to failure. Has Senator Reid learned nothing in the last 18 months? Apparently not, because his own ad makes the claim that he used the power of his office to pressure banks into making loans to a project whose partners were embroiled in a legal dispute.
Earlier this year MGM reported that the company was in serious financial trouble which was a surprise to Dubai World, its partner in City Center and subsidiary of the Dubai government. City Center was also facing cost overruns as the original estimated cost of $4 billion swelled to $11 billion as the demand for and value of the 2400 condos they were hoping to sell were rapidly deflating. Additionally construction defects were found in The Harmon, one of the buildings in City Center, which meant it could only be built to 28 stories instead of the intended 49. MGM eventually cancelled the condominium portion of the building and used much-needed cash to return deposits to the holders of cancelled sales contracts.
By March 27th Dubai World had already stopped contributing their share of construction costs and sued MGM citing mismanagement. It was feared that in a short time City Center would shut down and thousands of construction workers would be laid off.
On April 10th the project was saved when Dubai World dropped its lawsuit and the partners agreed to banks’ demands. Accounts of the transaction show that the partners in City Center intended to complete construction but were forced by their banks to contribute more cash as a pre-condition. No mention was made of Harry Reid’s role in saving the project at the time.
We don’t know what Sen. Reid did during the two weeks when City Center was at the precipice, but he claims, “Some said I shouldn’t have pushed so hard. But with 20,000 jobs at stake, I’d do it all over again.” A flyer produced by Reid’s campaign reads, “When he personally told the banks threatening to shut down City Center construction that Nevada couldn’t afford to lose those jobs, they heard Harry Reid loud and clear.”
It is clear that it was in both the banks’ and the developers’ best interests to save City Center and they didn’t necessarily need prodding from Sen. Reid to save their own skins. One of two things happened: Either Sen. Reid applied pressure to the banks and forced them to make a deal that was against their interests, or he did little and the dispute was resolved among the parties themselves.
Nevadans deserve to know who he pushed and how he pushed them. Did he demand that banks loan money to City Center before its partners resolved their differences, or perhaps force bankers to ignore lending regulations? If he made such demands, what did the banks have to fear from Reid if they failed to agree to make such loans? If such threats had been made do they rise to the level of illegality?
It is also possible that this is political grandstanding and is Reid taking credit for something he had little or nothing to do with. After all, MGM and Dubai World had to produce more of their own money before the banks would continue funding, so perhaps Reid’s role was superfluous. In any case, it is revealing of the character of a man who has been so filled with the arrogance of power that he thinks he can tell us all what to do with our money.
If Reid is so brazen to pick up the phone and tell bankers, who hold in trust the savings of millions of people, exactly what to do with their money, what restraint does he show when he tells you how to live your life?
I am pleased that City Center will be completed and think it’s extremely fortunate for the new hires. I congratulate the parties involved for resolving their differences. Sen. Reid, however, should clarify his role in the funding of the project and reveal the nature of the threats he claims to have made to private citizens.
Friday, November 20, 2009
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Two Little Words
Kanye West grabbed the microphone from Taylor Swift at the Video Music Awards last week during her acceptance speech for best video, obviously because she’s white. West hates white people, country music, NASCAR and all else that is white. His seething hatred of a young white woman who dared to win an award over African-American Beyonce, whose video he touted as “one of the best ever” pushed him to chug cognac and jump on stage. He is secretly behind a Black Power movement that wants to take over all three branches of government and the VMA's by force.
How could anyone possibly know West’s motivations? The same way Georgia Democrat Congressman Hank Johnson knows that Rep. Joe Wilson’s motivation for the “You lie!” comment on the House floor was meant to usher in a revival of the Klan’s putting on “white hoods and ride through the countryside.” “You lie!” means that Rep. Wilson wants to lynch black people starting with the President.
"I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw this myself in the late '70s in San Francisco," Nancy Pelosi added in response to Wilson and the Tea Party movement, "This kind of rhetoric was very frightening" and created a climate in which violence took place, she said.” “You lie!” is Rep. Wilson’s call to arms, words that mean to roust us from our beds to commit murder and mayhem.
"I think it's based on racism," omniscient former President Jimmy Carter said at a town hall, “There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president." “You lie!” means the vote doesn’t matter to racist Rep. Wilson and his comment was only made because the President is black; President Obama should never have been inaugurated.
There’s a lot of content in those two words Rep. Wilson spoke from the House floor during President Obama’s speech on health care. He should come out with his own version of Cliff's Notes. I bet he could whittle War and Peace down to two pages. Apparently the Pelosi's of the world don't remember President Bushitler being hanged if effigy at many antiwar protests.
The comment came after Pres. Obama stated that illegal immigrants would not be covered in any health care plan. Maybe we can take the drastic step to ask if the President was lying. The answer is maybe. There is a provision in the House bill that is what Pres. Obama stated, however Rep. Wilson had spent that afternoon attempting to insert teeth into that provision so hospitals could look up whether a patient is in fact here legally. The White House argued the opposite position, in effect making the provision meaningless. If a doctor isn’t allowed to learn a patient’s status how can he determine whether he’s part of the government program? He can’t.
Because of this debate on the health care bill, perhaps Rep. Wilson’s “You lie!” meant just that. We can’t speak to his motivations any more than President Carter and much of the Democrat Party can. It was rude, thoughtless and inexcusable for Rep. Wilson to heckle the President during the speech, an action even more offensive than Kanye West’s drunken babbling. To his credit, Wilson apologized not for the content of his two words but for saying them in a very inappropriate place. His apology was accepted by the President who doesn’t seem to fear being lynched anytime soon.
The Democrats can do far more for race relations by defending the President's statements than by playing the race card.
How could anyone possibly know West’s motivations? The same way Georgia Democrat Congressman Hank Johnson knows that Rep. Joe Wilson’s motivation for the “You lie!” comment on the House floor was meant to usher in a revival of the Klan’s putting on “white hoods and ride through the countryside.” “You lie!” means that Rep. Wilson wants to lynch black people starting with the President.
"I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw this myself in the late '70s in San Francisco," Nancy Pelosi added in response to Wilson and the Tea Party movement, "This kind of rhetoric was very frightening" and created a climate in which violence took place, she said.” “You lie!” is Rep. Wilson’s call to arms, words that mean to roust us from our beds to commit murder and mayhem.
"I think it's based on racism," omniscient former President Jimmy Carter said at a town hall, “There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president." “You lie!” means the vote doesn’t matter to racist Rep. Wilson and his comment was only made because the President is black; President Obama should never have been inaugurated.
There’s a lot of content in those two words Rep. Wilson spoke from the House floor during President Obama’s speech on health care. He should come out with his own version of Cliff's Notes. I bet he could whittle War and Peace down to two pages. Apparently the Pelosi's of the world don't remember President Bushitler being hanged if effigy at many antiwar protests.
The comment came after Pres. Obama stated that illegal immigrants would not be covered in any health care plan. Maybe we can take the drastic step to ask if the President was lying. The answer is maybe. There is a provision in the House bill that is what Pres. Obama stated, however Rep. Wilson had spent that afternoon attempting to insert teeth into that provision so hospitals could look up whether a patient is in fact here legally. The White House argued the opposite position, in effect making the provision meaningless. If a doctor isn’t allowed to learn a patient’s status how can he determine whether he’s part of the government program? He can’t.
Because of this debate on the health care bill, perhaps Rep. Wilson’s “You lie!” meant just that. We can’t speak to his motivations any more than President Carter and much of the Democrat Party can. It was rude, thoughtless and inexcusable for Rep. Wilson to heckle the President during the speech, an action even more offensive than Kanye West’s drunken babbling. To his credit, Wilson apologized not for the content of his two words but for saying them in a very inappropriate place. His apology was accepted by the President who doesn’t seem to fear being lynched anytime soon.
The Democrats can do far more for race relations by defending the President's statements than by playing the race card.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
A Lapse in Intelligence
Colonel Steven Kleinman, who has referred to himself as the "most unpopular officer" in all of Iraq, describes the previous administration's support of SERE tactics for interrogation as not only ineffective in securing accurate intelligence, but also as a systematic approach to torture that clearly compromises essential moral values upon which this nation was founded.
SERE, which stands for "survival, evasion, resistance, and escape," refers to a formal, structured group of strategies to resist hostile interrogation. During the period of the Cold War, American service people were trained in SERE in order to resist possible severe, torturous interrogations in situations such as the Korean War, at the hands of the Chinese. The Bush administration re-introduced the flip-side of SERE; that is, it encouraged and supported the very techniques of interrogation that earlier service people had been trained to resist and withstand.
In a recent interview with NPR (All Things Considered, April 23, 2009), Kleinman confirmed that the tenets of SERE had been employed against detainees in Iraq:
"Exactly, and I think a key point that your listeners need to understand, so they can grasp the gravity of the situation, is that the primary objective of that approach to interrogation was not truth … but somebody's political truth. In the Korean War, they actually compelled some of our pilots to admit to dropping chemical weapons on cities and so forth, when in fact that didn't happen. Now, that stands in stark contrast to intelligence interrogation, where the overriding objective is provide timely, accurate, reliable, comprehensive intelligence." http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103421778
The Bush administration was well aware that these SERE techniques were not created to extract accurate intelligence; they were employed to make people say things that were not true, and to promote propoganda. These strategies are of little or no use if one's primary objective is to obtain important, useful information to help the young American men and women in harm's way. Colonel Kleinman referred to himself as the "most unpopular officer" in all of Iraq because a culture of systematic torture of detainees had become a deeply penetrated status quo by the time he arrived on the scene, and Kleinman was perceived as an unwelcome enforcer of morality. The standard defense of these tactics by those who in engaged in them was that this was, at the very least, the expected treatment our soldiers would receive from the enemy if they were ever captured. This is a very different justification, this "eye for an eye" reasoning, than the official position that the main purpose of these interrogations was to obtain intelligence.
Our government sanctioned, encouraged, and instituted a systematic regime of torture applied to detainees that not only compromised the safety and well-being of our enlisted men and women by wasting time on ineffective interrogation methods, but also indoctrinated those Americans involved in the torture process in a method of treatment that goes against our core American value of respect for basic human dignity.
Perhaps these SERE tactics were effective, at times, despite what research and experience has shown, but I question whether or not the information obtained through these methods could have been obtained through other, less damaging, means. Because, in the end, what has been damaged, once again, is our reputation and our sense of ourselves as Americans. On April 29th, President Obama addressed these concerns through the following statements:
"Could we have gotten that information without using these techniques?" (a core question) and "Are we safer?" (a broader question)
"Churchill understood...you start taking shortcuts, and it corrodes the character of a people."
"Hold true to your ideals when it's hard, not just when it's easy to." (This was said in reference to our actions against detainees now being used as an Al Quaeda recruitment tool.)
"...stick to who we are, even when dealing with unscrupulous enemies."
And, finally, our current president reiterated a primary focus of his leadership that he thinks about every day, and every night before he goes to sleep:
"I will be judged as a Commander in Chief by how safe I am keeping the people...the best way I can do that is by making sure that we are not taking shortcuts that undermine who we are."
The Bush adminstration should be held responsible for our government's engagement in systematic torture techniques. I support any and all investigations into this extreme and damaging lapse of moral judgement, even at a time when the present administration must deal with more than any other administration's share of moral, economic, and policy clean-up from the past eight dark, horrific years.
SERE, which stands for "survival, evasion, resistance, and escape," refers to a formal, structured group of strategies to resist hostile interrogation. During the period of the Cold War, American service people were trained in SERE in order to resist possible severe, torturous interrogations in situations such as the Korean War, at the hands of the Chinese. The Bush administration re-introduced the flip-side of SERE; that is, it encouraged and supported the very techniques of interrogation that earlier service people had been trained to resist and withstand.
In a recent interview with NPR (All Things Considered, April 23, 2009), Kleinman confirmed that the tenets of SERE had been employed against detainees in Iraq:
"Exactly, and I think a key point that your listeners need to understand, so they can grasp the gravity of the situation, is that the primary objective of that approach to interrogation was not truth … but somebody's political truth. In the Korean War, they actually compelled some of our pilots to admit to dropping chemical weapons on cities and so forth, when in fact that didn't happen. Now, that stands in stark contrast to intelligence interrogation, where the overriding objective is provide timely, accurate, reliable, comprehensive intelligence." http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103421778
The Bush administration was well aware that these SERE techniques were not created to extract accurate intelligence; they were employed to make people say things that were not true, and to promote propoganda. These strategies are of little or no use if one's primary objective is to obtain important, useful information to help the young American men and women in harm's way. Colonel Kleinman referred to himself as the "most unpopular officer" in all of Iraq because a culture of systematic torture of detainees had become a deeply penetrated status quo by the time he arrived on the scene, and Kleinman was perceived as an unwelcome enforcer of morality. The standard defense of these tactics by those who in engaged in them was that this was, at the very least, the expected treatment our soldiers would receive from the enemy if they were ever captured. This is a very different justification, this "eye for an eye" reasoning, than the official position that the main purpose of these interrogations was to obtain intelligence.
Our government sanctioned, encouraged, and instituted a systematic regime of torture applied to detainees that not only compromised the safety and well-being of our enlisted men and women by wasting time on ineffective interrogation methods, but also indoctrinated those Americans involved in the torture process in a method of treatment that goes against our core American value of respect for basic human dignity.
Perhaps these SERE tactics were effective, at times, despite what research and experience has shown, but I question whether or not the information obtained through these methods could have been obtained through other, less damaging, means. Because, in the end, what has been damaged, once again, is our reputation and our sense of ourselves as Americans. On April 29th, President Obama addressed these concerns through the following statements:
"Could we have gotten that information without using these techniques?" (a core question) and "Are we safer?" (a broader question)
"Churchill understood...you start taking shortcuts, and it corrodes the character of a people."
"Hold true to your ideals when it's hard, not just when it's easy to." (This was said in reference to our actions against detainees now being used as an Al Quaeda recruitment tool.)
"...stick to who we are, even when dealing with unscrupulous enemies."
And, finally, our current president reiterated a primary focus of his leadership that he thinks about every day, and every night before he goes to sleep:
"I will be judged as a Commander in Chief by how safe I am keeping the people...the best way I can do that is by making sure that we are not taking shortcuts that undermine who we are."
The Bush adminstration should be held responsible for our government's engagement in systematic torture techniques. I support any and all investigations into this extreme and damaging lapse of moral judgement, even at a time when the present administration must deal with more than any other administration's share of moral, economic, and policy clean-up from the past eight dark, horrific years.
Friday, May 1, 2009
Flu
After decades in politics Joe Biden finally said something that made sense, stating that he advised his family not to travel in enclosed vehicles like planes or trains because of the swine flu pandemic. For that he was muzzled by his boss and had to backtrack from his statement.
As the head of the Center for Disease Control said… um, nothing. There isn’t a head of the CDC yet because after 100 days in office President Obama hasn’t gotten around to appointing one. Since Tom Daschle was found to be a tax cheat there is no director at Health and Human Services either and there is still a vacancy for Surgeon General. A Dream Team will surely be assembled to handle the pandemic perhaps by the time it’s over.
While Mexico City is in lockdown and other countries are putting people on alert we trust the judgment of President Obama who says this is a time for concern but not alarm. Aside from some cities cancelling Cinco de Mayo events the only meaningful thing the U.S. and the World Health Organization has done is rename the Swine Flu to Bad Flu Nasty Type A or some such so as not to offend Jews, Muslims and pigs.
This flu could be a quick event with few fatalities or it could be as bad as the 1918 Spanish Flu that killed more than 10% of the population of some countries and perhaps as many as 100 million people worldwide. The 1918 flu like the current Swine Flu caused its victims to have an overreaction of the immune system which tended to kill mostly the healthy in the age range of 20-40. Surprisingly the people in the prime of life who contracted Spanish Flu were the most likely to die, opposite a regular flu that tends to kill infants and the elderly. Back then the double-whammy of the flu and World War I decimated an entire generation of young adults.
There have been many advances in medicine since the Spanish Flu so the mortality rate of the current flu likely wouldn’t be as high in the United States. Developing countries may not be as fortunate.
Since no one in the administration is giving you direction I’ll take a stab at it. Cliché alert: You should hope for the best but prepare for the worst. Take some steps to protect yourself in case the virus spreads to your area like wear a surgical mask with an N95 rating as the cheaper cloth masks allow air in through the sides. Wash your hands and use hand sanitizer frequently. Never touch your eyes, nose or mouth without cleaning your hands first. Stock up on food in case you have to stay home for an extended period.
The government could have issued the simple warning that Joe Biden gave to his family. They could have closed the Mexican border and barred incoming air travel but didn’t want to cause a panic or further damage the teetering economy. For that the Obama is risking taking ownership of the pandemic the way George W. Bush took the bullet for Hurricane Katrina.
As the head of the Center for Disease Control said… um, nothing. There isn’t a head of the CDC yet because after 100 days in office President Obama hasn’t gotten around to appointing one. Since Tom Daschle was found to be a tax cheat there is no director at Health and Human Services either and there is still a vacancy for Surgeon General. A Dream Team will surely be assembled to handle the pandemic perhaps by the time it’s over.
While Mexico City is in lockdown and other countries are putting people on alert we trust the judgment of President Obama who says this is a time for concern but not alarm. Aside from some cities cancelling Cinco de Mayo events the only meaningful thing the U.S. and the World Health Organization has done is rename the Swine Flu to Bad Flu Nasty Type A or some such so as not to offend Jews, Muslims and pigs.
This flu could be a quick event with few fatalities or it could be as bad as the 1918 Spanish Flu that killed more than 10% of the population of some countries and perhaps as many as 100 million people worldwide. The 1918 flu like the current Swine Flu caused its victims to have an overreaction of the immune system which tended to kill mostly the healthy in the age range of 20-40. Surprisingly the people in the prime of life who contracted Spanish Flu were the most likely to die, opposite a regular flu that tends to kill infants and the elderly. Back then the double-whammy of the flu and World War I decimated an entire generation of young adults.
There have been many advances in medicine since the Spanish Flu so the mortality rate of the current flu likely wouldn’t be as high in the United States. Developing countries may not be as fortunate.
Since no one in the administration is giving you direction I’ll take a stab at it. Cliché alert: You should hope for the best but prepare for the worst. Take some steps to protect yourself in case the virus spreads to your area like wear a surgical mask with an N95 rating as the cheaper cloth masks allow air in through the sides. Wash your hands and use hand sanitizer frequently. Never touch your eyes, nose or mouth without cleaning your hands first. Stock up on food in case you have to stay home for an extended period.
The government could have issued the simple warning that Joe Biden gave to his family. They could have closed the Mexican border and barred incoming air travel but didn’t want to cause a panic or further damage the teetering economy. For that the Obama is risking taking ownership of the pandemic the way George W. Bush took the bullet for Hurricane Katrina.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Economic Effects on Families
It's not just stay-cations, trimmed entertainment budgets, and difficulties meeting the staggering increases of college tuition that are affecting American families. Our current economic situation is causing a spike in domestic violence. http://www.ndvh.org/2009/01/increased-financial-stress-affects-domestic-violence-victims/
Children who grow up surrounded by violence become habituated to its existence. They often become abusers and victims themselves, continuing a cycle that may last for generations. Spousal abuse has not only increased, but also child abuse. Some hospitals are reporting twice as many shaken babies as a year ago. http://www.courierpostonline.com/article/20090411/NEWS01/904110357
The American home is becoming, more and more, a stressed-out climate of violence. Elder abuse is also up, and I would hazard a guess that abuse of dependents with disabilities may also be on the increase. http://www.boston.com/news/health/articles/2009/02/09/mass_elder_abuse_on_rise/
Cutting spending for social programs and working against initiatives that may help address the roots of these social ills are "anti-American family" actions. Increased funding for education, healthcare, unemployment benefits, and stimulus package initiatives aimed at assisting the ever-growing ranks of the unemployed aim to improve the lives of the children, elders, and parents in the American family. Wasteful spending on "pet projects" does need to be eliminated, as President Obama has stated within the last day or so. But, we need to get our priorities straight. American families are suffering, and so are families elsewhere in the world, due to the crisis in our economy. Our number one priority needs to be on ensuring that the weakest among us do not bear the brunt of the fallout.
Children who grow up surrounded by violence become habituated to its existence. They often become abusers and victims themselves, continuing a cycle that may last for generations. Spousal abuse has not only increased, but also child abuse. Some hospitals are reporting twice as many shaken babies as a year ago. http://www.courierpostonline.com/article/20090411/NEWS01/904110357
The American home is becoming, more and more, a stressed-out climate of violence. Elder abuse is also up, and I would hazard a guess that abuse of dependents with disabilities may also be on the increase. http://www.boston.com/news/health/articles/2009/02/09/mass_elder_abuse_on_rise/
Cutting spending for social programs and working against initiatives that may help address the roots of these social ills are "anti-American family" actions. Increased funding for education, healthcare, unemployment benefits, and stimulus package initiatives aimed at assisting the ever-growing ranks of the unemployed aim to improve the lives of the children, elders, and parents in the American family. Wasteful spending on "pet projects" does need to be eliminated, as President Obama has stated within the last day or so. But, we need to get our priorities straight. American families are suffering, and so are families elsewhere in the world, due to the crisis in our economy. Our number one priority needs to be on ensuring that the weakest among us do not bear the brunt of the fallout.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Tea Party
Many of the 2500 attendees of the Las Vegas Tea Party including me wandered around Sunset Park unsure of where to find the focal point. In the hour leading up to the speeches dozens were scattered on the edges of the park with signs facing the road eliciting honks from passersby. More meandered in small groups, heads on a swivel looking for - something. Eventually we drifted toward a radio station van in the far corner of the park. We were obviously inexperienced at being a mob.
Why would so many right-of-center “silent majority” people enter a left-wing world of working themselves into a lather? They weren’t chafed enough to break windows and light fires like the anti-globalization movement (whatever that is) but managed to leave their homes and offices to listen to talk radio hosts and bloggers speak of taxes, deficits and government intrusion in our lives. These people were very angry, but in a lighthearted, jokey way.
A sign reading, “The Problem with Socialism is that Eventually You Run out of Other People’s Money” summed it up for me. Since the New Deal our elected officials have spent enormous sums on social programs and construction projects to buy votes. The abysmal track record of such boondoggles has elicited a collective decades-long yawn from the electorate. What’s changed in the past year is the government is bailing out entire industries with borrowed money and in some cases taking over ownership of private companies. Add in a trillion dollars in deficit spending, more than George W. Bush ever dreamed of, and you leave people wondering where this money will come from. Ask the guy with the “Don’t Tax Me, Bro” sign.
The funds for this bare-bones rally came from one man who paid the $200 permit fee. There was no rented stage, no elected official at the microphone and no marching orders from Fox News as CNN’s Susan Roesgen would have you believe. And definitely no money was spent on signs pointing to the van. The Republican Party wasn’t involved in these efforts evidenced by Chairman Michael Steele’s being denied a request to speak at the Tea Party in Chicago.
This seems to be the beginning of a larger movement as there is another round of tea parties planned for July 4th. We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore... if you don't mind.
Why would so many right-of-center “silent majority” people enter a left-wing world of working themselves into a lather? They weren’t chafed enough to break windows and light fires like the anti-globalization movement (whatever that is) but managed to leave their homes and offices to listen to talk radio hosts and bloggers speak of taxes, deficits and government intrusion in our lives. These people were very angry, but in a lighthearted, jokey way.
A sign reading, “The Problem with Socialism is that Eventually You Run out of Other People’s Money” summed it up for me. Since the New Deal our elected officials have spent enormous sums on social programs and construction projects to buy votes. The abysmal track record of such boondoggles has elicited a collective decades-long yawn from the electorate. What’s changed in the past year is the government is bailing out entire industries with borrowed money and in some cases taking over ownership of private companies. Add in a trillion dollars in deficit spending, more than George W. Bush ever dreamed of, and you leave people wondering where this money will come from. Ask the guy with the “Don’t Tax Me, Bro” sign.
The funds for this bare-bones rally came from one man who paid the $200 permit fee. There was no rented stage, no elected official at the microphone and no marching orders from Fox News as CNN’s Susan Roesgen would have you believe. And definitely no money was spent on signs pointing to the van. The Republican Party wasn’t involved in these efforts evidenced by Chairman Michael Steele’s being denied a request to speak at the Tea Party in Chicago.
This seems to be the beginning of a larger movement as there is another round of tea parties planned for July 4th. We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore... if you don't mind.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Leaving Las Vegas
Probably no industry besides housing dove into the cheap money orgy with more reckless abandon than Las Vegas casino conglomerates. The Strip has many cranes in the air helping build hotels that will total about 10,000 rooms, or would have since one project is idle. The music stopped and Boyd Gaming’s Echelon had nowhere to sit down. We’ll soon see if other chairs are removed from the game. There is no need for the cranes elsewhere in the world so they’ll just stay put, abandoned but lit up so aircraft won’t crash like Boyd’s stock.
The major players on the strip are hung over after relentless expansion with MGM now falling about $1.2B short of funds on the estimated $10B City Center. Harrah’s went $15B in debt going private, gobbling up casinos nationwide building their family to over 50 properties. Wynn and Las Vegas Sands made ill-fated investments in Macau. Station Casinos which owns seven properties catering mostly to locals is flirting with bankruptcy. Most of these stocks are trading at less than 5% of their peaks last year.
The troubles these companies face are of their own making and none will get a government bailout. Unfortunately for them and their employees they’re getting the opposite from Washington, a huge kick when they’re down. President Obama has stated that he doesn’t want any company who receives federal funds to spend money in Las Vegas. People jump when this President says to so there have been 340 event cancellations in the past 90 days; 111,800 people who won’t be spending money in Sin City. Many of the 46,000 people who are directly employed through these meetings will presumably sit idle. Mayor Oscar Goodman has asked for an apology for driving this stake through the Las Vegas economy. Good luck with that.
A few years ago when these projects were on the drawing board it looked like Las Vegas needed the extra capacity. The nearly a million people who were visiting each week tested the airport's capabilities, formed lines outside the restaurants and clubs and paid top dollar for rooms. The city that once gave away rooms, food and drink to make it up at the blackjack tables was getting $1000 and up for a bottle of Cristal. The population in the Las Vegas Valley was growing at 60,000 per year.
The boom brought riches but the crash is worse. Las Vegas has unemployment approaching 10%, leads the country in foreclosures and has another distinction: Forbes’ wrote about Vegas being the most abandoned city by home vacancy in the country. People are looking for greener pastures, which aren’t difficult to find since they live in a desert. The people who remain employed are seeing their hours and benefits slashed, home equity vaporized and their communities destabilized. There will be no end in sight until the demonization of Las Vegas business trips is lifted, or in other words there is no end in sight.
There is a message Nevada will send to President Obama but sadly will have to wait until the 2012 election.
The major players on the strip are hung over after relentless expansion with MGM now falling about $1.2B short of funds on the estimated $10B City Center. Harrah’s went $15B in debt going private, gobbling up casinos nationwide building their family to over 50 properties. Wynn and Las Vegas Sands made ill-fated investments in Macau. Station Casinos which owns seven properties catering mostly to locals is flirting with bankruptcy. Most of these stocks are trading at less than 5% of their peaks last year.
The troubles these companies face are of their own making and none will get a government bailout. Unfortunately for them and their employees they’re getting the opposite from Washington, a huge kick when they’re down. President Obama has stated that he doesn’t want any company who receives federal funds to spend money in Las Vegas. People jump when this President says to so there have been 340 event cancellations in the past 90 days; 111,800 people who won’t be spending money in Sin City. Many of the 46,000 people who are directly employed through these meetings will presumably sit idle. Mayor Oscar Goodman has asked for an apology for driving this stake through the Las Vegas economy. Good luck with that.
A few years ago when these projects were on the drawing board it looked like Las Vegas needed the extra capacity. The nearly a million people who were visiting each week tested the airport's capabilities, formed lines outside the restaurants and clubs and paid top dollar for rooms. The city that once gave away rooms, food and drink to make it up at the blackjack tables was getting $1000 and up for a bottle of Cristal. The population in the Las Vegas Valley was growing at 60,000 per year.
The boom brought riches but the crash is worse. Las Vegas has unemployment approaching 10%, leads the country in foreclosures and has another distinction: Forbes’ wrote about Vegas being the most abandoned city by home vacancy in the country. People are looking for greener pastures, which aren’t difficult to find since they live in a desert. The people who remain employed are seeing their hours and benefits slashed, home equity vaporized and their communities destabilized. There will be no end in sight until the demonization of Las Vegas business trips is lifted, or in other words there is no end in sight.
There is a message Nevada will send to President Obama but sadly will have to wait until the 2012 election.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
No Respect
The new President is showing signs of the inexperience we were warned about. After six weeks in office his cabinet is still not complete, Americans have their wallets in lockdown and he’s managed to alienate our two closest allies. Keep in mind that our President has never been in charge of anything except his campaigns and the Harvard Law Review. He’s never run a business or a government agency or picked up the public relations skills those would have required.
This on-the-job training has left British Prime Minister Gordon Brown doing his best Rodney Dangerfield "No Respect" all the way back to London. There was no joint appearance in front of flags planned until Brown begged and even then the opening remarks were skipped for questions from the press. When gift-giving time came, Brown handed President Obama a pen holder carved from timbers of the HMS Gannet which will match the desk in the Oval Office made from wood of its sister ship HMS Resolute. Like someone who forgot Christmas was coming Obama must have ran to Best Buy to fetch a stack of 25 DVD’s of American movie classics including Gone With the Wind and Ishtar. OK, not Ishtar but it wouldn’t matter if it had been that and the entire Friday the 13th catalog; the DVD’s aren’t compatible with UK DVD players and never mind that Brown isn’t a movie buff anyway. The Brown children got models of the Obamas new helicopter. Big woop. Our new President then abruptly Brown to go to a party. No respect at all, I tell ya.
Sending chills throughout Israel not just for her cackling, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was in the Middle East giving away $900M to the Palestinians who could hardly contain their laughter while promising not to give a penny to Hamas. She’s also made overtures to Iran who replied that President Obama is following the same “crooked ways” as George Bush. To summarize, we’re trying to buy friends in Palestine and Iran who want to destroy our only ally in the region. And they wouldn’t mind destroying us too.
George Bush built a coalition of over 30 countries in our Iraq War efforts with Great Britain in the forefront. If the time comes for a similar military engagement I wonder if our President will get a return phone call. George Bush kept Israel from attacking Iran’s nuclear sites, averting all-out war in the entire region. I doubt President Obama will be able to keep restraining the Israelis or will even try.
President Obama’s promise of The United States finally being respected in the eyes of the world must have had an asterisk.
This on-the-job training has left British Prime Minister Gordon Brown doing his best Rodney Dangerfield "No Respect" all the way back to London. There was no joint appearance in front of flags planned until Brown begged and even then the opening remarks were skipped for questions from the press. When gift-giving time came, Brown handed President Obama a pen holder carved from timbers of the HMS Gannet which will match the desk in the Oval Office made from wood of its sister ship HMS Resolute. Like someone who forgot Christmas was coming Obama must have ran to Best Buy to fetch a stack of 25 DVD’s of American movie classics including Gone With the Wind and Ishtar. OK, not Ishtar but it wouldn’t matter if it had been that and the entire Friday the 13th catalog; the DVD’s aren’t compatible with UK DVD players and never mind that Brown isn’t a movie buff anyway. The Brown children got models of the Obamas new helicopter. Big woop. Our new President then abruptly Brown to go to a party. No respect at all, I tell ya.
Sending chills throughout Israel not just for her cackling, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was in the Middle East giving away $900M to the Palestinians who could hardly contain their laughter while promising not to give a penny to Hamas. She’s also made overtures to Iran who replied that President Obama is following the same “crooked ways” as George Bush. To summarize, we’re trying to buy friends in Palestine and Iran who want to destroy our only ally in the region. And they wouldn’t mind destroying us too.
George Bush built a coalition of over 30 countries in our Iraq War efforts with Great Britain in the forefront. If the time comes for a similar military engagement I wonder if our President will get a return phone call. George Bush kept Israel from attacking Iran’s nuclear sites, averting all-out war in the entire region. I doubt President Obama will be able to keep restraining the Israelis or will even try.
President Obama’s promise of The United States finally being respected in the eyes of the world must have had an asterisk.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
There is a growing spat between the White House and Rush Limbaugh, the person they branded as leader of the Republican Party. That the Obama Team can pull that off shows the dearth of leadership in the GOP, despite the fact Limbaugh has never held elected office. New leader of the party, Michael Steele, hasn’t been given the same hero worship as President Obama despite being African American. The Democrat arguments can be boiled down to “Stop criticizing our spending initiatives and jump aboard” and “You don’t have a plan.” Why they’re making a Nixonian attack against a private citizen is a discussion for another time.
There is no reason for the Democrats to include Republicans in the spending frenzy which is why they didn’t. Republicans have 178 seats in the House of Representatives or 41%, which equals their representation in the Senate. In case you didn’t notice they have 0% of the White House. The only chance of blocking the Democrat agenda is a Republican filibuster in the Senate, unfathomable because of the revolting left-leaning Sens. Snowe, Collins and Specter.
Unfortunately for President Obama he will own the results of the $787B Stimulus Package, $400B spending bill and monster $3.6T budget. The Dems had no input from the GOP in writing these boondoggles but still wants its fingerprints on them so as to place blame later. If you listen closely you’ll hear that the cure for eight years of too much spending is more spending.
There is no plan from Republicans in general but several remedies from Conservatives, which unfortunately are two very different breeds. Cut the corporate income tax, privatize Social Security, allow more drilling for oil in America, cut taxes in general, cut government spending across the board, stop the bailouts. Yes, let the unhealthy companies fail including the Big Three automakers and Citibank. There will be pain for a while especially for union workers but new companies will spring from the ashes with better business models and no obligations to repay bad loans, union contracts or pensions.
What I just spelled out are the bare bones of a plan. Those on the left won’t even acknowledge that there is a debate over these issues let alone debate them. Welcome to the new era of bipartisonship.
There is no reason for the Democrats to include Republicans in the spending frenzy which is why they didn’t. Republicans have 178 seats in the House of Representatives or 41%, which equals their representation in the Senate. In case you didn’t notice they have 0% of the White House. The only chance of blocking the Democrat agenda is a Republican filibuster in the Senate, unfathomable because of the revolting left-leaning Sens. Snowe, Collins and Specter.
Unfortunately for President Obama he will own the results of the $787B Stimulus Package, $400B spending bill and monster $3.6T budget. The Dems had no input from the GOP in writing these boondoggles but still wants its fingerprints on them so as to place blame later. If you listen closely you’ll hear that the cure for eight years of too much spending is more spending.
There is no plan from Republicans in general but several remedies from Conservatives, which unfortunately are two very different breeds. Cut the corporate income tax, privatize Social Security, allow more drilling for oil in America, cut taxes in general, cut government spending across the board, stop the bailouts. Yes, let the unhealthy companies fail including the Big Three automakers and Citibank. There will be pain for a while especially for union workers but new companies will spring from the ashes with better business models and no obligations to repay bad loans, union contracts or pensions.
What I just spelled out are the bare bones of a plan. Those on the left won’t even acknowledge that there is a debate over these issues let alone debate them. Welcome to the new era of bipartisonship.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Happy Birthday
In poker tournaments there are often “last longer” side bets between friends where the person who goes deepest gets money from those who lose their chips early. If my father and his contemporaries made that gamble for the game of life surely he would have been given long odds of outlasting most pets let alone people he knew. In his earlier years he lit one Lucky Strike with another adding up to four packs a day, didn’t exercise, ate like a carnivore and kept distillers working overtime. Dozens of his friends, customers and employees who by default had healthier lifestyles are pushing daisies while Dad is still going strong. If you had made those side bets with the right odds you could balance the national budget. Happy 77th Pops.
There were several medical procedures my father had that would have been fatal had he lived in Canada or Great Britain because there is often a years-long wait for operations such heart bypass. Soon we may get nationalized health care which will ensure substandard care and higher costs. Foreigners come here for medical attention. When we adopt their system where will we and our loved ones go?
There were several medical procedures my father had that would have been fatal had he lived in Canada or Great Britain because there is often a years-long wait for operations such heart bypass. Soon we may get nationalized health care which will ensure substandard care and higher costs. Foreigners come here for medical attention. When we adopt their system where will we and our loved ones go?
Saturday, February 21, 2009
We Are All Socialist-Neo-Keynesian-Debtors Now
Who isn't an economic theorist nowadays? How did we all get to this rocky place that neither my generation nor my parents' recognize as a familar landscape? Who do we "blame"-- the white collar criminals, the corporate industrial debt complex, previous administrations, lax governmental regulation agencies, consumers, the wealthy, the poor?
During the flush years, many of us with green-hued consciences were horrified to witness an exponential increase in conspicuous consumption, teardowns replaced by cookie-cutter architecturally monstrous American dreams which should have never been realized, giant Humvees on the road, and exurban McMansion developments named after the natural environments they had replaced, such as "Hidden Creek" and "Shady Glen." It seemed that everything and everyone was on the fast track to more, bigger, more, bigger, more, more, more! And, now, everyone is hunkering down, not spending, and waiting it out. Thus, no money into the economy from consumers, less products needing to be manufactured, job layoffs resulting from decreased demand, and consequently less money in the hands of consumers...so less spending. The circle spirals downwards and downwards, driving unemployment to double digits, and it's all ultra-complicated by that nasty subprime mortgage-based securities debacle and a government-supported corporate industrial debt complex. Follow me?
Enter the Neo-Keynesians! If consumers aren't spending, and business isn't spending, who is going to get the economy rolling again? The government! I can't profess to understand all the subtleties of monetarism vs. Keynesian economics, but it makes sense to me that when stuck between a rock (the mounting and mounting and mounting national and personal debt) and a hard place (adding to that mountain of debt), you might have to choose the hard place in order to stop the Charybdis-like spiral we are now experiencing.
Promoting lax regulation and a free, unbridled market is what got us into this mess in the first place. At least, that's what this amateur economic theorist is hypothesizing. The market doesn't have a conscience, green or otherwise. Government has to serve that role. Am I advocating socialism and not capitalism? Who says the two have to be mutually exclusive? Perhaps we will utlize the best of each approach in order to set our priorities straight, and we'll spend our money on education, healthcare, shovel-ready capital improvement projects, and green energy technologies, and put people to work while improving our nation and society. Or, I guess we could just advocate what's been advocated for the past 8 years or so (gee, why so specific with the "8"?), and return to a culture of promoting irresponsible consumption and rampant deregulation. I dunno. What do you think?
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
(Albert Einstein)
During the flush years, many of us with green-hued consciences were horrified to witness an exponential increase in conspicuous consumption, teardowns replaced by cookie-cutter architecturally monstrous American dreams which should have never been realized, giant Humvees on the road, and exurban McMansion developments named after the natural environments they had replaced, such as "Hidden Creek" and "Shady Glen." It seemed that everything and everyone was on the fast track to more, bigger, more, bigger, more, more, more! And, now, everyone is hunkering down, not spending, and waiting it out. Thus, no money into the economy from consumers, less products needing to be manufactured, job layoffs resulting from decreased demand, and consequently less money in the hands of consumers...so less spending. The circle spirals downwards and downwards, driving unemployment to double digits, and it's all ultra-complicated by that nasty subprime mortgage-based securities debacle and a government-supported corporate industrial debt complex. Follow me?
Enter the Neo-Keynesians! If consumers aren't spending, and business isn't spending, who is going to get the economy rolling again? The government! I can't profess to understand all the subtleties of monetarism vs. Keynesian economics, but it makes sense to me that when stuck between a rock (the mounting and mounting and mounting national and personal debt) and a hard place (adding to that mountain of debt), you might have to choose the hard place in order to stop the Charybdis-like spiral we are now experiencing.
Promoting lax regulation and a free, unbridled market is what got us into this mess in the first place. At least, that's what this amateur economic theorist is hypothesizing. The market doesn't have a conscience, green or otherwise. Government has to serve that role. Am I advocating socialism and not capitalism? Who says the two have to be mutually exclusive? Perhaps we will utlize the best of each approach in order to set our priorities straight, and we'll spend our money on education, healthcare, shovel-ready capital improvement projects, and green energy technologies, and put people to work while improving our nation and society. Or, I guess we could just advocate what's been advocated for the past 8 years or so (gee, why so specific with the "8"?), and return to a culture of promoting irresponsible consumption and rampant deregulation. I dunno. What do you think?
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
(Albert Einstein)
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Spending Bill - Part Two
Lost in the marketing campaign for the Stimulus Bill was a TV ad trumpeting how Harry Reid will get Nevada’s “fair share,” In my experience saying “I’ll pay my fair share” means you won’t. “I want my fair share” means you want more than your fair share. This makes the term vague and meaningless and therefore one of the most irritating in the language. It fits quite well in an ad by the most grating man in the Senate.
The Stimulus Bill includes money for infrastructure such as a high-speed rail from L.A. to Las Vegas which will surely have Sen. Reid’s name on it. It also includes money for ACORN’s bogus campaign registration efforts, money for the former Big Three automakers and a Mob Museum in Las Vegas. Yes, Harry Reid will get Nevada’s fair share thanks to the suckers in the rest of the nation who don’t have a Senate Leader.
We could pick apart the Stimulus Bill line by line but that would take years. No one’s read the thing and I don’t plan to be the first so we’ll look at the big picture. People pay through the nose to the federal government then hope that the elected help can keep out of prison long enough to get more back than they paid in. This is government today. We want government jobs, welfare, retirement, health care, roads, parks and big buildings all on the government dime and we want more than the neighboring state gets. Cutting out the middleman and letting us keep our own tax dollars doesn’t occur to us.
Deficit spending has been tried since the dawn of civilization and has never worked. When Rome was broke Caligula had a novel enterprise for raising funds by opening a brothel with the Senators’ wives employed as prostitutes. I would applaud something similar in Washington but please don’t put Barney Frank in charge. FDR spent wildly but saw manufacturing and unemployment at their worst four years after the New Deal started. Japan’s Lost Decade of the 1990’s saw a stagnant nation because of government intrusion.
If government involvement in the economy were effective we’d all be speaking Russian right now. Or German, North Korean or Cuban. We have the greatest nation and economic engine the world has ever seen and we’re shoveling sand in the gears.
The news reports usually feature anyone from President Obama to some wretched person on the street saying that we have to do something and do it now. But sometimes doing something is much worse than doing nothing. If I dig a hole in the yard today and fill it in tomorrow it would be doing something but don’t confuse it with progress, especially if I hit a gas line. Throwing borrowed money at make-work boondoggles is not the recipe to fix an economy but just the opposite.
The bonds that will finance this bill will be sold to investors in countries such as China until they’re unwilling or unable to buy them anymore. Instead of cancelling the spending we’ll just print money which will lead to hyperinflation. This bill will ensure each of us will get our fair share of economic pain.
The Stimulus Bill includes money for infrastructure such as a high-speed rail from L.A. to Las Vegas which will surely have Sen. Reid’s name on it. It also includes money for ACORN’s bogus campaign registration efforts, money for the former Big Three automakers and a Mob Museum in Las Vegas. Yes, Harry Reid will get Nevada’s fair share thanks to the suckers in the rest of the nation who don’t have a Senate Leader.
We could pick apart the Stimulus Bill line by line but that would take years. No one’s read the thing and I don’t plan to be the first so we’ll look at the big picture. People pay through the nose to the federal government then hope that the elected help can keep out of prison long enough to get more back than they paid in. This is government today. We want government jobs, welfare, retirement, health care, roads, parks and big buildings all on the government dime and we want more than the neighboring state gets. Cutting out the middleman and letting us keep our own tax dollars doesn’t occur to us.
Deficit spending has been tried since the dawn of civilization and has never worked. When Rome was broke Caligula had a novel enterprise for raising funds by opening a brothel with the Senators’ wives employed as prostitutes. I would applaud something similar in Washington but please don’t put Barney Frank in charge. FDR spent wildly but saw manufacturing and unemployment at their worst four years after the New Deal started. Japan’s Lost Decade of the 1990’s saw a stagnant nation because of government intrusion.
If government involvement in the economy were effective we’d all be speaking Russian right now. Or German, North Korean or Cuban. We have the greatest nation and economic engine the world has ever seen and we’re shoveling sand in the gears.
The news reports usually feature anyone from President Obama to some wretched person on the street saying that we have to do something and do it now. But sometimes doing something is much worse than doing nothing. If I dig a hole in the yard today and fill it in tomorrow it would be doing something but don’t confuse it with progress, especially if I hit a gas line. Throwing borrowed money at make-work boondoggles is not the recipe to fix an economy but just the opposite.
The bonds that will finance this bill will be sold to investors in countries such as China until they’re unwilling or unable to buy them anymore. Instead of cancelling the spending we’ll just print money which will lead to hyperinflation. This bill will ensure each of us will get our fair share of economic pain.
Spending Bill
Last year I saw a very interesting documentary about impending fiscal doom called I.O.U.S.A by David Walker, formerly Comptroller General and head of the General Accounting Office. The message was quite simple and uplifting: “We’re financially screwed.”
The nation’s largest short term problem is the financial crisis, except if you get blown up anytime soon. There is a huge budget deficit that gets piled on top of our national debt every year. This is being financed by selling bonds, mostly overseas, which will probably be paid back with cheap inflation-racked dollars.
Walker walks us through the history of deficits of this country which were built up in times of crisis and war and quickly paid back. Until now. The current debt problem isn't resulting from The Vietnam War, Reagan’s military spending, nor our excursions in Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s a problem of “mandatory” spending which, unfortunately the military isn’t a part.
The FDR Administration saw the birth of government programs designed to finance your retirement and pay your medical bills. The amount spent per recipient and who the recipients are off-limits to the President’s veto pen as these laws are already on the books. “Reforming Social Security” has become political fighting words rather than igniting a serious talk about the root of the financial mess we’re in or whether the government should be paying for geezers’ golf lifestyles in Florida.
This supposedly compassionate “cradle to grave” nanny care is breaking us and we’re too busy playing Guitar Hero to notice. We see undigestable brain-numbing numbers like our $400 Billion annual deficit but fail to see that we have unfunded liabilities of $53 Trillion. That’s right, our national debt plus our retirements, doctor bills and general welfare will cost each of us – I don’t know because my calculator won’t run numbers that high.
In his campaign President Obama berated President Bush’s deficit spending as if Bush invented fiscal irresponsibility, yet signed a spending bill of $787 Billion with every nickel borrowed. In a not-so-rare moment of pretzel logic from John Kerry on the Senate floor speaking in favor of the bill essentially said, “Where were the Republicans the past eight years while we ran up these huge deficits in the first place?” The solution to a financial mess created by drunken spending must be to blow a boatload more.
The Walker documentary wasn’t exactly a blockbuster. On the opening weekend the wakeup call drew only me and four others to the theater.
The nation’s largest short term problem is the financial crisis, except if you get blown up anytime soon. There is a huge budget deficit that gets piled on top of our national debt every year. This is being financed by selling bonds, mostly overseas, which will probably be paid back with cheap inflation-racked dollars.
Walker walks us through the history of deficits of this country which were built up in times of crisis and war and quickly paid back. Until now. The current debt problem isn't resulting from The Vietnam War, Reagan’s military spending, nor our excursions in Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s a problem of “mandatory” spending which, unfortunately the military isn’t a part.
The FDR Administration saw the birth of government programs designed to finance your retirement and pay your medical bills. The amount spent per recipient and who the recipients are off-limits to the President’s veto pen as these laws are already on the books. “Reforming Social Security” has become political fighting words rather than igniting a serious talk about the root of the financial mess we’re in or whether the government should be paying for geezers’ golf lifestyles in Florida.
This supposedly compassionate “cradle to grave” nanny care is breaking us and we’re too busy playing Guitar Hero to notice. We see undigestable brain-numbing numbers like our $400 Billion annual deficit but fail to see that we have unfunded liabilities of $53 Trillion. That’s right, our national debt plus our retirements, doctor bills and general welfare will cost each of us – I don’t know because my calculator won’t run numbers that high.
In his campaign President Obama berated President Bush’s deficit spending as if Bush invented fiscal irresponsibility, yet signed a spending bill of $787 Billion with every nickel borrowed. In a not-so-rare moment of pretzel logic from John Kerry on the Senate floor speaking in favor of the bill essentially said, “Where were the Republicans the past eight years while we ran up these huge deficits in the first place?” The solution to a financial mess created by drunken spending must be to blow a boatload more.
The Walker documentary wasn’t exactly a blockbuster. On the opening weekend the wakeup call drew only me and four others to the theater.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Those Who Pay the Price
From The Voice of America:
The U.S. Army said the number of soldiers who committed suicide last year has increased for a fourth straight year. Army officials said despite an increase in funding for programs to help soldiers, they are having a hard time fighting the stigma attached to seeking professional help. At least 128 soldiers committed suicide in 2008, an increase from 2007 when a total of 115 suicides were recorded among active duty and those in the Army Reserve and National Guard. Officials said the number may go even higher pending the examination of 15 additional cases that could be self-inflicted.
Highest Suicide Rate Since Vietnam War
This is the first time since the Vietnam War that the rate of suicide in the Army, about 20 deaths per 100,000 soldiers, has surpassed the civilian suicide rate.
Original story here:
http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-01-30-voa59.cfm
Other news sources reporting this story point out the number of multiple deployments that these young people have endured, and the longterm effects of repeated exposure to combat and other stressors. My cousin has been deployed several times to the middle east, and the stress of these deployments have cost him a marriage and given his young children an absent father.
I also wonder about the other soldiers who return from their deployments. Are they receiving enough care and support to help them make a successful transition to civilian life? Is there really an effective way to help someone erase the horrors of combat that many of them have experienced?
I have nothing but respect and admiration for those who serve our country. Before we send these young people to fight, we, as a country, should be damn sure we are asking them to fight a battle that is truly worth fighting. That it is a real threat to our national security, or that of our allies. That it is a just war, a right war. That there is verifiable proof that the war is justified.
The U.S. Army said the number of soldiers who committed suicide last year has increased for a fourth straight year. Army officials said despite an increase in funding for programs to help soldiers, they are having a hard time fighting the stigma attached to seeking professional help. At least 128 soldiers committed suicide in 2008, an increase from 2007 when a total of 115 suicides were recorded among active duty and those in the Army Reserve and National Guard. Officials said the number may go even higher pending the examination of 15 additional cases that could be self-inflicted.
Highest Suicide Rate Since Vietnam War
This is the first time since the Vietnam War that the rate of suicide in the Army, about 20 deaths per 100,000 soldiers, has surpassed the civilian suicide rate.
Original story here:
http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-01-30-voa59.cfm
Other news sources reporting this story point out the number of multiple deployments that these young people have endured, and the longterm effects of repeated exposure to combat and other stressors. My cousin has been deployed several times to the middle east, and the stress of these deployments have cost him a marriage and given his young children an absent father.
I also wonder about the other soldiers who return from their deployments. Are they receiving enough care and support to help them make a successful transition to civilian life? Is there really an effective way to help someone erase the horrors of combat that many of them have experienced?
I have nothing but respect and admiration for those who serve our country. Before we send these young people to fight, we, as a country, should be damn sure we are asking them to fight a battle that is truly worth fighting. That it is a real threat to our national security, or that of our allies. That it is a just war, a right war. That there is verifiable proof that the war is justified.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Sarah Palin Redux
There are many choices an actor makes when building a character. When Ed O’Neill auditioned for the role of Al Bundy on Married with Children he drew inspiration from an uncle who had been beaten down by life, his job and his family. After watching dozens of actors channel Jackie Gleason’s blowhard Ralph Kramden, the show’s creators saw O’Neill stop at the front door on the set, hang his head and let out a defeated sigh before walking in to see his family. He had the job before saying a word. Although the script was the same, O’Neill saw a more interesting way to play Bundy.
Every actor has choices to make on how the printed word of the author will be brought to life. Tina Fey was naturally thrust into the role of Sarah Palin because of the physical resemblance and had the usual choices to make in building a character plus more because Fey surely had a hand in writing the material.
Let’s think about from what Fey had to draw. Palin hunted moose, played high school basketball, won a beauty contest, is the married mother of five children. She rose from the PTA to mayor of her small town to Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commissioner to Governor, taking on and defeating entrenched and corrupt male politicians in her own party along the way. She has an 80%+ approval rating. She has a funny way of speaking, dropping the g’s at the end of words and sounding a bit like a character from the movie Fargo, don’t you know.
Surely Fey would want to celebrate a woman who has risen so adeptly while raising children. She could have found humor in Palin’s story but still played her as the strong and intelligent woman she is. Or Fey could have chosen to play her as a moron, which she did.
Reporters have also have choices when defining the subject of a story. Even before the Katie Couric interview there were rumors about whether Palin was the actual birth mother of her son, if she wanted to ban books in the library, if she acted properly if firing the Public Safety Commissioner and whether she had an affair. Throngs of reporters were dispatched to Alaska to dig up dirt. Her speech at the convention was masterful. By the time she said another word she was on defense.
Reporters and entertainers were in the tank for President Obama to the point of being embarrassing. The thrill going up Chris Matthew’s leg was part of a media epidemic that caused them to ignore the questionable facets of Obama’s background (Rezko, Rev. Wright, Ayers) and nonsense spewing from Sen. Biden (President Roosevelt went on TV in 1929?).
I will agree with some that Gov. Palin may not be ready for the Vice Presidency. She would have benefitted from another term as Governor or perhaps a run for Senate to gain some international experience. Her interviews were less than stellar but she is an intelligent and driven woman who needs some polish. She may be a good President someday.
Compare the media treatment Palin received to that of Caroline Kennedy. In one 30-minute session Kennedy said “you know” over 200 times with a smattering of “um’s” for good measure. Kennedy has never held office and sometimes didn’t vote. Did SNL get Laraine Newman out of mothballs to portray her as a stumblebum? Have any reporters grilled her? Of course not. There is actually some disdain about how Gov. Paterson passed over Kennedy for the Senate appointment as if she were entitled to the office. Conversely, Tina Fey gets the Entertainer of the Year Award.
Sarah Palin is setting up a fundraising committee to run for President. I wish her well.
Every actor has choices to make on how the printed word of the author will be brought to life. Tina Fey was naturally thrust into the role of Sarah Palin because of the physical resemblance and had the usual choices to make in building a character plus more because Fey surely had a hand in writing the material.
Let’s think about from what Fey had to draw. Palin hunted moose, played high school basketball, won a beauty contest, is the married mother of five children. She rose from the PTA to mayor of her small town to Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commissioner to Governor, taking on and defeating entrenched and corrupt male politicians in her own party along the way. She has an 80%+ approval rating. She has a funny way of speaking, dropping the g’s at the end of words and sounding a bit like a character from the movie Fargo, don’t you know.
Surely Fey would want to celebrate a woman who has risen so adeptly while raising children. She could have found humor in Palin’s story but still played her as the strong and intelligent woman she is. Or Fey could have chosen to play her as a moron, which she did.
Reporters have also have choices when defining the subject of a story. Even before the Katie Couric interview there were rumors about whether Palin was the actual birth mother of her son, if she wanted to ban books in the library, if she acted properly if firing the Public Safety Commissioner and whether she had an affair. Throngs of reporters were dispatched to Alaska to dig up dirt. Her speech at the convention was masterful. By the time she said another word she was on defense.
Reporters and entertainers were in the tank for President Obama to the point of being embarrassing. The thrill going up Chris Matthew’s leg was part of a media epidemic that caused them to ignore the questionable facets of Obama’s background (Rezko, Rev. Wright, Ayers) and nonsense spewing from Sen. Biden (President Roosevelt went on TV in 1929?).
I will agree with some that Gov. Palin may not be ready for the Vice Presidency. She would have benefitted from another term as Governor or perhaps a run for Senate to gain some international experience. Her interviews were less than stellar but she is an intelligent and driven woman who needs some polish. She may be a good President someday.
Compare the media treatment Palin received to that of Caroline Kennedy. In one 30-minute session Kennedy said “you know” over 200 times with a smattering of “um’s” for good measure. Kennedy has never held office and sometimes didn’t vote. Did SNL get Laraine Newman out of mothballs to portray her as a stumblebum? Have any reporters grilled her? Of course not. There is actually some disdain about how Gov. Paterson passed over Kennedy for the Senate appointment as if she were entitled to the office. Conversely, Tina Fey gets the Entertainer of the Year Award.
Sarah Palin is setting up a fundraising committee to run for President. I wish her well.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Where Will the Guantanamo Detainees Go?
President Obama made a change in direction, ordering the closure of Guantanamo Bay yesterday after signaling that it may stay open longer. What wasn’t said is more prescient than what was.
President Obama asked his White House Counsel Greg Craig whether moving the prisoners was part of his own executive order though you’d assume he’d know what’s in it. Anyway, we’ll learn the fates of the Gitmo residents in a later executive order sometime this year. The White House is going to wing it.
There’s a slight problem with the Gitmo detainees: no one wants them. Of the estimated 245 prisoners at least 60 have been rejected for repatriation to their home countries. These “worst of the worst” could be sent to prisons in the mainland U.S., however there will be resistance for that too. There is much squawking about taking them at Leavinworth because it would instantly change it from part of a sleepy Kansas community to a terrorist target. Prepare for protests no matter where they’re located. Maybe President Obama will have the good taste to put them in a blue area of a blue state, such as downtown Manhattan or Hollywood.
The results are easy to predict. The New York Times is reporting that the deputy leader of Al Qaeda in Yemen, Said Ali al-Shihri, is a graduate of Gitmo and a Saudi reeducation camp for terrorists. The camp apparently is like a 12-step program with a high rate of relapse. Mr. al-Shihri should be captured and sent back to make his own bed and have a group discussion about how his mother’s neglect caused him to kill nonbelievers.
Some of the Guantanamo Bay detainees will certainly be set loose and many will plan to attack us. If there is another terrorist attack carried out by those released from Gitmo we’ll have ourselves to blame for not analyzing campaign promises.
President Obama asked his White House Counsel Greg Craig whether moving the prisoners was part of his own executive order though you’d assume he’d know what’s in it. Anyway, we’ll learn the fates of the Gitmo residents in a later executive order sometime this year. The White House is going to wing it.
There’s a slight problem with the Gitmo detainees: no one wants them. Of the estimated 245 prisoners at least 60 have been rejected for repatriation to their home countries. These “worst of the worst” could be sent to prisons in the mainland U.S., however there will be resistance for that too. There is much squawking about taking them at Leavinworth because it would instantly change it from part of a sleepy Kansas community to a terrorist target. Prepare for protests no matter where they’re located. Maybe President Obama will have the good taste to put them in a blue area of a blue state, such as downtown Manhattan or Hollywood.
The results are easy to predict. The New York Times is reporting that the deputy leader of Al Qaeda in Yemen, Said Ali al-Shihri, is a graduate of Gitmo and a Saudi reeducation camp for terrorists. The camp apparently is like a 12-step program with a high rate of relapse. Mr. al-Shihri should be captured and sent back to make his own bed and have a group discussion about how his mother’s neglect caused him to kill nonbelievers.
Some of the Guantanamo Bay detainees will certainly be set loose and many will plan to attack us. If there is another terrorist attack carried out by those released from Gitmo we’ll have ourselves to blame for not analyzing campaign promises.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Goodbye to Guantanamo
President Obama set his moral compass strong and true through the issuance of executive orders to close Guantanamo Bay Prison and other secret CIA prisons throughout the world. Additionally, prisoners in Guantanamo and other such prisons must now be treated according to the tenets of the Geneva Convention. Through this sweeping and immediate decision, the Obama presidency announces to Americans, and to the world, that the United States will no longer compromise its essential values and principles in the treatment of the accused.
There are some who believe torture is justified in this "war on terror"; that it might be used to destroy one life, but preserve many. In reality, this belief is misguided.
Experience indicates that the use of force is not necessary to gain the cooperation of sources for interrogation. Therefore, the use of force is a poor technique, as it yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to hear. (Army Field Manual 34-52)
Several weeks ago, I heard an interview on the radio with one of the chief Army negotiators for the Iraq War. He spoke eloquently about his interrogation techniques, which primarily consisted of forming relationships with the prisoners and gaining their trust. He was sometimes able to obtain accurate information through a combination of "psychological ploys" and "verbal trickery" (also describe in 34-52), but he mainly emphasized the creation of a series of agreements made with the prisoners. Through gaining their trust, he was able to interview a chain of prisoners, eventually leading him to those who were the most culpable.
We now have a moral, ethical leader of our country. The closing of Guantanamo is just the beginning of ending the ugly chapter of disregard for human rights introduced by the Bush administration in the name of "national security." I eagerly await the next coordinates on this new moral journey.
There are some who believe torture is justified in this "war on terror"; that it might be used to destroy one life, but preserve many. In reality, this belief is misguided.
Experience indicates that the use of force is not necessary to gain the cooperation of sources for interrogation. Therefore, the use of force is a poor technique, as it yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to hear. (Army Field Manual 34-52)
Several weeks ago, I heard an interview on the radio with one of the chief Army negotiators for the Iraq War. He spoke eloquently about his interrogation techniques, which primarily consisted of forming relationships with the prisoners and gaining their trust. He was sometimes able to obtain accurate information through a combination of "psychological ploys" and "verbal trickery" (also describe in 34-52), but he mainly emphasized the creation of a series of agreements made with the prisoners. Through gaining their trust, he was able to interview a chain of prisoners, eventually leading him to those who were the most culpable.
We now have a moral, ethical leader of our country. The closing of Guantanamo is just the beginning of ending the ugly chapter of disregard for human rights introduced by the Bush administration in the name of "national security." I eagerly await the next coordinates on this new moral journey.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Bush Booed
The new tone in Washington has escaped many on the left. In his last few moments of his Presidency George W. Bush was booed and subjected to a rendition of “Na, Na, Na, Na, Hey, Hey, Hey, Goodbye” as if he were a baseball pitcher getting pulled after a good shelling.
http://www.wjno.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=244038&article=4878923
He deserved better. President Bush went to Washington eight years ago with a history of bipartisanship and reaching out to the other side of the aisle as Governor of Texas. Even after the Florida recount debacle and catcalls about him being an illegitimate President he naively tried to bring the same spirit of teamwork in Washington. Early in his first term he invited Sen. Kennedy over for movies and let him write an education bill. Conservatives could see the folly in this strategery, but then we were hoping Bush was a fellow Conservative.
We had seen how the left cost George HW Bush a second term when congressional Democrats wrote a budget deal that included tax increases. When the President signed it they screeched like stuck pigs about how he broke his “no new taxes” pledge. This trap caused his 90%+ approval rating after the first Iraq War to evaporate bringing us the Clinton years. It’s unfathomable how George W. Bush didn’t learn from such recent history and then repeated it.
The angry left in this country has become Terrell Owens: when they win they do an end zone dance and taunt the loser. When things go wrong they point fingers and make demands. Loudly. If the country is a team those who jeered The President are the cancers in the locker room.
The Bush Presidency was a failure in the sense that he didn’t defend himself. He has two qualities that aren’t assets in Washington: he was too nice and too inarticulate to counter attacks on his character and policies. President Bush made mistakes but handled himself with class and composure until the end of his Presidency. Even the far left should give him credit for that.
http://www.wjno.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=244038&article=4878923
He deserved better. President Bush went to Washington eight years ago with a history of bipartisanship and reaching out to the other side of the aisle as Governor of Texas. Even after the Florida recount debacle and catcalls about him being an illegitimate President he naively tried to bring the same spirit of teamwork in Washington. Early in his first term he invited Sen. Kennedy over for movies and let him write an education bill. Conservatives could see the folly in this strategery, but then we were hoping Bush was a fellow Conservative.
We had seen how the left cost George HW Bush a second term when congressional Democrats wrote a budget deal that included tax increases. When the President signed it they screeched like stuck pigs about how he broke his “no new taxes” pledge. This trap caused his 90%+ approval rating after the first Iraq War to evaporate bringing us the Clinton years. It’s unfathomable how George W. Bush didn’t learn from such recent history and then repeated it.
The angry left in this country has become Terrell Owens: when they win they do an end zone dance and taunt the loser. When things go wrong they point fingers and make demands. Loudly. If the country is a team those who jeered The President are the cancers in the locker room.
The Bush Presidency was a failure in the sense that he didn’t defend himself. He has two qualities that aren’t assets in Washington: he was too nice and too inarticulate to counter attacks on his character and policies. President Bush made mistakes but handled himself with class and composure until the end of his Presidency. Even the far left should give him credit for that.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
The Wall Comes Down
It was a cold, sunny day in the midwest today, just as crisp and bright as that in Washington.
Between work tasks, I listened to the press coverage of the inauguration on NPR; read blogging updates on NYTimes.com; stole glances at CNN-Facebook internet video streaming; and caught some PBS coverage on T.V. I was struck by the amount of people in the crowd holding up cell phones and taking pictures. This day was not only remarkable for the historic significance of the first person of mixed racial heritage becoming President of the United States of America, but also because of the widening participation of citizens of the world through the wonders of advanced technology. It was (almost) like being there! The Facebook streaming included live comments by its members, most just as overjoyed as I was to be witnessing the passing of the helm in such a dramatically immediate way.
What excites me most about the new Obama presidency is this sense of passionate participation among so many who have expressed disenchantment with the political process in the past. It truly feels like a "gathering of the tribes," so wonderfully captured with humor by Reverend Dr. Joseph E. Lowery near the end of the ceremony today, calling for a new day "when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man, and when white would embrace what is right.” I do not recall, in my lifetime, speaking with so many people who wanted to BE THERE--whether it was in Grant Park for the acceptance speech last November, or on the mall in D.C. today. People feel compelled, drawn...driven to be present...to witness this incredible day on a very personal level.
It reminds me a bit of the fall of the Berlin Wall. When I was in my mid-twenties, traveling through western Europe by train, the wall came down, and it seemed like everyone was heading there to see it collapse into a pile of rubble. This day feels, to me, like one of those days. The creators of the Berlin Wall built it not only to contain people, but to limit ideas. Years later, the will of the people brought that wall down and opened the world for a new generation of dreamers. People, historical events, and conditions in this country have created real obstacles...walls...for people of color, for women, and for people in poverty. Yet, today, we bear witness to another achievement of the will of the people. Barack Obama's inauguration represents the destruction of another ugly, divisive wall. And, oh, does the light shine bright and true without its shadow!
Between work tasks, I listened to the press coverage of the inauguration on NPR; read blogging updates on NYTimes.com; stole glances at CNN-Facebook internet video streaming; and caught some PBS coverage on T.V. I was struck by the amount of people in the crowd holding up cell phones and taking pictures. This day was not only remarkable for the historic significance of the first person of mixed racial heritage becoming President of the United States of America, but also because of the widening participation of citizens of the world through the wonders of advanced technology. It was (almost) like being there! The Facebook streaming included live comments by its members, most just as overjoyed as I was to be witnessing the passing of the helm in such a dramatically immediate way.
What excites me most about the new Obama presidency is this sense of passionate participation among so many who have expressed disenchantment with the political process in the past. It truly feels like a "gathering of the tribes," so wonderfully captured with humor by Reverend Dr. Joseph E. Lowery near the end of the ceremony today, calling for a new day "when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man, and when white would embrace what is right.” I do not recall, in my lifetime, speaking with so many people who wanted to BE THERE--whether it was in Grant Park for the acceptance speech last November, or on the mall in D.C. today. People feel compelled, drawn...driven to be present...to witness this incredible day on a very personal level.
It reminds me a bit of the fall of the Berlin Wall. When I was in my mid-twenties, traveling through western Europe by train, the wall came down, and it seemed like everyone was heading there to see it collapse into a pile of rubble. This day feels, to me, like one of those days. The creators of the Berlin Wall built it not only to contain people, but to limit ideas. Years later, the will of the people brought that wall down and opened the world for a new generation of dreamers. People, historical events, and conditions in this country have created real obstacles...walls...for people of color, for women, and for people in poverty. Yet, today, we bear witness to another achievement of the will of the people. Barack Obama's inauguration represents the destruction of another ugly, divisive wall. And, oh, does the light shine bright and true without its shadow!
Inauguration Day
Throngs are in the nation’s capital in a spirit of optimism thinking that President Obama will save the economy, end wars and “bring us together,” whatever that means. Millions braved the sub-freezing weather to celebrate hope and to overflow a woeful undersupply of 5000 port-a-johns. Thankfully it’s not summer.
It is a good thing to have our first President of African descent. If nothing else many minority children will see that they can do anything and be anybody in this country. Too often people of color don’t put the hard work in to succeed because they are defeatist and for much of our nation’s history they were correct in thought. They can now look up to a well-spoken leader who doesn’t jump on every racist slight, real or perceived, for political gain. Hopefully today’s youth will see more clearly that we’re all first of the United States of America, not some group with a hyphen. They may see that the game is fair rather than stacked against them.
A new wave of optimism is sweeping the country, according to polls. 71% of Americans think the economy will improve and 72% think the stock market will bounce back. Evidently 1% of those polled don’t think the two are related. In addition, 84% think that President Obama will help them lose weight and 93% believe their Uncle Jerry will sober up, stop mooching money and get a real job. Optimism is good for an ailing economy and necessary for recovery as people stuffing mattresses with cash halts the velocity of money (the “V” in GNP=M1 x V).
What’s really great about President Obama is that he’s not George Bush and, even better, he’s not John McCain. Another four or eight years of a Republican President trying to make friends and getting slapped around for it would be difficult for this Conservative to take. In a sense the outgoing Administration failed but only because President Bush allowed it. He lost the nation after the response to Katrina because he failed to articulate that FEMA is not a first-responder. He was already teetering because he couldn’t explain that Saddam’s missing WMD’s were there but went “poof” and that WMD’s was only one of many reasons for invading anyway. A President McCain would similarly cross the aisle with a big smile and good intentions and take flurries to the face until he’s a punch line. Let President Obama try to work with Sen. Reid and Speaker Pelosi. A Republican cannot.
To President Obama’s credit he’s treated our outgoing President with dignity. Since the election he’s refrained from taking shots at President Bush and hasn’t called for investigations or arrests, unlike many in his party. President Bush may be able to ride off into the sunset quietly, as he should. Here’s my hope for change: The Office of the President will be esteemed and respected no matter how one feels about the current occupant. Today we’re not hearing ”He’s not my President” and worse as we did eight years ago. Maybe we can all have a renewed respect for the Presidency that can continue on to the inevitable next Republican. Hopefully on the way out the White House employees won’t take even one “w” off of a keyboard, scribble funny titles on office doors or steal the furniture. It’s a good thing that housekeeping isn’t scrubbing DNA out of the Oval Office.
I wonder if I’m the only one scratching his head at the new President’s moves since the election. His only stated reason for challenging Hillary Clinton for the nomination was because of her misguided stance on foreign policy, meaning her vote for the Iraq War. She’ll be in charge of foreign policy even though her husband Bill has ethical issues with foreign cash. His Treasury Secretary nominee Timothy Geithner doesn’t know how to file a tax return and his Commerce Secretary nominee Bill Richardson resigned because of a corruption scandal. Don’t forget the Blagojevich circus and who talked to whom when about Sen. Obama’s choice of replacement for his Senate seat.
But who cares? You the electorate wanted change and you wanted it big and fast. However the Iraq War seems to be status quo with Bush’s Defense Secretary Gates in place even though Sen. Obama campaigned on the idea that we’d be out in 16 months. Afghanistan will see a buildup as President Bush promised and planned. Guantanamo Bay won’t close immediately but perhaps by the end of the first term. The financial bailout Bush started will continue unabated. All this non-change must be unsettling to you. Woops, there’s more! The Obama camp believes that V.P. Cheney’s warrantless surveillance is legal as is detaining terrorists without trial.
There really isn’t much change so far and not much more on the horizon, save for some issues regarding gays and drilling restrictions. That oozing down the streets are bromides about change and hope, perhaps not what’s coming out from under all those outhouses. It’s mystifying to me that no one seems to care that the bulk of policy on the important issues will remain the same. Sen. McCain was to be Bush’s third term, wasn’t he?
What’s hard for me to get my arms around is how one person who hasn’t done anything yet can generate so much excitement. I’ve avoided the “savior” comments thus far but I wish someone could tell me what President Obama has done in the past that would make one think he’s going to be one. He may end up as a greater President than Lincoln or Jefferson, but also could be worse than Carter or Johnson (Andrew or Lyndon, take your pick).
A caller to a radio show this morning is on the right track when he said that liberals tend to have no faith in God so they put their faith in people. Being a savior is a daunting task and I wish our new President well. No pressure.
It is a good thing to have our first President of African descent. If nothing else many minority children will see that they can do anything and be anybody in this country. Too often people of color don’t put the hard work in to succeed because they are defeatist and for much of our nation’s history they were correct in thought. They can now look up to a well-spoken leader who doesn’t jump on every racist slight, real or perceived, for political gain. Hopefully today’s youth will see more clearly that we’re all first of the United States of America, not some group with a hyphen. They may see that the game is fair rather than stacked against them.
A new wave of optimism is sweeping the country, according to polls. 71% of Americans think the economy will improve and 72% think the stock market will bounce back. Evidently 1% of those polled don’t think the two are related. In addition, 84% think that President Obama will help them lose weight and 93% believe their Uncle Jerry will sober up, stop mooching money and get a real job. Optimism is good for an ailing economy and necessary for recovery as people stuffing mattresses with cash halts the velocity of money (the “V” in GNP=M1 x V).
What’s really great about President Obama is that he’s not George Bush and, even better, he’s not John McCain. Another four or eight years of a Republican President trying to make friends and getting slapped around for it would be difficult for this Conservative to take. In a sense the outgoing Administration failed but only because President Bush allowed it. He lost the nation after the response to Katrina because he failed to articulate that FEMA is not a first-responder. He was already teetering because he couldn’t explain that Saddam’s missing WMD’s were there but went “poof” and that WMD’s was only one of many reasons for invading anyway. A President McCain would similarly cross the aisle with a big smile and good intentions and take flurries to the face until he’s a punch line. Let President Obama try to work with Sen. Reid and Speaker Pelosi. A Republican cannot.
To President Obama’s credit he’s treated our outgoing President with dignity. Since the election he’s refrained from taking shots at President Bush and hasn’t called for investigations or arrests, unlike many in his party. President Bush may be able to ride off into the sunset quietly, as he should. Here’s my hope for change: The Office of the President will be esteemed and respected no matter how one feels about the current occupant. Today we’re not hearing ”He’s not my President” and worse as we did eight years ago. Maybe we can all have a renewed respect for the Presidency that can continue on to the inevitable next Republican. Hopefully on the way out the White House employees won’t take even one “w” off of a keyboard, scribble funny titles on office doors or steal the furniture. It’s a good thing that housekeeping isn’t scrubbing DNA out of the Oval Office.
I wonder if I’m the only one scratching his head at the new President’s moves since the election. His only stated reason for challenging Hillary Clinton for the nomination was because of her misguided stance on foreign policy, meaning her vote for the Iraq War. She’ll be in charge of foreign policy even though her husband Bill has ethical issues with foreign cash. His Treasury Secretary nominee Timothy Geithner doesn’t know how to file a tax return and his Commerce Secretary nominee Bill Richardson resigned because of a corruption scandal. Don’t forget the Blagojevich circus and who talked to whom when about Sen. Obama’s choice of replacement for his Senate seat.
But who cares? You the electorate wanted change and you wanted it big and fast. However the Iraq War seems to be status quo with Bush’s Defense Secretary Gates in place even though Sen. Obama campaigned on the idea that we’d be out in 16 months. Afghanistan will see a buildup as President Bush promised and planned. Guantanamo Bay won’t close immediately but perhaps by the end of the first term. The financial bailout Bush started will continue unabated. All this non-change must be unsettling to you. Woops, there’s more! The Obama camp believes that V.P. Cheney’s warrantless surveillance is legal as is detaining terrorists without trial.
There really isn’t much change so far and not much more on the horizon, save for some issues regarding gays and drilling restrictions. That oozing down the streets are bromides about change and hope, perhaps not what’s coming out from under all those outhouses. It’s mystifying to me that no one seems to care that the bulk of policy on the important issues will remain the same. Sen. McCain was to be Bush’s third term, wasn’t he?
What’s hard for me to get my arms around is how one person who hasn’t done anything yet can generate so much excitement. I’ve avoided the “savior” comments thus far but I wish someone could tell me what President Obama has done in the past that would make one think he’s going to be one. He may end up as a greater President than Lincoln or Jefferson, but also could be worse than Carter or Johnson (Andrew or Lyndon, take your pick).
A caller to a radio show this morning is on the right track when he said that liberals tend to have no faith in God so they put their faith in people. Being a savior is a daunting task and I wish our new President well. No pressure.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)