I know politics is like making sausage, but what we are witnessing with the health care legislation is much more disgusting. Right in front of our eyes we are watching extortion, bribery and theft by the highest levels of our government. And they have so little respect for morality and the citizens of this country that they not only do all this in public but they brag about it as they do it. And they think we are powerless to stop them and we are, if we let it happen. But there is a solution.
The solution is the left and the right, both, feel they are being ignored by the Congress and the White House. And while we may disagree on outcomes, I think we can agree that this arrogance needs to be addressed. I recommend the only solution is to vote every incumbent, at state and national levels, out of office. Let the right and the left support their choices for office as they wish. But just as a matter asserting our will as the "country of the people, by the people and for the people" we should kick every currently elected official out of office. We should through diligence, not term limits, only to allow those we elect to serve two terms at most until those we elect understand they are public servants, serving we the people.
In the immediate future all states which have not gotten sweetheart health care deal from Senator Reid should require their Senators to hold out for one. What is good for Vermont, Nebraska and Louisiana should be good enough for all states, particularly since those that don't get a special deal not only don't get a special deal, they also have to pay for every of state that does. It is the least we should expect our crooked, ethically challenged public servants to do for us. If they don't we should kick them out of office, which of course we are going to anyway. Right?
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Obama's Peace Prize Speech
In regards to Pollitico's question about Obama's Peace Prize speech: "What do you think of President Barack Obama's acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize?"
For me it does not matter what Obama says. One, he makes too many speeches for them to be his own. Two, obviously, the administration has a speech factory in operation run by Axelrod and Emanuel. Speeches on every topic, from every angle, some are contradictory of each other and many contradictory to the actions of Obama and his administration are generated within the group of speech writers. Three, in this case, I like much of what he said, I just don't believe Obama believes all of what he said. I think Axelrod gave him a speech that would allow Obama to have it both ways. Getting the peace prize satisfied the left; saying what he said satisfied the right. Obama wins. The polls tick up.
With Obama it is absolutely essential to only watch what he does, not what he says. To use a basketball analogy that he will get; watch Obama's belt buckle, not the head fake.
For me it does not matter what Obama says. One, he makes too many speeches for them to be his own. Two, obviously, the administration has a speech factory in operation run by Axelrod and Emanuel. Speeches on every topic, from every angle, some are contradictory of each other and many contradictory to the actions of Obama and his administration are generated within the group of speech writers. Three, in this case, I like much of what he said, I just don't believe Obama believes all of what he said. I think Axelrod gave him a speech that would allow Obama to have it both ways. Getting the peace prize satisfied the left; saying what he said satisfied the right. Obama wins. The polls tick up.
With Obama it is absolutely essential to only watch what he does, not what he says. To use a basketball analogy that he will get; watch Obama's belt buckle, not the head fake.
Friday, November 27, 2009
My response to Politico's Arena Question of the Day:
Should Obama hit the reset button on the White House? If so, where might he find it?
One has to look at this from President Obama's perspective and then ask the question can I transform this country sufficiently through legislation and the application of regulatory power to meet the expectations of a growing electorate whose interests rest in redistribution of wealth and the provision of services by the central government? If so, these results, and not the creation of jobs in the private sector, will be the foundation upon which I base my next election and my legacy.
The only other alternative is for him to embrace long term tax cuts to encourage private sector investment and job creation. This approach would reward private enterprise and undermine the tax policy that he believes will fuel big government largess and his legacy of "change you can believe in" would be destroyed.
Obama is willing to run the risk that his policies of redistributive wealth, greater government control and provision of basic social services will win the day and appeal to a growing number of people, and with immigration reform growing faster, who want these rewards more than they ever wanted jobs.
I am a private citizen and I am not being paid to contribute this opinion.
One has to look at this from President Obama's perspective and then ask the question can I transform this country sufficiently through legislation and the application of regulatory power to meet the expectations of a growing electorate whose interests rest in redistribution of wealth and the provision of services by the central government? If so, these results, and not the creation of jobs in the private sector, will be the foundation upon which I base my next election and my legacy.
The only other alternative is for him to embrace long term tax cuts to encourage private sector investment and job creation. This approach would reward private enterprise and undermine the tax policy that he believes will fuel big government largess and his legacy of "change you can believe in" would be destroyed.
Obama is willing to run the risk that his policies of redistributive wealth, greater government control and provision of basic social services will win the day and appeal to a growing number of people, and with immigration reform growing faster, who want these rewards more than they ever wanted jobs.
I am a private citizen and I am not being paid to contribute this opinion.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Lou Dobbs for President?
I now support a proposal that only a few months ago I would have thought silly and illogical; vote everyone out of office. I mean as a matter of policy and just for drill, vote every incumbent up for election out of office and continue to do that until every politician now serving in every level of government is gone. And then just let newly elected public servants serve one or two term maximum. And not though term limits but by the conscious determination of each voter in each election.
Why? To send a clear, unambiguous message that "we the people" run this country and that the term "public servant" takes on the truer meaning of servant.
If Lew Dobbs runs with that as one of his platforms I will dedicate my time and money to his campaign. I don't know a lot about him, but enough to justify his service for at least one term as a better alternative to any and every current serving politician.
The scene going on now in Washington is "not watching sausage made", its watching baby bunnies beaten with a baseball bats. It is ugly, criminal, bribery using taxer payer taxes by one politician to bribe another. And it is done in daylight, bragged about on the Senate floor with impunity. All this as the American dream floats out to sea is sunk overladen with debt.
Send all these offspring of dogs home.
Why? To send a clear, unambiguous message that "we the people" run this country and that the term "public servant" takes on the truer meaning of servant.
If Lew Dobbs runs with that as one of his platforms I will dedicate my time and money to his campaign. I don't know a lot about him, but enough to justify his service for at least one term as a better alternative to any and every current serving politician.
The scene going on now in Washington is "not watching sausage made", its watching baby bunnies beaten with a baseball bats. It is ugly, criminal, bribery using taxer payer taxes by one politician to bribe another. And it is done in daylight, bragged about on the Senate floor with impunity. All this as the American dream floats out to sea is sunk overladen with debt.
Send all these offspring of dogs home.
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Healthcare and White House Attack on FOX News
My contempt for this administration is limitless. Right in front of our eyes they are deconstructing the most unique, open, powerful, yet imperfect, social and governmental system in the history of the world. And most of our citizen are oblivious to their actions or like it. Given the administrations direction, America, the balance of power and the force for good in the world will disappear. We will not like what will fills the void; will not like the society that will take its place and, individually, we will miss the limitless American dream the each of us can achieve, with freedom, whatever we can visualize. That will go away. In its place we will have governmental control, predatory taxation of the wealthy until they become extinct and then the dull, lifeless existence becomes the norm for everyone and the chaos that will fill the world without power and morality at the helm. And they will do this by ignoring the real causes of health care cost increase and, instead pass legislation to achieve their political aims, not healthcare needs. They will do this buy seceding to world governments our sovereignty. And the administration can publicly and overtly attack a right leaning news organization while adding several others that are clearly and only liberal opinion journals to the White House press corp and no one says “boo” (its Halloween). The story is reported today and will be gone by tomorrow and the American people either don't understand its significance or won't care until it is too late.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Public Option
The public option is an alternative to the current supposed pricing gouging and denial of coverage by private insurance companies. Well, belatedly, this week, we see reports that insurance industry profit margins are well below many other industries. So providing a tax funded alternative to compel private insurance to lower their costs will insure the insurance industry will fail. What we will have left is tax funded non-competitive government single payer system without any incentive or ability to lower costs. The without any competition costs will spiral out of control or medical services, at the same or higher price, will be rationed; another form of denial of service, just more systemic.
So what is it will have we gained by the program now being pushed by the democrats? Certainly not lowered medical costs. Cost of medical services in this country are attributed to state regulations that limit national competition, defense medicine wherein doctors order up tests and procedures to limit malpractice suits and the cost necessary to support the best medical system in the world. Of these three factors, the first two are not even addressed by the bills now in congress and the third is something we ought to be proud to have. We will then have taxed, borrowed and spent trillions of dollars to insure a small fraction of the population who can afford but don't want to pay for insurance or can't pay for it but now have access to public health alternatives.
The question is why is the administration and the congress doing this? Certainly not to lower medical cost because they are in fact not even addressing the real cost issues. The driving force in this “reform” is a mix of increased governmental control, muddled economic thinking, kowtowing to their emotional, illogical democratic base and just giving into closely held Marxist leanings. This whole effort of the administration and the democratic congress is just plain stupid and very destructive and on some level, with some people, consciously doing this, treasonous.
So what is it will have we gained by the program now being pushed by the democrats? Certainly not lowered medical costs. Cost of medical services in this country are attributed to state regulations that limit national competition, defense medicine wherein doctors order up tests and procedures to limit malpractice suits and the cost necessary to support the best medical system in the world. Of these three factors, the first two are not even addressed by the bills now in congress and the third is something we ought to be proud to have. We will then have taxed, borrowed and spent trillions of dollars to insure a small fraction of the population who can afford but don't want to pay for insurance or can't pay for it but now have access to public health alternatives.
The question is why is the administration and the congress doing this? Certainly not to lower medical cost because they are in fact not even addressing the real cost issues. The driving force in this “reform” is a mix of increased governmental control, muddled economic thinking, kowtowing to their emotional, illogical democratic base and just giving into closely held Marxist leanings. This whole effort of the administration and the democratic congress is just plain stupid and very destructive and on some level, with some people, consciously doing this, treasonous.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Email to Obama August 16th, 2009
I watched one of your "town halls". You emphasized only points upon which many would agree need fixing: arbitrary cancellation of insurance, preconditions, etc. It was very artful. What you left out and will not address is more telling. You are relying on the American people agreeing with what you say and hoping they won't learn about what you will not address. That is why all your emergency bills, that need to be passed immediately, are hundreds and hundreds of pages long; only better to hide the elements you don't want us to know about. But the fact is the bill you want passed and you haven't read, has many other poor policies that are not acceptable to many of us.
Many of the things you spoke of which need fixing could be resolved by competition and with small incremental changes. Individual bills limited to specific issues clearly outlining cause and effect with specific solutions would work just as well. Such as tort reform, cross state competition, etc. But that would not suit your larger agenda. Clearly the public option will eventually kill private insurance. You know that. That is your plan. Watch your own SEIU video. You say that is not the plan. You know cost can only be held down under your plan by rationing since eventually there will be no competitive incentive to reduce price. Well, maybe you don't know that because there is no evidence you understand the capitalistic system.
You would say "I have no larger agenda". But we are allowed to believe you do because of your past statements on single payer policy, your past associations, your obfuscation and our growing distrust of you. You say we must do this now, immediately, without line by line debate because of the growing deficit. If you really cared about the growing deficit you would not have signed that piece of crap stimulus bill; a liberal earmark, spending bill with no near term positive impact on the recession and only long term inflationary impact and multi-generational debt.
You are not to be believed. Worse your continued pursuit of your socialist agenda while lying about your intent further erodes faith in our political system and our Constitutional foundation because now we see how artfully it can be manipulated with leaders in congress, with the support of the President, passing laws too big to comprehend and not even read by those who vote on them and sign them.
The only alternative is to throw everyone out and start over with an administration and legislative body responsive to the people. Simultaneously we must undue the liberal indoctrination of the American people who have lost sight of the American dream, who were never taught the fundamentals of our governmental system, and now are blindly happy to become wards of the state. Essentially, these people to whom I refer are the people who voted for you.
Many of the things you spoke of which need fixing could be resolved by competition and with small incremental changes. Individual bills limited to specific issues clearly outlining cause and effect with specific solutions would work just as well. Such as tort reform, cross state competition, etc. But that would not suit your larger agenda. Clearly the public option will eventually kill private insurance. You know that. That is your plan. Watch your own SEIU video. You say that is not the plan. You know cost can only be held down under your plan by rationing since eventually there will be no competitive incentive to reduce price. Well, maybe you don't know that because there is no evidence you understand the capitalistic system.
You would say "I have no larger agenda". But we are allowed to believe you do because of your past statements on single payer policy, your past associations, your obfuscation and our growing distrust of you. You say we must do this now, immediately, without line by line debate because of the growing deficit. If you really cared about the growing deficit you would not have signed that piece of crap stimulus bill; a liberal earmark, spending bill with no near term positive impact on the recession and only long term inflationary impact and multi-generational debt.
You are not to be believed. Worse your continued pursuit of your socialist agenda while lying about your intent further erodes faith in our political system and our Constitutional foundation because now we see how artfully it can be manipulated with leaders in congress, with the support of the President, passing laws too big to comprehend and not even read by those who vote on them and sign them.
The only alternative is to throw everyone out and start over with an administration and legislative body responsive to the people. Simultaneously we must undue the liberal indoctrination of the American people who have lost sight of the American dream, who were never taught the fundamentals of our governmental system, and now are blindly happy to become wards of the state. Essentially, these people to whom I refer are the people who voted for you.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Feinstein on "Cap and Tax"
Re your response to my email regarding Cap and Tax and your response: "I believe that there is convincing scientific evidence that climate change is happening, and I have come to conclude that the cost of failing to act far exceeds the cost of taking the necessary steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and make a permanent shift towards clean, renewable energy and energy efficient technologies. Please know that I appreciate hearing your concerns and remain committed to advancing measures that address climate change, create jobs and increase our energy independence."
But there is not convincing evidence that humans are causing climate change and therefore legislation to change energy use habits is a wasteful lost opportunity. Green energy does not have the potential to replace fossil fuel as an effective one to one replacement option. An alternative that makes sense is to use our own fossil fuel resources and to develop nuclear energy, both of which do have the ability to reduce our reliance on foreign sources. Also, unilaterally reducing our output will have no effect if China and India do not. So passage of this bill will put the US at a competitive disadvantage and ultimately not change the environment in any significant way. There is no evidence our green efforts will encourage the Chinese or the Indian to follow suit, nor should they because they understand how limited green alternatives are.
The liberal democrats have been stopping all efforts to develop these energy sources for years. Now they say it will take years for them to be developed and useful. When Thomas Jefferson's White House gardener objected to planting magnolias at the White House because it would be hundred years before they would be sizable, Jefferson replied "then we should plant them right away". So stop wasting time.
I think you are smart enough and wise enough to have the courage to stop following the polls, stop pandering to your constituents and start speaking logic and educating voters regarding the adoption of energy self-sufficiency including fossil fuels and nuclear that will also create jobs and will actually create real usable replacement energy. In the meantime we can continue to figure out how to get enough power from the wind and the sun.
Frankly, the is something going on here which is not satisfied by logic.
But there is not convincing evidence that humans are causing climate change and therefore legislation to change energy use habits is a wasteful lost opportunity. Green energy does not have the potential to replace fossil fuel as an effective one to one replacement option. An alternative that makes sense is to use our own fossil fuel resources and to develop nuclear energy, both of which do have the ability to reduce our reliance on foreign sources. Also, unilaterally reducing our output will have no effect if China and India do not. So passage of this bill will put the US at a competitive disadvantage and ultimately not change the environment in any significant way. There is no evidence our green efforts will encourage the Chinese or the Indian to follow suit, nor should they because they understand how limited green alternatives are.
The liberal democrats have been stopping all efforts to develop these energy sources for years. Now they say it will take years for them to be developed and useful. When Thomas Jefferson's White House gardener objected to planting magnolias at the White House because it would be hundred years before they would be sizable, Jefferson replied "then we should plant them right away". So stop wasting time.
I think you are smart enough and wise enough to have the courage to stop following the polls, stop pandering to your constituents and start speaking logic and educating voters regarding the adoption of energy self-sufficiency including fossil fuels and nuclear that will also create jobs and will actually create real usable replacement energy. In the meantime we can continue to figure out how to get enough power from the wind and the sun.
Frankly, the is something going on here which is not satisfied by logic.
Monday, May 4, 2009
Obama Attacks Wall Street - Reassigns Private Sector Career Choices
Mr. Obama:
You want to significantly regulate derivatives trading on Wall Street to limit what you consider to be unacceptable risk. You also note this intended regulation will reallocate mathematically gifted young professionals to other careers smacks of the old Soviet Union. Pretty soon you are going to decide we could make more shoes if we only made shoes for the left foot or we could build apartment buildings faster if we left stairwells out of the design.
With your limited understanding of finance and direction soon banks will only be able to loan the money they only actually have in their vaults and we can revert to the banking system of the early 19th century. Perhaps you want the the United States to exit the financial industry and leave it to other countries. That would work well with Geithner's (The Tax Cheater) interest in pursuing an international currency alternative to the the dollar.
I would like to see the U.S. return to being a industrial producer nation including enticements for the study of the hard sciences and mathematics and to induce more people to accept careers that leverage those skills in our new and legacy industries. But I do not share the opinion that the creation and trading of derivatives is a phony or frivolous endeavor. It is a critical component of the money cycle and essential for the economic growth. Without derivatives we would be unable securitized loan portfolios and without the secondary market the cost of money would be so high that liquidity would dry up, interest rates would be exorbitant and the economy would tank; not cyclically, but permanently.
If the U.S. financial markets become so over regulated that they are no long competitive then financial activities will merely shift offshore. The result will be that others will totally control our financial destiny. (Perhaps that is another initiative in your long term plan of unsupportable deficit spending and debt to give China even more control over our financial future.) Just as you have recently demonized the Chrysler bond holders, who have fiduciary responsibility to many investors they represent, you have chosen to demonize Wall Street for political advantage out of your own distrust of the capitalist system. It easy for you to cynically target certain market segments by promoting class warfare to further your socialistic aims. I can see where many Americans cannot understand this. And unfortunately you understand this and rely on it to carry forward your socialistic goals.
Assuming it is even within the scope of your duties to micro manage the allocations of skills within our free market system, which do not accept, I would prefer your efforts went into to creating opportunity based upon free market driven criteria rather than close down segments to which you arbitrarily and stupidly object.
A very angry and dissatisfied citizen.
You want to significantly regulate derivatives trading on Wall Street to limit what you consider to be unacceptable risk. You also note this intended regulation will reallocate mathematically gifted young professionals to other careers smacks of the old Soviet Union. Pretty soon you are going to decide we could make more shoes if we only made shoes for the left foot or we could build apartment buildings faster if we left stairwells out of the design.
With your limited understanding of finance and direction soon banks will only be able to loan the money they only actually have in their vaults and we can revert to the banking system of the early 19th century. Perhaps you want the the United States to exit the financial industry and leave it to other countries. That would work well with Geithner's (The Tax Cheater) interest in pursuing an international currency alternative to the the dollar.
I would like to see the U.S. return to being a industrial producer nation including enticements for the study of the hard sciences and mathematics and to induce more people to accept careers that leverage those skills in our new and legacy industries. But I do not share the opinion that the creation and trading of derivatives is a phony or frivolous endeavor. It is a critical component of the money cycle and essential for the economic growth. Without derivatives we would be unable securitized loan portfolios and without the secondary market the cost of money would be so high that liquidity would dry up, interest rates would be exorbitant and the economy would tank; not cyclically, but permanently.
If the U.S. financial markets become so over regulated that they are no long competitive then financial activities will merely shift offshore. The result will be that others will totally control our financial destiny. (Perhaps that is another initiative in your long term plan of unsupportable deficit spending and debt to give China even more control over our financial future.) Just as you have recently demonized the Chrysler bond holders, who have fiduciary responsibility to many investors they represent, you have chosen to demonize Wall Street for political advantage out of your own distrust of the capitalist system. It easy for you to cynically target certain market segments by promoting class warfare to further your socialistic aims. I can see where many Americans cannot understand this. And unfortunately you understand this and rely on it to carry forward your socialistic goals.
Assuming it is even within the scope of your duties to micro manage the allocations of skills within our free market system, which do not accept, I would prefer your efforts went into to creating opportunity based upon free market driven criteria rather than close down segments to which you arbitrarily and stupidly object.
A very angry and dissatisfied citizen.
Monday, April 27, 2009
History Repeats Itself
Yesterday on CBS' Face the Nation Senator Patrick Leahy (D - Vt.) Chairman of the Judiciary Committee said a special commission is required to get to the bottom of the Bush-era interrogation policies:
"It is not from some idea of vengeance in doing this. But we know that there were a number of people that made the decision to violate the law, a number of people who said that we don't have to follow our Constitution, others who wrote memos basically saying the president and the vice president are above the law".
He says "we know", but where is the specific proof for that statement. How does Leahy "know" the motivation of people in the Bush administration as he contends? From Leahy's point of view Leahy's truth justifies an investigation. And so here we go again. We have a very entrenched, polarizing politician, with leadership by tenure, from a politically protected district, engaged with his liberal constituency in the symbiotic blood thirst hatred of all things Republican.
(June 2009 update: If only Leahy was as concerned with unusual, a perhaps illegal, termination by President Obama of Gerald Walpin, the AmeriCorps inspector general.)
Somehow it is not enough for some of these people agree "that is why we have elections" and to allow that the opposition were duly elected representatives of the people doing what they believed to be right under very threatening circumstances.
Now there is posturing by many in government saying 'water boarding, shocking! I didn't know they were doing water boarding". I feel somehow I was secretly privy to national security secrets not even known to the now Secretary of the State and Speaker of the House who are amazed and dismayed these methods could be have ever been used. It was all over the news, with demonstrations of the technique, everything. And they were in positions of power, in the House and Senate, high rolling players within the Beltway? And now they are shocked? This is all posturing and positioning to absolve themselves in the eyes of their liberal constituents for their past inaction. If they now want to be shocked, then they now should also be ridiculed for being naive and oblivious.
Then there are the questions, what is torture? Is water boarding torture? Others say "but we are the United States, we don't torture". We have a huge array of weapons to defend our national security. But we are not allowed to have water boarding as a weapon against terrorist bent on killing our citizens and destroying our way of life? Terrorist who neither adhere to nor are covered by the Geneva Convention so conveniently and frequently brought up in their defense.
In 2001 we asked, "why didn't we know about these terrorists plots?" The answer, The Church Hearings, where we eliminated the CIA's use of human intelligence from unsavory foreign sources. So here we go again repeating history by failing to remember it. We will be blind to terrorist threats because we unilaterally choose to limit access to the insights of those captured. This is exacerbated by other misguided decisions now underway that are testing our inclination to even capture and imprison those sworn to our destruction in favor of conducting a strange hybrid combination of warfare and judicial proceedings.
Why can't Enhanced Interrogation Techniques just be part of the arsenal at the disposal of the President, to use or not use, at his discretion, to protect the country? And if he chooses to ignore detention and enhanced interrogation and we are attacked, then "that's why we have elections" (and impeachment).
Taking the lead from Leahy's propensity to assign motivation, I suggest Leahy's motivation for a "truth commission", is Leahy wants pay back for Dick Cheney once telling him "to go fuck yourself' "; a sentiment I then and now share.
"It is not from some idea of vengeance in doing this. But we know that there were a number of people that made the decision to violate the law, a number of people who said that we don't have to follow our Constitution, others who wrote memos basically saying the president and the vice president are above the law".
He says "we know", but where is the specific proof for that statement. How does Leahy "know" the motivation of people in the Bush administration as he contends? From Leahy's point of view Leahy's truth justifies an investigation. And so here we go again. We have a very entrenched, polarizing politician, with leadership by tenure, from a politically protected district, engaged with his liberal constituency in the symbiotic blood thirst hatred of all things Republican.
(June 2009 update: If only Leahy was as concerned with unusual, a perhaps illegal, termination by President Obama of Gerald Walpin, the AmeriCorps inspector general.)
Somehow it is not enough for some of these people agree "that is why we have elections" and to allow that the opposition were duly elected representatives of the people doing what they believed to be right under very threatening circumstances.
Now there is posturing by many in government saying 'water boarding, shocking! I didn't know they were doing water boarding". I feel somehow I was secretly privy to national security secrets not even known to the now Secretary of the State and Speaker of the House who are amazed and dismayed these methods could be have ever been used. It was all over the news, with demonstrations of the technique, everything. And they were in positions of power, in the House and Senate, high rolling players within the Beltway? And now they are shocked? This is all posturing and positioning to absolve themselves in the eyes of their liberal constituents for their past inaction. If they now want to be shocked, then they now should also be ridiculed for being naive and oblivious.
Then there are the questions, what is torture? Is water boarding torture? Others say "but we are the United States, we don't torture". We have a huge array of weapons to defend our national security. But we are not allowed to have water boarding as a weapon against terrorist bent on killing our citizens and destroying our way of life? Terrorist who neither adhere to nor are covered by the Geneva Convention so conveniently and frequently brought up in their defense.
In 2001 we asked, "why didn't we know about these terrorists plots?" The answer, The Church Hearings, where we eliminated the CIA's use of human intelligence from unsavory foreign sources. So here we go again repeating history by failing to remember it. We will be blind to terrorist threats because we unilaterally choose to limit access to the insights of those captured. This is exacerbated by other misguided decisions now underway that are testing our inclination to even capture and imprison those sworn to our destruction in favor of conducting a strange hybrid combination of warfare and judicial proceedings.
Why can't Enhanced Interrogation Techniques just be part of the arsenal at the disposal of the President, to use or not use, at his discretion, to protect the country? And if he chooses to ignore detention and enhanced interrogation and we are attacked, then "that's why we have elections" (and impeachment).
Taking the lead from Leahy's propensity to assign motivation, I suggest Leahy's motivation for a "truth commission", is Leahy wants pay back for Dick Cheney once telling him "to go fuck yourself' "; a sentiment I then and now share.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
The Lessons of AIG: Deceit, Mob Rule and Leadership
An open letter to Congress and the Administration.
Outrage by Congress and the Administration over AIG retention bonuses is a deceitful mask. You will not admit these bonuses are allowed in the stimulus bill you passed but did not read. If you knew it was allowed in the bill and now pass yourself off as having been deceived you are fundamentally dishonest.
I don't know, you don't know and the American public does not know if the individuals in AIG's Financial Products Group receiving retention bonuses deserve them or not. We don't specifically know if these individuals are the cause or the solution to the current AIG problems. Trying to be "more Catholic than the Pope" you feign outrage to impress your constituency with your fake passion, threaten AIG employees compensation with unconstitutional taxation and now, perhaps inadvertently, jeopardize their safety. And, in the process, you have failed as the stewards of our investment by condemning the management and employees of AIG without study or logic.
When you in the administration and the congress decided to get involved in the financial crisis you also decided to ignore the old axiom “buyer beware”. You erred by not understanding the implications of the AIG bailout, failed after the fact to mitigate the weaknesses of the plan, failed by passing a bill you did not read and then failed to understand you did not know how to manage your new “business”, and when the s—t hit the fan you blamed everyone except yourselves.
The response of principled politician on the public outcry over retention bonuses should be “we have obviously made some errors here. The American people need to understand many AIG employees are talented people involved in very technical, complex financial products that are essential to making financial markets work. While many of the public may not understand how and why they get paid what they get paid, it is important to know that some of these people have education, training and experience that very few people possess and therefore they are essential to the future success of AIG and to the protection of our investment. On the other hand, because of the AIG mess, it is clear some people who worked at AIG or still work there are stupid or criminal. Since the government is now a majority stakeholder in AIG we must make sure AIG management knows into which group their employees fall and reward and eliminate them accordingly. That is what I, as your elected representative, will make sure is done from here on out.”
This is how you lead. Not by running to the front of misguided, emotional mob and heightening its rhetoric. Instead be a leader. Be a statesman (stateswoman). Help the electorate understand the complexity of the the problem, how it must be fixed and what you will do to insure it is done. Do what is right or go home.
Outrage by Congress and the Administration over AIG retention bonuses is a deceitful mask. You will not admit these bonuses are allowed in the stimulus bill you passed but did not read. If you knew it was allowed in the bill and now pass yourself off as having been deceived you are fundamentally dishonest.
I don't know, you don't know and the American public does not know if the individuals in AIG's Financial Products Group receiving retention bonuses deserve them or not. We don't specifically know if these individuals are the cause or the solution to the current AIG problems. Trying to be "more Catholic than the Pope" you feign outrage to impress your constituency with your fake passion, threaten AIG employees compensation with unconstitutional taxation and now, perhaps inadvertently, jeopardize their safety. And, in the process, you have failed as the stewards of our investment by condemning the management and employees of AIG without study or logic.
When you in the administration and the congress decided to get involved in the financial crisis you also decided to ignore the old axiom “buyer beware”. You erred by not understanding the implications of the AIG bailout, failed after the fact to mitigate the weaknesses of the plan, failed by passing a bill you did not read and then failed to understand you did not know how to manage your new “business”, and when the s—t hit the fan you blamed everyone except yourselves.
The response of principled politician on the public outcry over retention bonuses should be “we have obviously made some errors here. The American people need to understand many AIG employees are talented people involved in very technical, complex financial products that are essential to making financial markets work. While many of the public may not understand how and why they get paid what they get paid, it is important to know that some of these people have education, training and experience that very few people possess and therefore they are essential to the future success of AIG and to the protection of our investment. On the other hand, because of the AIG mess, it is clear some people who worked at AIG or still work there are stupid or criminal. Since the government is now a majority stakeholder in AIG we must make sure AIG management knows into which group their employees fall and reward and eliminate them accordingly. That is what I, as your elected representative, will make sure is done from here on out.”
This is how you lead. Not by running to the front of misguided, emotional mob and heightening its rhetoric. Instead be a leader. Be a statesman (stateswoman). Help the electorate understand the complexity of the the problem, how it must be fixed and what you will do to insure it is done. Do what is right or go home.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Omen VI: The Chicago Incubus
I sent this to the White House based upon a New York Times article regarding the Administration's plan to limit all Financial Service Executive compensation.
The NY Times article is coming out tomorrow.
Email:
So you are floating the banking salary and bonus limitation story through the NY Times to see what the reaction is.
Here is my reaction.
While banks are an important element of the business cycle, they are still basically private concerns under our capitalistic system. How they operate and what type of performance measurements they deploy and rewards they offer should largely be monitored by the shareholders.
Unfortunately most shareholders don't have a clue about how a performance measurement goal should be written and how to determine if it is being met.
But of course you knew this when you saw the country accept your ridiculous, unmeasurable goal of 'saving" four million jobs. How can one measure saving jobs?
Instead of trying to create class warfare, mob rule and hatred of the rich, something you gathered at your liberal mother's knee and hid from your schoolmates at the elite schools you were able to attend, and now are using to deflect attention from your own limitations and not so hidden aspirations to socialize this country, you should instead focus not on micro managing and destroying the banking system and you should be trying to construct legislation that helps shareholders determine what reasonable performance measurements are and for banks to clearly report against these measurements.
And in this way, shareholders and citizens can more effectively monitor and manage our capitalistic system instead of you and your cabal trying to dictate it from the White House and spread the riches around to your needy supplicants.
I, for one, believe, over the last sixty days, I have been watching the next installment of the movie "The Omen" where the anti-Christ moves to destroy the world by internally destroying the only country standing between good and evil.
I have long held the belief the American people are well centered and have always put us back on course. I only hope this is true before you do too much damage.
The NY Times article is coming out tomorrow.
Email:
So you are floating the banking salary and bonus limitation story through the NY Times to see what the reaction is.
Here is my reaction.
While banks are an important element of the business cycle, they are still basically private concerns under our capitalistic system. How they operate and what type of performance measurements they deploy and rewards they offer should largely be monitored by the shareholders.
Unfortunately most shareholders don't have a clue about how a performance measurement goal should be written and how to determine if it is being met.
But of course you knew this when you saw the country accept your ridiculous, unmeasurable goal of 'saving" four million jobs. How can one measure saving jobs?
Instead of trying to create class warfare, mob rule and hatred of the rich, something you gathered at your liberal mother's knee and hid from your schoolmates at the elite schools you were able to attend, and now are using to deflect attention from your own limitations and not so hidden aspirations to socialize this country, you should instead focus not on micro managing and destroying the banking system and you should be trying to construct legislation that helps shareholders determine what reasonable performance measurements are and for banks to clearly report against these measurements.
And in this way, shareholders and citizens can more effectively monitor and manage our capitalistic system instead of you and your cabal trying to dictate it from the White House and spread the riches around to your needy supplicants.
I, for one, believe, over the last sixty days, I have been watching the next installment of the movie "The Omen" where the anti-Christ moves to destroy the world by internally destroying the only country standing between good and evil.
I have long held the belief the American people are well centered and have always put us back on course. I only hope this is true before you do too much damage.
Friday, February 13, 2009
Email Sent to Rep. Ellen Tauscher - California's 10th District
Text of Email sent to Rep. Ellen Tauscher and sent to the Contra Costa Times as a letter to the Editor :
Your vote for the Stimulus Bill was amazingly stupid. This bill is an waste of taxpayer wealth. This bill will not create jobs in the short term, perhaps ever. It is loaded with expenditures that are payback for past and future votes. It will create inflation and a huge debt for future generations.More frustrating and depressing is the realization that this is major effort on the part of liberals to take the country in the direction of dependence on the government instead of reliance on private enterprise and personal initiative. It is a very cynical effort on your part, Pelosi's, McNerney's and Miller's, to name a few local villains.
Your actions and the manner in which this bill was forced through the congress are despicable. Not only were Republicans left out but it was passed without any members of congress even reading and understanding the specific elements of this bill before they were required to vote. The Congress chose to ignore their own advisers in the Congressional Budget Office. By the way, to make up for some of this waste, why don't you suggest to Pelosi to disband the CBO since you are not using it.
Your friend and leader, Pelosi, is a contemptuous shrew and is an embarrassment to the concept of democracy.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Bipartisanship - Overrated
Much lauded bipartisanship is greatly overrate.
To the Congress:
Just vote your conscious; not your career. Be willing to go home if your constituency objects. Vote for what you truly believe is right on the the issue at hand; not for a vote to be named later, more office space, a ride on Air Force One or an impressive committee assignment. Just do what is right or go home.
Bipartisanship is the source of muddled, weak legislation. It is the first step in plausible deniability and the lack of accountability.
Voters really don't care about bipartisanship. If they say they do, its only when they want the opposition to vote their way.
What voters care about is conscience, courage and commitment. Whatever your political views either side can admirer those traits.
To the Congress:
Just vote your conscious; not your career. Be willing to go home if your constituency objects. Vote for what you truly believe is right on the the issue at hand; not for a vote to be named later, more office space, a ride on Air Force One or an impressive committee assignment. Just do what is right or go home.
Bipartisanship is the source of muddled, weak legislation. It is the first step in plausible deniability and the lack of accountability.
Voters really don't care about bipartisanship. If they say they do, its only when they want the opposition to vote their way.
What voters care about is conscience, courage and commitment. Whatever your political views either side can admirer those traits.
Unions and the Executive Branch
On February 6, 2009 Mr. Obama signed an Executive Order: Use of Project Labor Agreements for Federal Construction Projects.
This order requires all building projects within the Executive Branch to be completed with union labor. The primary rationale assumes construction under a union contract is more stable, more predictable and less susceptible to labor disruption than non union labor.
When is the last time anyone saw non union workers disrupt a project? When is the last time you saw a union based business disrupt a project? Not fair counting today!
This is stupid!
This is dangerous!
My God, this is blatant payback to unions for their election financial support. More perverse, this is one spoke on the socialistic wheel. It is a key indicator of future actions including Card Check, the elimination of the secret ballot in unionization efforts, more unions, more union financing of Democratic campaigns, more union anti-business sentiment, less merit driven worker performance and reward, higher prices, socialized medicine, etc.
Write the press. Write the White House. Voice your dissatisfaction. Write and call your elected representatives. Create a blog. Send letters to the editor. Send money to campaigns supporting your views.
I Have Seen the Future and It All Turns Relatively Well
Obama was elected with a narrow margin by people who expect him to pay for their gas, buy them cars, buy them houses, get them promoted at MacDonald's, make them one hundred percent financially whole while on unemployment, etc. Obama's purposely vague campaign relied on each voter to project on him their individual aspirations and dreams. These voters expect him to deliver. I suspect even the liberal Obama is surprised by the nature of these personal pleadings and in his quite moments knows he will not be able to deliver on these infinite, unknown expectations his campaign strategy allowed to be created.
America is moving to the left, but it is not left yet. Obama's nominations of Daschle, Geithner, Richardson, Holder, Browner, Ogden, Kagan, some appointed and some not, some known and some soon to become known by their future dangerous actions will turn the middle voter against the radical elements of the Obama administration. America did not vote for socialism and the dismantling of our culture and our constitution. They voted against George Bush. -- "God punishes us when he answers our prayers". America will not like what they get when they get it.
The stimulus bill will fail to improve unemployment and the dark cloud of future inflation will be visible and the Obama administration will fail in its first term. The loyal opposition should continue to provide more viable alternatives and more time for each liberal initiative to be examined as they are pushed by administration and the Pelosi/Reid congress. What do we call this now, transparency?
The disenfranchised voters looking for an Obama handout will not turn out in the next election. They were voting for change and they got it -- $13.00 a week from the stimulus bill is the change they got. In the midterm elections enlightened voters in the middle not looking for a handout, those watching the results of the first two years will understand that Pelosi, Reid, Leahy, Obey, Rangel, et al do not represent the middle. And though the voters may not have direct influence to rid the congress of these people they will go out of their way to insure they don't send them allies. They will start the move to middle by electing conservatives. Obama will be taken care of in 2012.
I have seen the future and it works out relatively well if conservatives keep up the pressure and keep up the spotlight on the liberals. --- Well, that is, everything is OK except the more dire and uncontrolled international scene.
America is moving to the left, but it is not left yet. Obama's nominations of Daschle, Geithner, Richardson, Holder, Browner, Ogden, Kagan, some appointed and some not, some known and some soon to become known by their future dangerous actions will turn the middle voter against the radical elements of the Obama administration. America did not vote for socialism and the dismantling of our culture and our constitution. They voted against George Bush. -- "God punishes us when he answers our prayers". America will not like what they get when they get it.
The stimulus bill will fail to improve unemployment and the dark cloud of future inflation will be visible and the Obama administration will fail in its first term. The loyal opposition should continue to provide more viable alternatives and more time for each liberal initiative to be examined as they are pushed by administration and the Pelosi/Reid congress. What do we call this now, transparency?
The disenfranchised voters looking for an Obama handout will not turn out in the next election. They were voting for change and they got it -- $13.00 a week from the stimulus bill is the change they got. In the midterm elections enlightened voters in the middle not looking for a handout, those watching the results of the first two years will understand that Pelosi, Reid, Leahy, Obey, Rangel, et al do not represent the middle. And though the voters may not have direct influence to rid the congress of these people they will go out of their way to insure they don't send them allies. They will start the move to middle by electing conservatives. Obama will be taken care of in 2012.
I have seen the future and it works out relatively well if conservatives keep up the pressure and keep up the spotlight on the liberals. --- Well, that is, everything is OK except the more dire and uncontrolled international scene.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)