Could This Soon Be a City Near You?

 Yesterday's news video of the debacle in Kabul brought back so many memories from a similar situation in Vietnam, oh so long ago. Americans literally turning their tails and running.  For their lives. 

It isn't the fault of the thousands of Americans working in Afghanistan, nor the military who kept the Taliban at bay nor the rank and file of the Afghanis themselves.  It is the fault of self-serving, naive and perhaps even stupid leadership - people we've put in power to lead us.  It turns my stomach.

What makes it even worse is those among us who bow to their dictates because we are too lazy to dig beneath the surface to find truth. I think of the children of Afghanistan - both boys, who are subjected to a demented form of homosexuality, and girls who are sometimes not even in their teens spirited off to be the "wife" of some warrior. And more girls and women who are going to lose their opportunities for an education that can so vastly improve their lives.

Well, you might say, that's far away and it doesn't really affect us.  Doesn't it? The illustration above could soon be Chicago or Portland or Seattle or New York if we don't soon get a handle on our own country.

I see hope, I hear people speaking who are angry.  Really angry about what's happening be it CRT or mask mandates or defunding the police. The one thing that's lacking, however, is a lack of cohesiveness.  Someone who is willing to pick up the reins and get a movement organized.  A Tea Party movement without the capitulation to the Republican Party who are just as complicit in our current mess as the Democrats.

The ones I envision pulling it together are parents, no matter their politics. For those who are suffering the most are the children and don't get between a child and its parent. Mother or Father. Kids have lost far too much in the way of schooling during the lockdowns which have proven to be ineffectual at best. This applies to kids up to and including college.  They're not getting the education we expect them to get nor the one they deserve.

A lot of atonement needs to take place. First with our feckless politicians, then to those who have hijacked higher education, to the teachers union and school boards to health care officials who have suddenly turned into petty dictators.

They say they are following the science. How can the science be so different in so many places if that's true? Truth.  That's all we ask. Is that too much?  Apparently so.

Following Blindly Has Its Pitfalls

Two items caught my attention while reading online headlines.  One, a lot of Democrats are still running from the President.  Two, Chris Christie's "bazaar behavior" may hurt his presidential aspirations.

It strikes me as a no win situation.  One that shouldn't be, no matter your politics.

Both sides are like lemmings following their leadership over the cliff into the sea.  Oh sure, both sides have their rebellious types,  the Tea Party Republicans and the Progressive Democrats.  They are the spoilers and proud of it.  That nothing moves forward means nothing as long as it works out to harm the opposition. Any opposition, even if within their own party.  That's forward thinking!

On the Democratic side, they'd not have to be running from the President if they hadn't blindly voted for Obamacare.  If they had voted the truth of the legislation it probably would not have passed, there was so much not addressed and so much flawed it was just plain bad legislation.   But politics being what they are today, they caved to either bribery or threats from their leadership.  Work with the each other?   Not on your life.

On the other hand, the die hard Republican absolutists will not forgive Chris Christie for the liberal leanings he sometimes has taken to be able to govern his state.

Maybe that's what needs to be scrutinized. How do we get back to the methods that get the most good done?  Certainly not following blindly because you are a member of a particular party.  Those who do are putting party,  ideology and career before country. The result has been a President who ignores the Constitution and cherry picks what will and will not be enforced and gets a pass and Secretaries with far too much "shall" power.

Christie, he probably isn't alone though he gets the press, knows that flexibility gets things done.  Would he be as flexible if he were in a Red state?  I can't say for sure, but I would hope so.  As is, however, he is forced to look at both sides to get things done and he has done just that. If I can assume, which is dangerous, this is his philosophy on effective governance.

I hope sometime between now and the 2014 mid-terms both the politicians and the voters see the light.  How much more of this agony and ecstasy emotional see saw can the country take?

If I want to see glee I'll watch the TV show.  I'm tired of watching it in Congress when one side or the other stumbles.  The problem is there is no one around to pick any one up.  They're too busy cheering the fall and we're too busy trying to patch up the mess. 

Watching And Waiting...

I spent some time this morning watching the health care summit. A few things struck me. Nancy Pelosi did not look happy. I think she was bored and wanting to get back to passing the massive legislation that awaits us.

President Obama interrupted John McCain who was trying to make a valid point and scolded him by telling him the campaign was over. How would Obama know? He hasn't stopped yet himself!

The Democrats have been busy telling the Republicans how many times they used reconciliation when they were in power. This is pay back time. Now isn't this a fine way to pass legislation that they don't have to abide by but we will?

Friends, we are being governed by a group of children more interested in furthering their personal ideology than sorting out a complex issue for the good of the country. Let's face it, the Democratic leadership wants a socialist America. The people do not. It's really pretty simple. They have the power. We do not. It's really pretty simple.

The Republicans suggestion of starting over and passing issues on which they can agree, or at least compromise, is not at all unreasonable. Yet the Democrats, including and especially the President, are the ones saying no.

I see the ball being squarely in the President's court. If he doesn't go back and amend his outline to include some of what the Republicans want we'll know there was no good faith in this meeting. It indeed will be nothing more then theater.

Actually, he has to do a bit more. He has to take Pelosi and Reid to the woodshed if necessary to get them to cooperate. I doubt that he will nor that they would.

If there is no move toward the Republicans I will have lost the final wisp of respect I have for the President and his party.

It's sad, really. I'm moving more and more toward the likelihood of no longer participating in national elections. No matter who wins, once the newly elected are settled in it's right back to business as usual.

We talk of how abhorrent dictatorships are. They essentially have one in both Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan. True ones exist in many African nations and of course North Korea. Well, you know, we're not so far from it here. The name? The Democratic congress for now. That, of course, is subject to change to the Republican congress in due time.

We need the old war horses of Congress, those who respect it's rules and procedures for how they were meant to work. We need them to hold those who will thwart the rules that made it one of the great institutions of the world accountable. We're not getting through from the outside; if they will perhaps they can.

One thing of which they might take note. The people will only be pushed so far. All they need do is look at Iran. They're already threatening us with fines and jail time for not buying their product. What's next? Troops in our own streets? Just what is America becoming?

Perhaps election time will let those in power know we do not consider it a game nor a toy for them to break beyond repair.

Bye Bayh!

There he stood at the podium, his wife with a tear in her eye and his two sons at his side. He was not there to heap embarrassment upon them, but rather heap embarrassment on the United States Congress. I wonder if he succeeded. I doubt it. They are beyond embarrassment.

When a man of Evan Bayh's caliber and experience ops not to run again because he does not love Congress, it is a sad day for the country! Why does this popular two term Senator no longer love it? "There is much too much partisanship and not enough progress. Too much narrow ideology and not enough practical problem solving."

There you have it. Out of the mouth of one of their own! What more will it take for Mr. Reid and Ms. Pelosi to take note? Oops. Wrong. They know. The problem is just what to do about it. They are the ones I'd like to see leave. Not Evan Bayh.

Every time a Senator or Congressman who is known to be willing to work with those across the aisle quits, it weakens the body. The numbers are interesting to me. While the lowest percentage of his career, he has voted with the Democratic caucus 71% of the time. That seems pretty indicative that he is a Democrat, yet he is known as the Senate Democrat least likely to vote with his party this Congress. Is there something wrong with this picture?

We so badly need more willing to work across party lines yet they are being driven out by the leadership's refusal to budge. It would seem the President is more in sync with the leadership than those willing to try the bipartisan route or he wouldn't have dug his heels in on Pelosi's health care reform.

It's going to be an interesting several months leading up to the 2010 mid-terms. I anticipate little more than contentious bickering.

I also anticipate the tea party movement throwing a monkey wrench into the elections by putting up their own ideological candidates thereby weakening Republican chances to make significant gains. If the Democrats prevail they will consider it a mandate. They will be wrong.

Is the voting public wise enough to not let that happen?

How I wish there were more like Evan Bayh. If there were perhaps they could have worked together to move both parties rather then feeling compelled to leave.

One more time, we lose.

We Have Nothing To Fear...But The Bush Administration

My more liberal friends, at least those who are still enthralled with President Obama, have continually admonished me to be patient ever since I began hedging my support.

The Obama administration has been in place for a few days shy of a year now. They own it all. Though the "Democratic strategists" who are often foils on the talking head shows don't seem to agree. Have you ever noticed that whenever asked a direct question they always fall back to what the Bush administration did? I've got a hot flash for them. The Bushies have been out of office for a year now!

Rather than "changing" what the Bushies did wrong, it seems to me they are continuing the same practices. Mainly, governing by fear. Take health care. Mandating that everyone buy insurance or face fines or jail time. If that isn't fear, I don't know what is! Add to that the uncertainty of a plan being put together behind closed doors that the President would like to have voted on the day Congress returns. That's darned scary!

That's pretty mild, however, when compared to the national security fiasco. Why is it the American public is being made to pay for their foul ups? It isn't the American public that didn't connect the dots. It was the administration! The Islamic radicals are not boarding planes in this country; they're coming from overseas. Yet we're being put through intrusive hoops of questionable value. It isn't the American public who had a Muslim Major counseling soldiers returning from combat. Counseling them about what? Killing Muslims! It was them!

Somehow they always manage to tie it back to the Bush administration. One thing they won't be able to tie back is the decision to try these Islamic extremists in our civilian courts. What if, just what if, one of them was to be acquitted? Maybe the underwear bomber. Due to inability to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. What we we do with him?

Sorry. This wouldn't even be close to a reasonable question if the Bush administration was still in power. No way. No how. I'm not defending Bush. I am saying Obama is proving to be very much the same. That to me is something to fear.

A Tax By Any Other Name Is Still A Tax

A couple of things have really interested me about the raging health care reform angst. President Obama made the rounds of all the networks except FOX posturing about what the bill would contain. The problem is there is no bill other than the one the house passed out of committee which bears little resemblance to what Obama touting. Having not been voted on, it's currently in limbo.

I'm wondering why, on all those shows, not one anchor asked Obama of which bill he was speaking. The Wyden-Bennet bill, the Dodd-Kennedy bill, the Baucus bill or that House bill?

Beyond that state of confusion is his insistence that the fine to be levied on those not signing up for insurance would not be a tax. Funny, the Baucus bill states it differently:

Excise Tax. The consequence for not maintaining insurance would be an excise tax.

I am also of the opinion that anyone who is required to pay into a government fund that is mandated in order to share the burden across a wide range, is in fact a tax. George Stephanopolis checked with Merriam Webster; I settled for the dictionary on my Mac:

tax |taks|
noun
a compulsory contribution to state revenue, levied by the government on workers' income and business profits or added to the cost of some goods, services, and transactions.

Fining or penalizing people for not buying into a government program for which they have no need does not mesh with my idea of reform. Nor the American way of doing things. But then, most of Obama's programs, along with his methods,do not mesh with my way view of the American way of doing things. What he's doing with his heavy handed intrusions is no better than waging a war of choice rather than one of need.

As with the situation in Afghanistan where his hand picked General is at odds with him over man power, he's found himself boxed into a corner and is now going to see if we indeed have the right strategy. He's a day late and a dollar short.

So it is with health care. He's out making promises about a bill that as of yet does not exist. He's making points of things that are in direct contradiction of what's in the bills working their way through committees.

This is why people like me, and there are many, have lost confidence in this man who would reshape the country into one beyond recognition. I worry; not about the people, they're beginning to see what others have for some time. I worry because the hope and change we're seeing is so far from what we visualized. I worry because the opposition party remains weak and rudderless; without leadership. I worry because politics is the reason.

For all the talk about changing the way health care is managed for the good of the people, it reality it's for the good of the special interests both inside and outside the government. It's a wolf in sheep's clothing. And the sheep would be?

Policy - Where's The Substance?

I'd like to think, above all, in his speech last night to Congress, President Obama was throwing down the gauntlet to Nancy Pelosi as well as chastising everyone else. The house bill is the only bill actually out there and what he described as what he expected, or assured, is far from H.R. 3200. For instance he assures us illegal aliens won't be covered, yet in H.R. 3200 they are.

Part of trying to do a great deal in a compressed time frame brings problems. Nothing really gets done, or if it does, it doesn't get done well. I won't rehash all the bailout deals, cash for clunkers, nor the stimulus program. All that has been speaking quite eloquently of their shortcomings for themselves.

I still have grave concerns about foreign policy. The Financial Times points out he has yet to take strong action on many of his campaign promises. The Afghanistan war is escalating and the death toll increases on a daily basis. More troops are to be requested for the "war of necessity". Yet, as is the case in Iraq, from where will they come? At one time Obama stressed that we must prevent al-Qaeda from regaining a stronghold yet recent press has us fighting the Taliban. They are not one and the same. Al-Qaeda is seeking safe haven, the Taliban seeks to run the country.

Secretary of Defense Gates states the US goal is to train Afghan security forces to take over and for us to recede to an advisory capacity. We see how well that's working in Iraq. Not so well.

Richard Holbrook, the President's special envoy to Afghanistan, says of U.S. "success", "We'll know it when we see it." Not exactly definitive!

In direct contrast to Gate's assessment, the U.S. has also dedicated itself to such goals as advancing women's rights, improving governance and cracking down on corruption and narcotics. Should this not be the roll of the U.S. Military, but rather the Afghan people themselves?

Pair that with an election fraught with fraud, it parallels the recent elections in Iran which returned a corrupt leader, and the powers behind him, to power. As for Iran, their nuclear ambitions are near fruition. What are we going to do?

Let's not forget Israel where Netenyahu has okayed new building in the West Bank in direct opposition to Obama's demands.

It's not looking good in the Middle East any more than it is on the health care front here at home. It is not only we citizens that are awaiting well grounded leadership rather than soaring rhetoric from the President. The whole world is waiting.

Who's Doing The People's Work?

In a lot of respects, the people are. We're not getting straight answers from either side of the aisle on health care reform. Oops! It's now being termed "insurance reform" which is closer to what it should be.

I'm willing to wager a lot of folks turning up at the town hall meetings have done what Hub has done. Down loaded the bill and read it. Especially those in our age group. We're the ones targeted by most of the scare tactics. And a lot of the truths being obscured.

That being said, I was surprised to see how many lawmakers are off on junkets. Maybe they feel it's safe haven. If no one can question them, they don't have to answer.

I would think the health care issue is of enough importance they could have postponed many of these trips. After all, it's their constituency asking the questions and for everyone off on a junket, there are entire districts without a source of information which can be held accountable.

Who are some of these lawmakers and where are they? According to The Wall Street Journal they're off to Europe with their wife or island hopping around the Pacific. Why? Well, the dozen that are on a 10 day trip in the Pacific are supposedly studying how immigration laws are applied in the Marianas, a U.S. territory. I don't know. I'd be inclined to pick up the phone and ask.

They are also slated to visit Samoa, Hawaii, Guam and Palau. No doubt to see if it's a suitable place to park the Uighurs still in Guantanamo. I especially like Representative Ellison Twittering his way around Africa bemoaning the fact he caught the sniffles while studying gender based violence in Kenya. Gender based violence in Kenya?

According to the 2000 census, Ellison's district had a population of 614,935. In the 2008 Congressional elections 322,081 people voted. That's a fair chunk of people not having a town meeting during this Congressional recess. Multiply that by the district populations of the others and you're getting into real numbers.

The idea that people have gotten engaged is wonderful. That it has gotten unruly is not unexpected considering the vagueness of what's being proposed paired with the fact it affects all of us.

I give a big thumbs up to those who stayed home to face their constituents. After watching Senator Claire McCaskill, D-MO, stand her ground I've gained a lot or respect for her. Her answers did not satisfy many and that in of itself is the message.

Sort it out and get it right before passing it into law. I guess the Democrats on those junkets are so sure of their majority that they feel no need to subject themselves to their constituents.

They best enjoy their tax payer funded escapades. If bad legislation is what passes they may find a "staycation" might have been the better choice.

'Tis A Puzzlement!

I am well aware that the numbers being bandied about regarding the numbers of uninsured Americans are less than accurate. The idea that there are no programs for the poor are also inaccurate. There is Medicaid, which is specifically designed for these folks.

One reason I am leery of anything comprising heavy government involvement is exemplified by Medicaid. You see, it is a joint program funded by both the federal government and the states. Here's where the problem comes in. Wealthy states budget more than poor states yet poor states tend to have the people most in need. You'd think the feds would help the poor states by giving them a larger piece of the federal pie, but no. The more money the states budgets, the higher the federal piece. Sounds like governmental logic, doesn't it?

I'm not going to begin to get into why more poor aren't enrolled. They either are unaware of it or won't pay the premium which, purposely, is rock bottom cheap. It's so much easier to go to the emergency room and stick the rest of us with the bill.

Now. We know part of the fight is over the cost of this health care overhaul. Those planning this bill have come up with a way to trim $100 billion from the $1 trillion price tag. According to the Wall Street Journal,

The cuts would be achieved in part by asking states to share in a planned expansion of Medicaid, which offers health insurance for the poor, and by requiring low-income people to pay higher premiums to purchase insurance.

What is it about "poor" they don't understand?

In the very same issue of the Journal is this article, Pinched States Wrestle With More Cuts. We already know what's happening in California because it's getting the press. Let's look at a few others in trouble. Pennsylvania may stop paying state workers. Any bets how many will go to the office?

Arizona is considering selling it's House and Senate buildings. They could turn them into housing for the homeless! The shortfalls are staggering and getting worse. How are they supposed to step up Medicaid programs? They can't fund anything!

Liberal talk has been taking great glee in the fact the Republicans are in total disarray. They have no leadership other than want-to-be's like Sarah Palin or mouths that roar like Rush Limbaugh. That may be true.

What's worse, however, is the Democrats not recognizing the reality of the situation they want to blithely "fix" without so much as reading a written word! I don't see leadership there either. I foresee chaos.

The Democrats are the party of big government. You are witness to how well it's working and don't even start with the "he's only been in office six months" mantra.

The truth. The country is a mess. Another truth. The bigger the government involvement, the bigger the mess. Just think about Congress as a whole. How many of them are career politicians? How many of them have a clue about business management? They read so little before passing legislation only we have to adhere to, I wonder if they can read.

Too bad it doesn't equate with talking!

Of Partisan Politics And Personal Agendas

I have never seen anything like the political scene we've been witnessing the past few weeks. I get the feeling the entire United States government is imploding.

From the President on down, everything is in chaos. To the President's credit, he is coming off some of his campaign promises that were based on assumptions rather than hard fact. He is being accused of weakness. I support him fully for I see it as coming to grips with reality.

Congress, on the other hand, is a different story. Every President I can remember has made the pledge to change the way Washington does business, including Obama. None have succeeded, including Obama. It's not for the lack of trying. Partisanship has run so deep and bitter for so long I don't see it changing without a major turnover of our elected officials, beginning with the leadership.

That partisanship and bitterness is what is causing the unraveling we're currently witnessing. The prisoner abuse conflict, what defines torture, who authorized it and how should they be made to pay. Cheney out there clinging to the hope he can convince the people Obama is keeping us less safe. The firing of the federal attorneys. So much from the past administration is filling the news and the time our elected officials are supposed to be working for our present and our future!

Obama has made it clear it's time to move forward. What's done is done, new leadership is in place. But no. The Republicans, who are fading quickly into obscurity, cling to their righteousness through the voices of talk show hosts. They have no leadership.

The Democrats, in a desperate attempt to escape the accusations of complicity, are scrapping against one another like junk yard dogs. Gitmo, torture, who said what to who when. All from times long past. Is anyone tending the store?

There is something inherently wrong with the way we are served when a Senator switches parties to better his chances of being re-elected. There is something inherently wrong with the practice of filling leadership positions on the basis of seniority rather than ability.

There is something inherently wrong when we, the constituents, keep sending the same people back to Washington because of the pork they've provided.

It has become a Catch 22. It takes experience to navigate Washington politics, yet when one becomes so sensitised to that climate so as to be effective, recognition of the realities outside the beltway fade. With that, true representation tends to fade and personal agendas, ambitions, rise.

Washington politics is like a narcotic. It's addictive, the perks equal the highest of highs and coming off that high is ferociously fought. The thought of returning to the real world and losing the power, the perks and the celebrity is more than most are willing to do. Staying high and oblivious is preferable to coping in the real world with the rest of us.

What's happening now reminds me of those anti-meth bill boards you see spotlighting the ravages of the addiction. The addiction is now taking it's toll. Nancy Pelosi is aging before our eyes. Smirks from all parties are less frequent. Dick Cheney's mental stability seems frail. It's fascinating and frightening all at the same time.

Politics is not the opiate of the masses in this case, it is the opiate of those who have become addicts of their own making inside Washington.

Have we, the people, been the enabler?

Be Careful What You Wish For!

I often wonder if either politicians or the media "get it". The current news cycle seems to be little more than whether or not we should torture. Chris Matthews almost drools at the thought of really getting the bad guys. It's frightening.

There are always the "What if you knew the bad guys had information about an imminent attack. Would you torture them to get the details?" questions. Gene Robinson is the only one I've heard question, to Lynn Cheney no less, just how anyone would have that information in the first place.

There has been little discussion regarding just what actually comprises torture other than water boarding. Then the discussion turns even more political. Has Obama waffled on the release of "enhanced interrogation" photos? What ever became of the promise of transparency in this administration?

As M*A*S*H's Colonel Potter would say, "Horse pucky"! Obama's military commanders strongly urged him to reconsider his inclination to release the photos. Wisely, he listened. Reconsidering and changing ones mind is not waffling! It's showing good judgement when a wise argument has been made.

Why anyone would want to see what we've actually done or contracted to have done is beyond me. That isn't the point. It's the perception the rest of the world will have. More importantly the perception the Islamic world will have. It needs no help to make it more negative!

Forget the argument as to whether or not torture actually works. I'm sure there are times it does and times it does not. The point the military commanders are trying to make is that our enemies can and will give worse than they get. To put our service men and women at greater risk than they already are would be irresponsibly reckless.

Photos speak volumes and are fair game to be interpreted in any manner the observer wishes, be it accurate or not. Those so anxious to have them released would do well to remember not only the Islamic rage that accompanied the Abu Ghraib fiasco but also the emotions that are stirred, even today, of the Holocaust atrocities. The Jewish community will never let it go. Why should the Islamic community be any more generous with what they see as a total humiliation of their religious beliefs.

Jon Stewart summed it up one night when he explained he understood the rage and shared the same blood lust, but the point he made is one we should all consider. This country is better than he is.

I will never understand a culture that is so fanatical that it will stone to death it's own people. And worse. Or behead captives like Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl and so many others.

I do understand that flame of hatred is no ember. It is burning strong and flares out of control frequently. Why should we add fuel to it by releasing photos which would be proof positive that there was a day our country was not better than the sum of it's peoples' rage?

Powell And The Moderates Versus The Republicans

Opinionating along political lines is getting more and more difficult these days. It's akin to being a moderate in either party.

I've always considered myself pretty much a middle of the road type, finding merit where it may be regardless of party. These days however, to look for it is considered betrayal and finding it is nigh on to impossible.

The Democrats, regardless of what they say, are the party of big government and even bigger spending. I have no idea what the Republicans are any more. It's hard to be an equal opportunity commenter when you can't pin down what they stand for in order to comment on it! What's more contrast it.

One part of the party, represented so well by Dick Cheney, clings to times past. He makes the circuit of Sunday talk shows quite frequently trying to convince us the policies of the current administration have put the country at high risk. On the other hand he tells us on Face the Nation , in his continuing effort to discredit Colin Powell, that he didn't realize Powell was still a Republican! How can he be so positive about the state of our national security now that he is no longer privy to current briefings yet not know one of the most respected men in the country has indeed remained a Republican?

How, too, can he endorse the blatherings of Rush Limbaugh, the titular "head" of the Republican party, over the thoughtful insight of Powell? He may not agree with Powell, but to side with Limbaugh's way of thinking, for instance, the reason for Powell's endorsement of Obama was because they are both black, seems to me to be a man out of touch with reality. Or is it just bitter spite? Limbaugh? Hannity? Ingraham? Please! They are not the voices of any party I could be interested in. They preach devisiveness!

Then we have the listening tour with Jeb Bush, Romney and Virginia Representative Eric Cantor trying to find out how to attract people to the big tent. I have a few suggestions. Get over Roe versus Wade and Gay Marriage issues. And quit allowing the religious right be the loudest voice with all their dictates. Moderates and independents will never even look at the tent unless it becomes more broad based.

They also need to get over Ronald Reagan. He was a good man, and to the Republican way of thinking he was the right man for his time. But that time is long past; the country and the times are vastly different.

At the moment I find it extremely frustrating that the Republicans are so totally rudderless. It's like we have the Democrats without opposition. There are certainly no ideas coming forth to counter everything being protested.

The Democrats should be sitting in the catbird seat, but no. They can't find common ground among themselves. Now that the first 100 days hyperbole is over, it makes me wonder just how long it will be until the nation is totally frozen in it's tracks.

Pleading The 5th...er..the 10th!

I'm not kidding here folks. It's really time for the administration to stop and smell the flowers! The public is becoming frightened by the power grab the Feds are pulling for the sake of what? Hope? I hope they stop soon! Change? That wasn't supposed to mean Federal intervention in every aspect of our lives whether or not it's wanted or needed.

Don't try to tell me the bailouts and stimulus programs are working. Yes, the market has been going up and there are other indicators that the worst might be over. For that to be true, it means things were on the way to turning around before Obama was even in office. The bulk of the money he has allocated to his various schemes has yet to be dispersed and the requirements for receiving same are being made up as they go along.

Fortunately, someone has taken notice and are beginning to leave the grease off the wheel. Actually the rumblings the states were feeling things were amiss at the Federal level began with Alaska's Sarah Palin spot lighting her state. Before that how many of us knew there were rumblings about secession way up north?

Just a week or so ago, during the tea party period, Texas Governor Rick Perry made similar noises and now the Oklahoma legislature is putting the Federal Government on notice with an effort to claim their sovereignty!

What's with all this discontent? Too much too soon and too many toes being stepped on. While it's nice we have an energetic young President who is determined to get things done, there's a bit too much stumbling going on. I watched Hillary Clinton sit with Afghanistan's Karzai and Pakistan's Zardari and apologize, one more time, for civilian deaths. It's war. Civilian's get killed. If they can do better then do so!

We've accepted a share of the blame for the drug wars in Mexico. We still can't decide what torture consists of and what's permissible. We're still being asked to pour additional billions into the auto companies and the banks. We're forcing banks who don't want it to take it and now are not allowed to pay it back. Why? The Feds would lose control where it isn't even needed! The same with the states.

And therein lies the problem. The states and that pesky 10th amendment which reads:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

For a man who is supposedly well versed in Constitutional Law, I'd like to know what sort of grades our President got in applicable courses.

Of course none of the states are going to secede. We are the "United" States for good reason. Like the constant noises Quebec makes about leaving Canada, it's fodder for leverage and little else. They need Canada. All our states need what the Federal Government has to offer too. Should we have another Katrina or if Mt. Redoubt really blows, the Feds are needed.

The states are merely letting the Feds know they're pushing the envelope. So did the people with something as simple as a tea party. The question is, will the Feds hear or do we need to supply them with an ear trumpet?

Obama - Messiah Or Dictator?

There is a difference between anger and worry. I've experienced too much of both lately as I watch the administration try to mend the financial crisis by trial and error.

Today, I'm halting the emotions at worry. Tomorrow it may well be back to full blown anger. I am extremely uncomfortable with the sanctions that are being heaped on corporations receiving bailout money without the ground rules being set at the get go.

Take for instance the exit of Rick Wagoner from GM. GM was to submit their reorganization plans by March 31. That's tomorrow. However, the "auto czar", who has no auto industry experience, decided it wasn't adequate. The President, on his own, told Wagoner if there was to be any chance for GM to get additional help he had to go. Did Obama have that right? Should he have that right?

Granted, the GM board should have removed Wagoner long ago. And yes, it's tax payer dollars being used to bail them out. But without preset rules and an arbitrary opinion from someone outside the industry, it makes Mr. Wagoner the scapegoat. For what? To make the administration look tough?

I listened to Obama say that for GM to go in a new direction it needed new leadership. Wagoner's number two took over. Is that new leadership?

Okay, there can be a lot of arguments for everything the administration is doing because of tax payer dollars. However, more and more it looks to be an attempt to change the way corporate America works and if so, you'll soon see us as a diminished nation even more than we already are.

The New York Times had a story which was even more frightening. They are considering regulating executive pay via regulation rather then legislation. This smacks of dictatorship.

Even worse, they are considering extending this practice to financial institutions not receiving bailout money and even to publicly traded companies.

Obama campaigned on regulation to give share holders a larger say in setting executive pay. Well, that's the responsibility of the board. If the shareholders don't like what the board is doing they can vote them out. The hitch here is the shareholders have to exercise their right and vote their proxy's if they can't attend the annual meetings.

Just like politics. You have to vote to have a say. The responsibility, in that respect, falls on the shareholders, not the executives.

"What about corporate greed?" you may ask. There is far too much of it to be sure. But if what the administration is attempting doesn't shape them up nothing will. They will just move off shore.

Speaking of greed, how about the greed for power? To have the ultimate authority to reshape an entire country into a vision not necessarily sanctioned by the people? To dictate what CEO's can and cannot do while giving Unions a pass? By doing an end run around Congress?

Think about it. We criticized the Bush administration mightily for all Bush's signing statements stating he was going to ignore parts of passed legislation. We criticized Bush for ignoring the Constitution on many occasions. We criticize the Christian Conservatives for trying to hijack the government so they can force their agenda on those of us who don't agree with it.

I'm worried. Oh, yes I am. I see our President running around the country and the world as head cheerleader while in truth the team is making up the rules as they go. Who's our cheerleader and how can we win? Without a say, we can't.

A Step Too Far!

According to the International Herald Tribune the Obama administration is going to seek an increase in oversight of executive pay.

Whoa! This is taking the current populist stance way too far. I can understand strict oversight of the companies who have accepted bailout money willingly, but for those whom those monies were forced on or those not involved at all, this is intrusion we will come to regret.

I think what's happening here is the general public is seeing the multi million dollar figures without knowledge of how large corporations conduct their business nor how executive level employees across the board are compensated. The administration is fast approaching European socialism where governments intrude in all things corporate.

I've read hundreds of blogs parroting the outrage of the dollar amounts of the bonuses while the populist are losing their jobs and homes. How many companies other than AIG are handing out similar bonuses? A lot. Is the public equally outraged at this? Are they even aware of it? Has it finally hit home that both Geitner and the Fed were aware of the AIG bonus plan before and complicit with it before the money was distributed? Has it come across that Senator Dodd, who denied putting the clause in the stimulus package allowing the bonus to be paid, did in fact put it in? That he lied? And that Geitner did too by not coming forward with this information?

Let's see where the outrage is for a few other things like the multi million dollar contracts athletes get, not to mention signing bonuses for untried players. How about the cost to tax payers when they're held hostage by team owners who want a new stadium or arena and won't put up the money themselves but threaten to pull the team? Where's the outrage from the people who will never make that kind of money nor get those bonuses nor even attend a game. A game! I won't even get into the money Hollywood puts out for trash! Where's the outrage? All the while this is happening people are still losing their jobs and their homes.

At the moment everything bailout is in a state of chaos. It reminds me a bit of the French Revolution when Marie Antoinette was saying, "Let them eat cake" as the people were starving. The people rebelled and aristocratic heads rolled. A parallel exists here by looking at how the web that has been spun is beginning to strangle those who wove it. That's why I suggested in yesterday's post it's time for Obama to scale back his own big picture agenda and get a handle on what in the grand scheme of things should be a relatively minor blip. Or does he really want this "revolution" to continue fomenting?

Obama should take note of Georges Danton, a revolutionist himself who fell out with Robespierre. He's noted for saying, as he went to meet Madam Guillotine, "La revolution devore ses enfantes." The revolution eats it's own children. What did he do that was so egregious to the more extreme of his own kind? He was not a fanatic and was capable of moderation and genuine reason.

This is how I view Obama. However, if he doesn't start leading, the more extreme segments of his own party as well as we, his people may begin a revolution he'll not be able to contain. Maybe now is the time for some heads to roll!

Welcome To The Real World Congressman!

Congressman Peter DeFazio (D-OR), welcome to the world of your constituency! In other words, welcome to the real world.

Take a good look at this man. He could be a terrorist. No? He was pulled out of line for special security screening at the Portland International Airport. He was not happy. Nor should a 12 term Congressman be happy with such treatment. Neither am I when it comes to me! It's intrusive, it's embarrassing and it's intimidating.

Having already gone through security before boarding a flight in Eugene, he was making a connecting flight to D.C. in Portland when he was pulled from line and searched by rubber gloved TSA agents. It didn't feel good at all did it Congressman?

This member of the House Transportation aviation sub-committee told TSA officials "it was a stupid practice"! Do tell.

One thing I do not understand is why both the Congressman and the TSA admitted security operations are a "work in progress". Why? These searches have been going on and getting far more intrusive since long before 9/11. Why is it still a work in progress?

Time for another Dogwalk solution. Make every member of Congress fly from airports where they are not easily recognized. Out of their states and districts. See how they like being treated like the rest of us. More than a handful, I'd wager, will agree "There's room for improvement". Maybe that would force Mr. DeFazio and his aviation sub-committee to change that which he observed. "The TSA is off track and we are going to fix the policy."

Just make sure its for all of us. Not just members of Congress!

The Whole World Is Suspect!

And we had better be watching for aliens from outer space!

USA Today reports that the government's terrorist watch list has now hit 1 million. That's a 32% increase since 2007! Now just how in the world do you keep track of that?

The FBI says 95% are foreigners. Terrific. People are put on it by intelligence and law enforcement agencies. Like the local traffic cop after issuing a ticket. Did you know that can happen? There are various levels of offenses that will get you on the list but just what the offense may be is not divulged.

What makes the matter worse, when people seek redress, some 51,000 in the past two years, they find that they have been misidentified. Do you think? Some of those names include Senator Edward Kennedy and Nelson Mandela. There is also Robert Johnson. Now there's an uncommon name. I know a Robert Johnson. The only thing he's likely to terrorize is a bottle of Scotch! John Williams? Which one? I must not forget John Anderson. Age 6.

Long before 9/11 we lived in Seattle. We often went to Canada to camp or do the galleries. We also groused about how long it took to get back across the border. To come home! It's much worse now. What are they going to do during the Winter Olympics? It will be madness.

I haven't flown for several years. I resent being pawed by "security" guards for, as I was once told, "my own good". I resent the passengers who when interviewed repeat the mantra, "well, as long as they're keeping us safe". From who? The 9/11 hijackers were here legally!

There are some 12 million illegal aliens in this country. How many of those names are on the watch list? Is yours? Is mine? This is one more instance where a bloated bureauracy has run amok and in so doing become largely ineffectual. There are no specific rules for who goes on the list. There is no easy way to get off the list.

Some intent on doing us harm will slip through the cracks. Even with all that is now in place - or maybe because of what is now in place. We'd do well to learn a lesson from the Europeans who've learned to pick themselves up and move on.

One million names and growing. The more it grows the more liberties we lose. Will we ever again be free of fear? Will we ever again be able to cross our borders or fly or sail or take a train without being screened? Which one of our lost liberties will be the one where we finally say enough? Or will we always be like lemmings marching to the sea until there is nothing left?

The Pork Queen - Nancy Pelosi

All across America small towns have their celebrations complete with Queen and court. It would seem we have one on the national level too.

Politico reports that House Speaker Nancy
Pelosi is open to a second stimulus package. She criticized the media for being too critical about the first for expecting too much too soon. Was there not enough pork in the first? Was there not enough allocated to save her little marsh mouse or find out why pigs smell the way they do?

This from the woman, who if she were up for a cabinet position, would probably have some tax problems of her own. While the new members of Congress fly commercial with the rest of we peons, she is known for demanding high end military aircraft to shuttle her entourage, including family, around and letting her upset be known should they not be readily available. Does she reimburse the military for their use? Does she pay tax on those jaunts as additional income? I rather doubt it. If Sarah Palin has to reimburse Alaska for family sojourns, then too should Ms. Pelosi reimburse the military. Not just for a first class ticket, either, but the full freight for operating expenses.

I do have to find fault with the President for allowing as much pork to pass in the first stimulus bill as was done, but is it me or does Ms. Pelosi just not get it? Actually, I think she gets it just fine. It's just that no one has had the will to reign her in. I find that worrisome.

The good news of the day is the market is up and Citi actually showed a profit. The bad news is the Democrats hold the house with the Pork Queen as speaker. The reason people are getting impatient is because they don't see the stimulus. Where is the job creation?

Military personnel cleaning up the planes after a Pelosi flight certainly isn't a job saved or created. If that is the thinking, then I can assuredly explain why pigs stink. They are, after all, pork.

Roses And Thorns

Will you look at that! Democrats and Republicans giving a standing ovation during Obama's speech to the joint Houses of Congress. How I hope it was sincere rather than just for show.

I've done my share of complaining about the recovery packages that are being passed into law; the cost along with the amount of pork that has been included. And I've done a fair amount of complaining about the missteps our new President has made; or rather that his "people" have not prevented him from making. Therein lies the problem and I think it's worth hammering home.

I give Obama an A for effort. He's barely a month into his Presidency and look at what he has accomplished. Whether or not you agree with its substance, it is a phenomenal accomplishment. It shows me that, in keeping with his word, he has a plan.

The Republicans are beating their breasts and screaming waste. Well. Where were they with their plans when they held the power as the Democrats do now? Most of what was heard, that has not been kept secret, was bloviating from incessant hearings with little to show at the end. The war raged and the country withered.

I listen to all the snarky comments about the "Messiah" and how he's governing by photo op and that Michelle wore a sleeveless dress in February. Ho hum. At least he is bringing forward actual ideas. He is correct. And this is so important. The old ways that have been tried haven't worked. It's time to try something new.

They may work. They may not. At least the effort is being made by the Administration, as imperfect as they may seem to many of us. What more can we ask? A lot - from Congress.

I got a kick out of watching Nancy Pelosi lead each wave of applause. No wonder she stays so slim. She had a pretty good workout last night. But she, along with the rest of her colleagues in both houses ought to remember these ideas haven't really come from them as much as Obama and his teams of advisers.

We may not agree with all that is being put forth but without viable alternatives, obstructionism for the sake of same is disheartening to say the least.

I'm proud of our President, even in disagreement. I'm proud to have someone who can articulate, I'm encouraged that he is young and vigorous. I love the fact that his daughters are a picture of youth and vitality in the stodgy world of Washington politics.

I especially appreciate how astute they are. Dinner table conversation revolves around a game called Roses and Thorns. Each recalls a "rose" moment and a "thorn" moment from their day. Malia is reported to have said to her Dad, "You have a really thorny job."

They are of a generation yet to come into their own. Astute. The country is going to be just fine.

Fuzzy Math

Yep. I voted for Obama. I was convinced that because he was well educated and considered to be exceptionally bright we would be well served. I was convinced that because he speaks so eloquently he'd be able to explain things to the likes of me and so would his appointees.

Well. Forget Treasury Secretary Tim Geitner. His first appearance on the public stage was less than impressive. Not only was it disappointing after having Obama tell us his news conference was going to be great, his lack of explanation about anything was frightening.

Then there is the man himself. Obama. A multi-billion dollar "stimulus" bill has just been passed with more spending than stimulating. States and cities are beginning to get realistic in balking. They realize that once the federal money goes away the new programs will become unsustainable unless taxes are raised to cover them. Being politicians, they are savvy enough to realize it can be a re-election killer. The same goes for the banks who don't want the money because they don't want the Feds involved. The same goes for the auto industry. At least Ford. No one with an ounce of sense wants politicians anywhere near their businesses.

Now Obama is telling us he is going to cut this deficit by two thirds by the end of his first term. How? By raising taxes on businesses and the wealthy and cutting spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Math is not my strong suit but I'm not too bad at logic. No matter how much you raise taxes on businesses, it boils down to one thing. The consumer, you and I, pay it via pass throughs. Taxing the wealthy? How many times has "wealthy" been redefined? Cutting spending in Iraq and Afghanistan? We're not out of Iraq yet and there is no solid strategy as to exactly how or exactly when of which I am aware. An additional 17,000 troops have just been allocated to Afghanistan with the generals saying it will not be enough in the long run. What's going to be cut? Equipment? Again? I don't think so!

Okay. Maybe there are plans in the making yet to be made public. I certainly am not privy to all that goes on behind the scenes. I can only form an opinion from the information given. When I'm told, with great fanfare, that the average family is going to see an extra $67 in their paycheck beginning in April, I'm always glad I haven't a mouth full of coffee.

What the heck does $67 buy these days? Certainly not groceries for a family of two what's more a family of four or larger! If this is the "stimulus" to encourage we tax payers to go out and spend, spend, spend, they've got to be kidding! Someone is smoking something funny. It isn't me. I don't even smoke legal stuff. Forgetting the health issues, I flat out can't afford it!