Ground Kerry Before More Harm Is Done

The debacle that is Obamacare is bringing a point home that has long been needed.  This administration is less than truthful on top of being inept.

The reasons are many for both.  One, they're trying to push an agenda by the American people knowing if it were transparent the people would rebel. To wit Obamacare.

To do so they've allowed people with questionable expertise in any aspect of health care craft the bill.  If they've done it on purpose to move the country toward single payer system they should all be thrown out of office.  It's not for them to decide; it's for us to decide.  If they've done it because they're inept the same holds true.

So, before things get any worse, it's time to ground John Kerry.  We're seeing now what the world already knows on an international scale.  This administration is weak and inept. It's foreign policy staggers like a drunken sailor.

Now, however, they are so in need of a victory they are willing to sacrifice a tenuous calm, with several exceptions at that, in an entire region of the world on the false pretense the Iranians would keep their word on anything. The rest of the world and previous administrations can't all be wrong when saying Iran cannot be trusted. We do know Obama is not all knowing and his word also cannot be trusted.

What about his success in Syria?  Ah, yes.  The death toll is now over 250,000.  The civil war continues having passed the 2 1/2 year mark.

But the weapons of mass destruction are being destroyed. So? People are still dying.  Are you aware of Assad's latest tactic?  Starvation. Systematic, slow, agonizing starvation. Loyalist troops are not only not letting aid into civilian and rebel strongholds, which in many cases are one and the same, but they are not allowing food  in either. Is there a worse way to die?

One soldier was heard telling a young boy begging to take a bag of pita bread through a government check point, "...there are those bigger than me and you who make the rules and they're watching you right now."

While the administration basks in the fact they didn't have to used military force to rid the Syrians of their poison gas, what are they doing for those who are starving?

Have you read or heard anything about this in our media?  Neither have I.  This came from the Financial Times  which covers international news far better than our media.

Be skeptical when the administration says negotiations with Iran need be given a chance. If you look at the situation in Syria, you'll see they are inept at that too.

This is no time for glory seeking to save a Presidential or a Secretary of State's legacy. Tighten the sanctions until the Iranians cry uncle and not before.  And hope those who once believed in our strength and loyalty will have it within them to give us another chance when we shed this administration.

But don't bet on it.

It's Time To Change The Programming

The evening airwaves between four and, say, eight are filled with redundancy no matter which channel you favor. I've gotten to the point I want to lash out like Jay Carney did not long ago to a CBS reporter.  "I get it, ...!"

If I see one more clip of Obama saying we can keep our health care, period and the talking head proceed to bug a guest  into say the President LIED, I'm going to get violent.  Then the host usually trots out a litany of citizens who have either lost their coverage or have seen their cost skyrocket.  Okay.  I get it!  How many times is that dead horse going to be beaten?

I beg to question, however, why don't they get it?  The disastrous roll out of the health care website is due to a lot of things, none of which have anything to do with the actual content of the bill.  You could say it shows the government should never get involved in anything in which it lacks expertise. Which is just about everything. It's a given but about as possible under this administration as Ted Cruz's attempt to defund the bill.

They're going to meddle because it's the nature of the beast.  Those in high places always think they know more than the rest of us even though most of them are there for no more than having been a loyal supporter of the man who holds the top job.

In truth, the problem with the bill is it's content.  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that when unnecessary benefits are added, demanded, the price is going to increase.  It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to know that those increased prices are going to preclude a lot of the very people they need because of that additional cost.  It should be easy to see that by saying only 5% or 15% of the people are being effected is ignoring the number of bodies actually effected which is in the millions.  A percentage is far more palatable and masks the fact real people with real needs make up that percentage. I could break it down even further but for space and time constraints.

Could the pundits help the case?  I think so but they won't because they have no imagination as to how to program plus it's easier to harangue than offer something of substance.

What would I do?  I'd seek out the Republicans who have had good ideas about how to fix the problem sit down for a serious panel discussion all in one place at the same time.  I'd have each lay out their ideas.  I'd not interrupt. I'd not allow them to interrupt each other.

When they were finished I'd ask them why they don't take themselves off the air, sit down together and piece together the best of each idea.  Then they select the most dynamic among them to be the spokesman for the plan and present it to the people in every venue that would have them.  And fight for those who wouldn't.  Just to keep it fair.  If, say, MSNBC said no thanks, let it be known by every means available.

Yep.  That's what I'd do.  It's the Dogwalk solution for Congressional  inertia and media complacency.

Red State Blues

Maybe Iowa and New Hampshire have the right idea.  I don't  believe either state should have the power in choosing our political nominees that they do because I don't think either is representative of the country as a whole.

That being said, what they do have is access to the candidates up close and personal.  What better way to assess a person than in person?

That's why I was so excited to see a headline in the local paper heralding the fact that Chris Christie was coming to northern Idaho!      Okay, he wasn't coming to campaign for himself but to help raise funds for our Governor.  I understand the need for fundraising, but it sure cuts out the little guy.  Especially in this economy.

Sure, the masses will be able to see him at a rally for a whole half hour for $50 a pop.  Oh well.  Out of my budget.  The big spenders will be able to attend a VIP reception for $1000 per couple.  Way out of the budget!

The problem is, this is likely to be the only time he comes close.  If he actually runs he may make a token visit to Boise, the capital, but that's it.  It's because we're such a solidly red state, the Republicans don't bother with us because we're a given.  The Democrats stay away too for the same yet opposite reason.  We're just here.  Taken for granted.  Do we have unaddressed concerns?  Does anyone really care?

It's back to voting by guess and by golly.  I can do no more to inform myself than to read as much as I can.  I didn't do enough of it with Obama and I've vowed not to make the same mistake twice. Listening to stump speeches tell me little and are so repetitious I get to the point of tuning them out.  Listening to the talking heads gives no more than slanted insight from those I feel sometimes are even less informed than I am.  It's perplexing.

I don't know if I'll still be interested in Christie when it gets closer to the presidential sweepstakes, but I'd have a better sense if I could actually see him.  Feel a handshake.  Is it strong?  Look him in the eye.  Do his eyes meet mine? Listen to him speak.  Is there a dynamic the television mics don't pick up? There is certainly the matter of context.

Back to business as usual. Reading, listening and trying to figure out the being within from afar.  No wonder we make so many bad decisions at the ballot box.  In most cases we haven't a clue for whom
we're voting!

Obama Has The Sadim Touch

What is the Sadim Touch?  The opposite of the Midas Touch. Where everything that is touched is turned into a mess.

In some respects perhaps we should be glad Obama has turned out to be a bystander President rather than a leader.  Everything he touches is either a pending disaster or an unmitigated mess.

Consider Fast and Furious, the IRS scandal, Benghazi, the NSA, violating reporter's privacy,  and now the ACA. Not just the roll out, but the consequences of poorly written and unread legislation  paired with too many "the Secretary shall"s. These are but a few of the unmitigated messes.

The pending disasters are more far reaching in that they are global.  Syria, where Assad gave up his chemical weapons in order to be able to continue slaughtering his people. Since Assad didn't really need them it was no punishment. Not following through on arming the once good guys thus allowing the extremists to gain a foothold.

Cutting off aid to Egypt because of the misguided assumption that because Morsi was duly elected he should remain in office no matter the increasingly dictatorial stance he was taking.

Libya.  What more needs to be said.  Over a year later no arrests for the consulate attack while the press has had a multitude of interviews with those involved.

And now he's about to ease sanctions on Iran with nothing in return.  No freeze on enrichment.  No dismantling of centrifuges.  Leaving everything in place for Iran's nuclear program to continue. Something that has been going on since June, actually.

So what happens now? No one has considered any of the U.S. actions in the middle east to be wise.  Essentially everyone will fend for themselves.  The Taliban in Pakistan has elected the man who threatened school girl Malala as their new leader. Iran will get its nuke.  Pakistan has agreed to sell nukes to Saudi Arabia. Saudi will continue arming the rebels in Syria.  Russia may provide the nuke for Syria if deemed  advantageous.  Jordan will probably fall,  Hamas and Hezbollah will be strengthened.  Iraq will lose out to Iran as will Afghanistan to the Taliban. Al Qaeda will continue to run rampant and spread across Somalia, the Sudan and throughout the weaker African states.

Then there is Israel. With friends like us they don't need enemies! Whatever they choose to do be sure we will not be forewarned.  We have opposed them, besmirched them and finally betrayed them.

All because Obama needed to divert attention from the ACA in an attempt to save his administration from total collapse.  What a trade off. Every mid eastern expert in the world takes exception to our policies if thats what you want to call them.  Peace in our time?  Not by this President's hand.

Unless the negotiations in Geneva come to a total stand still you'll hear the other shoe we've been waiting for - drop.

Some People Are Never Satisfied

When nothing else catches my attention I'll flip around the dial to see who is ranting about what.  FOX doesn't get much of a listen after Bret Baier finishes up at four.  I don't like the new lineup so it's usually reruns of Midsomer Murders, Foyle's War or whatever else might be on PBS.

Last night however, I caught a bit of Hannity who seems to be losing it.  He and Ann Coulter were trashing Chris Christie.

Not so long ago Ann Coulter was politically in love with Christie. "We have to nominate people who can win!" was her mantra. I guess it ended when he opted out of the presidential sweepstakes in 2012.

Last night is was a whole different story.  The election in New Jersey was calculated to be all about him., so she said. Well, yes, it was.  Had he not called for a special election to fill the  Senate seat of the late Frank Lautenberg  the Republicans would have won, so she claimed.  How so?  Once voters pulled the lever for Christie they'd have continued to vote Republican.  Booker, obviously, is a Democrat. He is also a super star of sorts. Not that we need another one in Washington, but it did help in his election.

Maybe it's a generational thing again, but voting a split ticket used to happen quite often.  Of course that was back when people bothered to look at the qualifications of a candidate, not just his/her party.  They even seemed to have done so when they first elected Christie, a Republican, in what is a very blue state.

Then the two were angry because he wouldn't take time to campaign in Virginia for Ken Cuccinelli.  Had he done so Cuccinelli could have won and they would have had another Republican governor! But no, it was all about the selfish Christie.

And you wonder why I have no respect for these pundits who fill far too much air time.  The crux of the problem is too many "conservatives" are trying to mold every Republican that runs into the "conservative" image.  Christie won't budge.  His responsibility is doing the best he can for his state and he at least realizes that includes working with the opposition.  What a novel approach! Do you suppose that's why he wins?

Funny, Christie is still the politician Coulter loved.  He still wins.  Quite handily I might add.  It's refreshing to see a politician who isn't afraid to buck pundit pressure and to what is necessary to get the job done.

Is he smart enough to be able to handle the very different presidential primaries?  Time will tell if he runs, but I'm willing to bet he'll figure it out.

As for Coulter, Hannity et al, if they'd spend more time promoting the positive about candidates rather than having a hissy fit because Christie would not call the President a liar, more good would come of it.

If and until they stifle their antagonistic manner, they're not worth the air time they are given.  Note that. Given.  If viewers had to pay, a whole lot of that time would be up for grabs.  If I'm going to pay, whoever is speaking had best have something worthwhile to say.  Maybe that's why there is so much better programming on PBS.  We viewers help pay for it.