Is there too much government in your life?
View Results
Our President spoke today. I’ve reviewed the transcript. I count 45 lies, 7 misleading statements and 3 revelations of his hidden agenda. His speech today, as are most of his speeches, was a comprehensive attempt to mislead the American People. Here’s my take on it:
The President of the United States of America speaks: THE PRESIDENT: “Good afternoon, everybody. I just concluded a productive discussion with the leaders of both parties in Congress.” (One lie. One misleading statement) REETZALITY: It was not a productive session. The president failed to set forth a single productive result from the meeting. PRESIDENT: This was one of a series of regular meetings that I called for in the State of the Union because I think it’s important for us to come together and speak frankly about the challenges we face and to work through areas where we don’t agree; hopefully find some areas where we do. (Three lies) REETZALITY: The President does not believe in coming together and he certainly doesn’t have the capability to speak frankly. If he did, he would reveal his agenda to socialize our nation and fundamentally transform us into something we are not. And Mr. President, “find some areas where we do” agree? Couldn’t you just have each side set forth their agenda and check for over-lap? Our president doesn’t believe in “reaching across the aisle” and for that I give him some credit. I wish some Republicans would act likewise like McCain, Graham, Snow, Collins and Brown. You don’t compromise on principles folks. PRESIDENT: “Our conversation today focused on an issue that’s being discussed every day at kitchen tables across this country — and that’s how do we create jobs that people need to support their families.” (One misleading statement)
REETZALITY: Mr. President, you don’t create jobs, the private sector does. And just because you might loosen the noose strangling free enterprise doesn’t give you the right to take credit for what occurs with the limited freedom you’ve allowed. PRESIDENT: “I believe that starts with doing everything we can to support small businesses. These are the stores, the restaurants, the start-ups and other companies that create two out of every three new jobs in this country — and that grow into the big businesses that transform industries, here in America and around the world.” (One big lie) REETZALITY: “Everything we can to support small business?” Really, you shoved your health care down our throats hurting small business. You passed financial reform, hurting small business. You are pushing cap and trade, hurting small business. You are running up debt to the extent that a drunken sailor now seems like a fiscal conservative, hurting small business. You love unions and card check, hurting small business. Thus, you are not doing “everything we can” to support small business. PRESIDENT: But we know that many of these businesses still can’t get the loans and the capital they need to keep their doors open and hire new workers. (One misleading statement) REETZALITY: But a lot of small businesses can get the capital, they just don’t want the risk of increased debt given the ominous uncertainty of your agenda. Also Mr. President, unlike your perception of how things work, small businesses not only require capital, they also require opportunity and incentive. The uncertain and ominous cloak of your agenda is killing opportunity and incentive. PRESIDENT: “That’s why we’ve proposed steps to get them that help — eliminating capital gains taxes on investments, making it easier for small lenders to support small businesses, expanding successful SBA programs to help these businesses access the capital that they need.” (One misleading statement) REETZALITY: Mr. President, American small business doesn’t want help, it wants liberty from excessive regulation, taxation, unionization, and government control. It is not so simple as just throwing money at the problem. I’ll give you a pass on this one Mr. President since you’ve yet to run a lemonade stand or make any sort of bottom line. PRESIDENT: “This is how we create jobs — by investing in the innovators and entrepreneurs that have always driven our prosperity.” (Two misleading statements) REETZALITY: Mr. President our prosperity is not driven by government, it is hindered by government. And for the second time, you don’t create jobs, the private sector does when it is inspired to produce. What inspires production? Profits, and your going to tax them big time. You are killing the inspiration. And do you even know any innovators and entrepreneurs? Didn’t think so, well unless count the Weather Underground and SDS folks as being entrepreneurial and innovative in their anti-Americanism. PRESIDENT: “These are the kind of common-sense steps that folks from both parties have supported in the past — steps to cut taxes and spur private sector growth and investment. And I hope that in the coming days, we’ll once again find common ground and get this legislation passed. We shouldn’t let America’s small businesses be held hostage to partisan politics — and certainly not at this critical time.” (Three lies. One misleading statement) REETZALITY: You just said “cut taxes” while your treasury secretary said, two days ago, that you were going to let the Bush tax cuts expire, thus raise taxes. Small business held hostage to partisan politics? Really, so if you all reach across the aisle and decide your “bi-partisan” expansion will be good for business, it will be? Keep dreaming Mr. President. PRESIDENT: “We also talked about the need to move forward on energy reform. The Senate is now poised to act before the August recess, advancing legislation to respond to the BP oil spill and create new clean energy jobs.” (One agenda revelation) REETZALITY: Great Mr. President. Rush through a bill that will be swarmed in earmarks and hidden agenda items before the August recess and that will help business? Wrong Mr. President. PRESIDENT: “That legislation is an important step in the right direction. But I want to emphasize it’s only the first step. And I intend to keep pushing for broader reform, including climate legislation, because if we’ve learned anything from the tragedy in the Gulf, it’s that our current energy policy is unsustainable.” (Two lies) REETZALITY: It is not an important step in the right direction. It is an awful step in the wrong direction. Cap and Trade, energy reform, what ever faux title you chose Mr. President, has proven every time it is implemented that it hinders free enterprise. As to learning from the Gulf Oil spill, what we have learned is that the government is incompetent in dealing with disasters, even incompetent in exploiting them for self interested nefarious political gain. Ostensibly, the government’s dealing with the Gulf Oil Spill demonstrated that the government can’t even get it right when it’s in their progressive agenda. Also, I don’t think you learned anything from the Gulf Oil Spill other than possibly refined your ability to exploit disaster in order to push your progressive agenda. PRESIDENT: “And we can’t afford to stand by as our dependence on foreign oil deepens, as we keep on pumping out the deadly pollutants that threaten our air and our water and the lives and livelihoods of our people. And we can’t stand by as we let China race ahead to create the clean energy jobs and industries of the future. We should be developing those renewable energy sources, and creating those high-wage, high-skill jobs right here in the United States of America.” (Eleven lies) REETZALITY: So Mr. President, then why are you proposing a moratorium on off shore drilling if you are so adverse to dependence on foreign oil? Why isn’t ANWAR opened for drilling? And Mr. President, this China Challenge, unbelievable. China is the world’s biggest polluter and they will continue to be so even when they do produce your mandated green products due to the shroud your policies have placed upon American free enterprise. What high wage, high skill jobs? Please tell me Mr. President. Just asking? PRESIDENT: “That’s what comprehensive energy and climate reform would do. And that’s why I intend to keep pushing this issue forward.” (One global lie. One agenda revelation) REETZALITY: No it’s not Mr. President. And let us be, to use your word, “Frank,” You have no idea or concern what comprehensive energy and climate reform would do other than this: It would further destroy American enterprise, increase government control, hurt freedom, and after that, again let’s be “Frank,” you don’t care. PRESIDENT: “I also urged the House leaders to pass the necessary funding to support our efforts in Afghanistan and Pakistan. I know much has been written about this in recent days as a result of the substantial leak of documents from Afghanistan covering a period from 2004 to 2009.”
REETZALITY: I can only decipher your desire to continue to nation build in Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan by presuming your desire to bankrupt this country in order to create more need for your progressive government trumps your aversion to waging war against Muslims. PRESIDENT: “While I’m concerned about the disclosure of sensitive information from the battlefield that could potentially jeopardize individuals or operations, the fact is these documents don’t reveal any issues that haven’t already informed our public debate on Afghanistan; indeed, they point to the same challenges that led me to conduct an extensive review of our policy last fall.” (Two lies-he hasn’t read the leaked documents) REETZALITY: Am I getting this right Mr. President, near 100,000 documents and it’s no big deal? PRESIDENT: “So let me underscore what I’ve said many times: For seven years, we failed to implement a strategy adequate to the challenge in this region, the region from which the 9/11 attacks were waged and other attacks against the United States and our friends and allies have been planned.” (One lie) REETZALITY: O.K. Finally, the Bush bashing. Actually, we did get rid of the Taliban for a while, but we didn’t kill enough of them. And Mr. President, your rules of engagement are going to get more Americans killed. And what is your strategy? Counter-insurgency? Oh, I’m sure that’s going to work with a bunch of goat shepherds who grow a ton of opium on the side? Co-exist right? Another question, how do we have a viable strategy when you won’t even properly identify the enemy? You know, forgive me for saying such a reprehensible term, “radical Islamists. PRESIDENT: “That’s why we’ve substantially increased our commitment there, insisted upon greater accountability from our partners in Afghanistan and Pakistan, developed a new strategy that can work, and put in place a team, including one of our finest generals, to execute that plan. Now we have to see that strategy through.” (Three lies) REETZALITY: A couple of things here. You haven’t substantially increased our commitment, you actually low balled the request for troops. Last month 56 Americans were killed in Afghanistan. I hope you don’t consider that working. And again, some more “frank” speak, you don’t know if it will work.
PRESIDENT: “And as I told the leaders, I hope the House will act today to join the Senate, which voted unanimously in favor of this funding, to ensure that our troops have the resources they need and that we’re able to do what’s necessary for our national security.” (One lie)
REETZALITY: Her Mr. President, speaking of national security, how about closing the borders? Sorry, I thought you mentioned National Security. PRESIDENT: “Finally, during our meeting today, I urged Senator McConnell and others in the Senate to work with us to fill the vacancies that continue to plague our judiciary. Right now, we’ve got nominees who’ve been waiting up to eight months to be confirmed as judges. Most of these folks were voted out of committee unanimously, or nearly unanimously, by both Democrats and Republicans. Both Democrats and Republicans agreed that they were qualified to serve. Nevertheless, some in the minority have used parliamentary procedures time and again to deny them a vote in the full Senate.” (One agenda revelation-install judges who are not deferential to the constitution) REETZALITY: Mr. President, why don’t you try appointing folks who actually like and respect our constitution? I suspect this might be the hold up that is irritating you. PRESIDENT: “If we want our judicial system to work — if we want to deliver justice in our courts — then we need judges on our benches. And I hope that in the coming months, we’ll be able to work together to ensure a timelier process in the Senate.” (One lie) REETZALITY: Again Mr. President, appoint folks who adhere to constitutional principles and your problems will be solved. PRESIDENT: “Now, we don’t have many days left before Congress is out for the year. And everyone understands that we’re less than 100 days from an election. It’s during this time that the noise and the chatter about who’s up in the polls and which party is ahead threatens to drown out just about everything else. But the folks we serve — who sent us here to serve, they sent us here for a reason. They sent us here to listen to their voices. They sent us here to represent their interests — not our own. They sent us here to lead. And I hope that in the coming months, we’ll do everything in our power to live up to that responsibility. Thanks very much. (Eight lies when he claims to want to live up to the responsibility) REETZALITY: A great finale Mr. President. First, the noise and the chatter you are hearing is contempt for your policies. Secondly, You don’t listen to folks’ voices unless they agree with your radical agenda. Did you know Mr. President that the majority of Americans were against your health care bill, your financial reform, cap and trade, and your law suit against Arizona? Sure you do, but it doesn’t stop you from pushing your progressive agenda. So folks, that’s my take on today’s propaganda from the Commander of Propoganda and that’s my Reetzality (2nd) for the day. Thanks for the read.
Brett Reetz
Is there anything our President likes about America other than leisurely destroying it? I’m searching for an answer, trying to find something that our President not only says he likes, but something he acts like he likes. Let’s run a list. Here goes.
Free Enterprise: No way does our President likes free enterprise. He says he does but his actions betray his words. He bailed out the banks, the auto industry, AIG, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. He wants hyper control over our financial system. He is drooling over the possibility of shutting down the oil industry. He is in favor of the redistribution of wealth. He actually believes the Constitution is flawed because it does not address “redistributive justice,” his words. He is in favor of Cap and Trade which will be a monumental shroud on free enterprise, and freedom itself in that Cap and Trades’ tendrils will reach right down to a persons domicile. Nope, our President is not an advocate of free enterprise.
Border Control and Security: Our President does not want our borders controlled. He says he does but refuses to act until we get “comprehensive” immigration policy. Unfortunately, “comprehensive,” to him, means amnesty for thirteen million illegal aliens and probably a lot more. He still hasn’t made good on his promise to Arizona to send 1200 National Guardsmen to the border, actually breaking his promise of doing so within two weeks after the meeting with the Arizona Governor. Let’s face it folks, our President does not even view the very land we occupy as worthy of protection. As to National Security, he nixed the missile defense system in Eastern Europe. He has done nothing to keep Iran non-nuclear. He’s cutting defense spending. He wants to treat foreign terrorists as common criminals, trying them in criminal courts rather than military tribunals. He won’t even use the phrase “Islamic Extremist.” You know those guys who are willing to die to destroy us.
Self Reliance: Our President does not respect self-reliance. Redistributive Justice does not co-exist with self-reliance. His health care bill does not co-exist with self-reliance. He believes it is the government’s job and duty to provide and not the individual’s responsibility. He believes it’s government’s fault if you don’t own a house, have a job, have health care, can’t afford education, don’t have insurance, not the individual’s fault.
American Exceptionalism: Our President does not believe we are exceptional. Actually, we’re just human, but we’ve been blessed with a nation that was founded on freedom and liberty which allowed us to actualize and be exceptional. But does our President praise this truth? No. He apologizes to the world for our behavior. He ignores our principles and wants us to be more like other nations, that Mr. President, in case you haven’t watched the news of late, are failing. He does not like the idea of a nation with our principles dominating the world, or even leading it for that matter. And that says a lot about the man because if you don’t like us leading with our principles, then you don’t understand the magnificence of our principles.
Environment: The Gulf Oil Spill reveals that our President doesn’t care too much about the environment. He views the Gulf Oil Spill as an opportunity to impose his priorities of more regulation, less freedom (pass Cap and Trade) and less free enterprise rather than a dire call to action to save the environment. He views the Gulf Oil Spill as a “fat pitch” to further attack free enterprise, all the while, actually thwarting the efforts to thwart the environmental impact of the spill. He took two weeks to respond to Louisiana’s request to build barrier islands. He turned down offers of help to deal with the oil spill from thirteen nations. Under his rule, the coast guard moth balled skimmers in order to make sure they met government regulations, further delaying remedial measures to save the environment. His only non-urban activity is golf and that’s not saying much. Cap and Trade won’t fix the environment. China and India aren’t signing on and even if they did, Cap and Trade only imposes more government. Scientifically, there is no evidence that it will do anything for the environment.
State’s Rights: He is suing Arizona for exercising their state’s rights. He does not like State’s rights, the very right that is set forth to create a sort of governmental competition. The very right that allows state’s to innovate in their policies in an attempt to improve life. He doesn’t agree with a state’s right to ban abortion.
Free Speech: He doesn’t like it. He attacks free expression regularly, even going so far as to say that free expression gets in the way of progress. He appointed Justice Kagen who is no fan of the First Amendment, who believes that there should be a redistribution of free expression which means government control. He is in favor of the Fairness Doctrine which in classic Ayn Randian style, has nothing to do with fairness but rather equality of points of view which means, government control of speech. He is in favor of net neutrality, meaning more government control, less free speech.
The Right to Bear Arms: He does not believe in the Second Amendment. His votes in the Illinois Legislature prove this.
What’s left? Does it even matter? By having contempt for the principles stated above, does one even need to go further? It’s akin to saying, “I like Nuclear Reactors, I’m just not fond of the nuclear reaction that goes on inside.” You cannot love America and what it stands for if you don’t stand for the American Principles. And our President does not stand for the American Principles. It’s as plain as day. He says it. He acts upon his words. He has contempt for those who disagree. We have enough information to finalize the diagnosis.
Folks, his rhetoric sounded good during the campaign. But now, at this critical time, it is imperative to realize and act upon the truth that it was just rhetoric, nothing more. He doesn’t like our country and if you don’t join him in his effort to destroy that which made us great, he doesn’t like you. And folks, here’s the kicker: He not only doesn’t like America, what he really doesn’t like is our freedom to save it. Freedom is his nemesis. Freedom is the stalking horse that threatens his skewed un-American vision. Freedom is what he really despises.
On a psychological note, a note based upon my observations and education, if a child is raised by an abusive parent, it is likely that the child will be grow up to be an abusive parent as well. This is particularly true with sexual abuse. It is called the Cycle of Sexual Abuse. Here’s the reach. Our President views his history, whether it is the cultural African American history or his history personally, as abusive and unfair. Is there a possibility that he is metaphorically the abused child playing his role in the cycle of abuse? To him, America wasn’t that good to him. (Rather amazing, he became President) He had a broken home. He was raised by a cacophony of anti-American mentors. He was bounced around from place to place, home to home. And now he’s an adult, repeating the anti-American mantra through his words, but more so through his actions. Is this the case? It sure seems like it, but I’m just asking.
So, going back to the premise of this piece, what is it that our President likes about this country? I come up with not a single fundamental American thing. I am not saying that he isn’t enjoying the fruits of our Nation’s labor. He is, but the fruits, the opulence he enjoys is not an American Principle. All dictators live opulent lives by the way. Opulence has nothing to do with American Principles. Opulence is a by-product but not a fundamental of Americanism. So please don’t argue that he loves America because he appreciates the opulence it has bestowed upon him. To love America is to love its principles. And he does not. And that is the dire dilemma that faces us today.
That’s my Reetzality for the Day.
Thanks for the read.
Dmitry Medvedev, the Russian president, said Moscow was bidding to help lead efforts to build a new world economic order after the old system collapsed in the global financial crisis. Mr Medvedev said the renewed interest in Russia this year was a sign of a changing world in which the institutions of the western-dominated world order had had their day amid thousands of corporate defaults and the threat of sovereign defaults. Medvedev said, “What had seemed untouchable has collapsed. The bubbles that created the illusion of flourishing economies have burst. And we should use it to build a modern, flourishing and strong Russia … which will be a co-founder of the new world economic order and a full participant in the collective political leadership of the post-crisis world.” That’s just great. Russia is now vying to lead the world economy. Now, I’m not faulting Dmitry. I don’t fault ambition, ever. But I am going to do some “faulting” here. Here’s what I’m going to fault. Western Government, that’s what.
Two points to consider Dmitry. One, the free market didn’t fail. Two, Western Government failed. Yes, we are in a global recession. Yes, times have been tough.
But mind you Dmitry, the vast, vast, vast majority of failures have been directly tied to government. Let’s check it out. AIG? Credit default swaps unregulated by government, thank you Lindsey Grahm and President Clinton. Financial Crisis on Wall Street? Community Redevelopment Act, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, are the root causes. The auto industry? Government imposed café standards and unions. Steel Industry? Unions and regulation caused its demise. Real estate market crash? Again, Community Redevelopment Act, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Outlandish corporate risks gone bad? Enabled by government bail outs.
But the biggest failure? Government? Which one? Pick. U.S., Greece, Spain, Portugal, U.K., Ireland, Japan. Every one of them simply spent more than they took in and bankrupted themselves, except they don’t have to go bankrupt, they can tax. The problem is that when they tax they kill the host that their parasitic nature depends on. They kill the private sector which when you look at the portion of the private sector that is not tethered, buoyed or inflated by government, that portion is doing all right, even in these disastrous times. But even the portion of the private sector that isn’t attached to the wet teet of government will be crushed if government takes much more of the productivity.
And that’s the plan, to take more, to redistribute more, to further slash liberty to the bare. Every nation, every leader needs a kick in the head. They need to be forced to objectively review history and admit that they are wrong in their pursuits. They need to accept the fact that government, more often than not, is not the solution, it’s the problem. Government is unaccountable and suffers little consequence, thus they routinely fail as they are now. This isn’t new. This is the same old story.
Come on readers. How’s our government doing on the Gulf Oil Spill? How is our government doing on the illegal alien problem? Our government couldn’t even run Arlington National Cemetery correctly. If you didn’t see the news today, they found a pile of head stones in a creek bed and were recently found to be burying veterans on top of other veterans. It is rather ironic that our government can’t even manage to run a burial appropriately while at the same time, pushing us in a direction where it’s going to need it’s own burial. There’s more. Social Security? Bankrupt. Medicare? Bankrupt. Medicaid? Bankrupt. Our future, bankrupt. (If we don’t act fast). We have 113 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities crashing down on us. If we don’t change, we are dooming ourselves and our children and our children’s children. Shame on us.
Yet, I’ll give Dmitry this: He’s on the right track. He said this too: “Russia needs a real investment boom”, in order to achieve its modernization goals, he said. To stimulate that, Mr Medvedev announced Moscow would introduce zero taxation on capital gains for companies working on long-term investments starting from January next year and said Russia was improving the legal system to provide better protection for businesses against the long arm of bureaucracy.
Wow, we won the cold war only to be out libertied by the Ruskies! Now that’s down right embarrassing.
Wake up folks. Government is the problem. It’s a cancer, and it’s killing us. We need to get it under control. We need to shrink the tumor or learn to speak Russian or maybe Chinese.
That’s my Reetzality for the day.
Now this is what I’ve been trying to say! Dorothy Rabinowitz, writing for the Wall Street Journal writes a fantastic piece. Read on with an open mind.
THE ALIEN IN THE WHITEHOUSE
The distance between the president and the people is beginning to be revealed.
By DOROTHY RABINOWITZ
The deepening notes of disenchantment with Barack Obama now issuing from commentators across the political spectrum were predictable. So, too, were the charges from some of the president’s earliest enthusiasts about his failure to reflect a powerful sense of urgency about the oil spill.
There should have been nothing puzzling about his response to anyone who has paid even modest critical attention to Mr. Obama’s pronouncements. For it was clear from the first that this president—single-minded, ever-visible, confident in his program for a reformed America saved from darkness by his arrival—was wanting in certain qualities citizens have until now taken for granted in their presidents. Namely, a tone and presence that said: This is the Americans’ leader, a man of them, for them, the nation’s voice and champion. Mr. Obama wasn’t lacking in concern about the oil spill. What he lacked was that voice—and for good reason.
Those qualities to be expected in a president were never about rhetoric; Mr. Obama had proved himself a dab hand at that on the campaign trail. They were a matter of identification with the nation and to all that binds its people together in pride and allegiance. These are feelings held deep in American hearts, unvoiced mostly, but unmistakably there and not only on the Fourth of July.
A great part of America now understands that this president’s sense of identification lies elsewhere, and is in profound ways unlike theirs. He is hard put to sound convincingly like the leader of the nation, because he is, at heart and by instinct, the voice mainly of his ideological class. He is the alien in the White House, a matter having nothing to do with delusions about his birthplace cherished by the demented fringe.
One of his first reforms was to rid the White House of the bust of Winston Churchill—a gift from Tony Blair—by packing it back off to 10 Downing Street. A cloudlet of mystery has surrounded the subject ever since, but the central fact stands clear. The new administration had apparently found no place in our national house of many rooms for the British leader who lives on so vividly in the American mind. Churchill, face of our shared wartime struggle, dauntless rallier of his nation who continues, so remarkably, to speak to ours. For a president to whom such associations are alien, ridding the White House of Churchill would, of course, have raised no second thoughts.
Far greater strangeness has since flowed steadily from Washington. The president’s appointees, transmitters of policy, go forth with singular passion week after week, delivering the latest inversion of reality. Their work is not easy, focused as it is on a current prime preoccupation of this White House—that is, finding ways to avoid any public mention of the indisputable Islamist identity of the enemy at war with us. No small trick that, but their efforts go forward in public spectacles matchless in their absurdity—unnerving in what they confirm about our current guardians of law and national security.
Consider the hapless Eric Holder, America’s attorney general, confronting the question put to him by Rep. Lamar Smith (R., Texas) of the House Judicary Committee on May 13.
Did Mr. Holder think that in the last three terrorist attempts on this soil, one of them successful (Maj. Nidal Hasan’s murder of 13 soldiers at Fort Hood, preceded by his shout of “Allahu Akbar!”), that radical Islam might have played any role at all? Mr. Holder seemed puzzled by the question. “People have different reasons” he finally answered—a response he repeated three times. He didn’t want “to say anything negative about any religion.”
And who can forget the exhortations on jihad by John Brennan, Mr. Obama’s chief adviser on counterterrorism? Mr. Brennan has in the past charged that Americans lack sensitivity to the Muslim world, and that we have particularly failed to credit its peace-loving disposition. In a May 26 speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Mr. Brennan held forth fervently, if not quite comprehensibly, on who our enemy was not: “Our enemy is not terrorism because terrorism is just a tactic. Our enemy is not terror because terror is a state of mind, and as Americans we refuse to live in fear.”
He went on to announce, sternly, that we do not refer to our enemies as Islamists or jihadists because jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam. How then might we be permitted to describe our enemies? One hint comes from another of Mr. Brennan’s pronouncements in that speech: That “violent extremists are victims of political, economic and social forces.”
Yes, that would work. Consider the news bulletins we could have read: “Police have arrested Faisal Shahzad, victim of political, economic and social forces living in Connecticut, for efforts to set off a car bomb explosion in Times Square.” Plotters in Afghanistan and Yemen, preparing for their next attempt at mass murder in America, could only have listened in wonderment. They must have marvelled in particular on learning that this was the chief counterterrorism adviser to the president of the United States.
Long after Mr. Obama leaves office, it will be this parade of explicators, laboring mightily to sell each new piece of official reality revisionism—Janet Napolitano and her immortal “man-caused disasters” among them—that will stand most memorably as the face of this administration.
It is a White House that has focused consistently on the sensitivities of the world community—as it is euphemistically known—a body of which the president of the United States frequently appears to view himself as a representative at large.
It is what has caused this president and his counterterrorist brain trust to deem it acceptable to insult Americans with nonsensical evasions concerning the enemy we face. It is this focus that caused Mr. Holder to insist on holding the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in lower Manhattan, despite the rage this decision induced in New Yorkers, and later to insist if not there, then elsewhere in New York. This was all to be a dazzling exhibition for that world community—proof of Mr. Obama’s moral reclamation program and that America had been delivered from the darkness of the Bush years.
It was why this administration tapped officials like Michael Posner, assistant secretary of state for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. Among his better known contributions to political discourse was a 2005 address in which he compared the treatment of Muslim-Americans in the United States after 9/11 with the plight of the Japanese-Americans interned in camps after Pearl Harbor. During a human-rights conference held in China this May, Mr. Posner cited the new Arizona immigration law by way of assuring the Chinese, those exemplary guardians of freedom, that the United States too had its problems with discrimination.
So there we were: America and China, in the same boat on human rights, two buddies struggling for reform. For this view of reality, which brought withering criticism in Congress and calls for his resignation, Mr. Posner has been roundly embraced in the State Department as a superbly effective representative.
It is no surprise that Mr. Posner—like numerous of his kind—has found a natural home in this administration. His is a sensibility and political disposition with which Mr. Obama is at home. The beliefs and attitudes that this president has internalized are to be found everywhere—in the salons of the left the world over—and, above all, in the academic establishment, stuffed with tenured radicals and their political progeny. The places where it is held as revealed truth that the United States is now, and has been throughout its history, the chief engine of injustice and oppression in the world.
They are attitudes to be found everywhere, but never before in a president of the United States. Mr. Obama may not hold all, or the more extreme, of these views. But there can be no doubt by now of the influences that have shaped him. They account for his grand apology tour through the capitals of Europe and to the Muslim world, during which he decried America’s moral failures—her arrogance, insensitivity. They were the words of a man to whom reasons for American guilt came naturally. Americans were shocked by this behavior in their newly elected president. But he was telling them something from those lecterns in foreign lands—something about his distant relation to the country he was about to lead.
The truth about that distance is now sinking in, which is all to the good. A country governed by leaders too principled to speak the name of its mortal enemy needs every infusion of reality it can get.
Ms. Rabinowitz is a member of the Journal’s editorial board.
That’s my Reetzality for they day! Thanks for the read and thank you Ms. Rabinowitz.
June 4 (Bloomberg) – President Barack Obama is poised to increase the U.S. debt to a level that exceeds the value of the nation’s annual economic output, a step toward what Bill Gross called a “debt super cycle.” Bill Gross is the co-chief investment officer and manager of the world’s biggest bond fund at Pacific Investment Management Co. said yesterday the unemployment rate may rise to 10 percent within the next several months with job growth “anemic.” “Over the long term, interest rates on government debt will likely have to rise to attract investors,” said Hiroki Shimaru, a market economist in Tokyo at Nikko Cordial Securities Inc., a unit of Japan’s third-largest publicly traded bank. “That will be a big burden on the government and the people.” (U.S.’s $13 Trillion Debt Poised to Overtake GDP: Chart of Day, by Garfield Reynolds and Wes Goodman, Bloomberg)
“The market was assuming that the private sector was coming back, but obviously we’ve seen none of that,” Gross said in a radio interview on Bloomberg Surveillance with Tom Keene. Geithner also singled out Europe as a region needing to push forward with financial regulation reform. “Further progress on financial repair is critical to global economic recovery,” he wrote. “This requires, particularly in parts of Europe, further efforts to restructure and recapitalize the banking system.” In the U.S., where personal savings is increasing and Congress is close to passing legislation overhauling financial rules, “we are meeting our responsibility,” Geithner told reporters in Washington June 2.
The savings rate in the U.S. climbed to 3.6 percent in April, the highest level since January, from 3.1 percent in March as incomes increased and purchases cooled, according to Commerce Department figures released May 29.
June 7 (Bloomberg) — The U.S. economy may be headed for a slowdown reminiscent of the one it suffered in 2002 as the sovereign-debt crisis in Europe, fading government support and persistently high Joblessness weigh on expansion in the second half of the year. Economists have begun to lower their forecasts for the first time since the recovery began in the middle of 2009. Allen Sinai, chief global economist at Decision Economics, and Michael Moran chief economist at Daiwa Capital Markets America in New York, said they now see annualized growth of 2.25 percent to 2.5 percent in July-December, down from around 3 percent previously. “The risks to the recovery are growing,” the New York- based Sinai said. “We’ve raised the odds of a double-dip recession to one in four from one in 20.” “Markets had excessively bought into the possibility of a V-shaped rebound driven by a self-sustaining private-sector recovery,” Mohamed El-Erian chief executive officer of Newport Beach, California-based Pacific Investment Management Co., manager of the world’s largest bond fund, said in an e-mail. That view “is starting to be visibly and increasingly challenged by the multiplying facts and realities on the ground.” The latest came on June 4, when the Labor Department reported that private-sector employers added 41,000 jobs to their payrolls in May, down from 218,000 in April and well below the 180,000 median forecast by 35 economists in a Bloomberg News survey. While the unemployment rate fell to 9.7 percent from 9.9 percent, it’s remained above 9 percent. (U.S. Rebound Seen Slowing Most Since 2002 on Europe Debt Woes by Rich Miller, Bloomberg)
O.K., ON TO REETZALITY. There’s the financial news of the day. The European Union is on the brink of failure, Greece has failed, Hungary is facing default, said Viktor Orban who then changed his tune when Hungary’s currency, the Forint fell 4.8% in two days, destroying his credibility. Portugal, Spain, England, Ireland and the United States are “coming on strong” in the race to fail. Things are not looking good folks no matter what President Obama says about the recent job growth which only included 41,000 private sector jobs which barely keeps up with population growth. (Either an amazing lie or an amazing ignorance on his part. New jobs are compared to increased population; thus true job growth requires an increase in the percentage of employed persons to the actual population to increase.) We are in trouble, big time.
Here’s why we are in trouble: Insane government policies of redistribution of wealth! Governments throughout the world have made endless commitments to take care of people and industries, addicting its masses to the government teet. In doing so, governments have thwarted individuals’ ability to take care of themselves. Governments have reared generations of dependents rather than independents. They have done so through liberal policies of government handouts to individuals, corporations and unions. They have taxed people, either directly or indirectly (see license fees, excessive regulation, hidden taxes, value added taxes, Obama care, etc.) and threaten to tax and regulate more (see EU meetings and listen to President Obama). They have taxed us to the point that we are now partial metaphorical slaves, handing over in some cases more than fifty percent of our productivity to government so they can redistribute it, take our earnings, our wealth, and giving it to somebody else. Now, the true private sector, the corporations not in bed with government, the traditional family, the small business, these entities are doing what they should be doing, and rightfully so; they are preparing for the worst part of the storm. Folks are saving more. Folks are not spending as much. Companies are not hiring. Folks will be leaving the equities market or hedging against the predicted and ominous free fall. The world economy is faultering. It is on the brink of disaster. Let me rephrase the last sentence. We are on the brink of accepting the reality that we are in a disaster. The disaster started a long time ago.
We will begin to see government pensions fail. As reported by David Cho, a Washington Post staff writer, October 11, 2009, “The financial crisis has blown a hole in the rosy forecasts of pension funds that cover teachers, police officers and other government employees, casting into doubt as never before whether these public systems will be able to keep their promises to future generations of retirees.” See also http://www.pensiontsunami.com/. The fact is, financially government pensions have already failed. They are broke because the governments that run them, federal, state and local, have not only taxed the private sector to pay for them, but then, in a way, double dipped and took, they call it borrowed, the pension reserves to again redistribute the wealth, the same actual wealth, a second time.
Government has anesthetized the private sector which is not the best metaphor because although the private sector is hunkering down, hibernating, it is doing so consciously as a defensive measure to governments’ reckless spend and tax policies.
Here’s more Reetzality, a prediction in part and also an observation. The private sector is going to decouple from the public sector. Decoupling is a financial term. Decoupling is a situation in which returns on two assets or asset classes that normally move together move separately. For example, oil and natural gas prices usually move together: when one goes up, so does the other, and vice versa. Likewise, stocks and corporate bonds usually behave the same way. Decoupling in both cases occurs when oil moves in one direction while natural gas moves in the opposite, or when stocks’ and corporate bonds’ returns diverge.
Unfortunately, but it’s the Reetzality for the day, the public and private sector are not asset classes in the literal sense. Therefore, I am opining on a more ominous decoupling. The private sector has lost all faith in the public sector. The true private sector, the portion that is not in bed with government, unlike Wall Street, the auto industry, unions, etc., is decoupling itself from the government. Folks are sheltering their productivity, not spending when the government attempts to get them to spend through faux stimulus plans, saving more, getting out of the market, working for cash, trading goods and services to avoid taxes and generally as stated previously, hunkering down for the worst of the storm. The private sector is decoupling.
Here’s the problem with that: As the governments’ reckless, disastrous and wrongful policies manifest in failure, as government workers (see Greece) protest the bankruptcy of their employers, the governments, governments will come for the private sectors money. Governments will hijack even more of the private sectors’ productivity. I’m not certain that the private sector will tolerate this ominous Reetzality. I am not suggesting that there will be an actual revolution. I am suggesting that the private sector will say that it has had enough and will civilly revolt through the vote, through increased frugality and through government avoidance policies. The private sector will say, “No thank you government, we’ve helped enough. Time for you to accept responsibility for yourself. Be sure to tell your people.”
And let me tell you this, the government will not like this one bit. The government will blame the private sector. The government will refuse to acknowledge the real crisis which is not financial, not health care, not energy, not private debt, not education, not hunger, not anything other than a single crisis that has a redundant history, a Government Crisis. (See Rome, Greece, U.S.S.R.) Until our “leaders” accept responsibility for their policies and turn to the dependents they’ve been spoiling for generations and tell their dependents that they can’t afford it anymore, times they are a changing, things won’t get better. And if they don’t? Well then my readers, history will repeat itself and we will have a comprehensive collapse of the world economy.
God save our Children.
Note: Thank you Bloomberg for your resources. You are an honest news source indeed.
President Obama, during Thursday’s (May 27, 2010) press conference, said that every morning when he’s shaving, his daughter comes in and asks, “Did you plug the hole yet, Daddy?” It is reported that Glenn Beck hit a new low by mocking this asserted inquiry of Malia, President Obama’s daughter. I disagree. Here are my thoughts as to why I do not think Glenn Beck was mocking Malia Obama:
1. I do not believe the question was asked by Malia Obama. In order for her to ask the question, President Obama would have to be posing the problem of the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico as his responsibility. He would have to have been telling his daughter, literally and only, “I have to plug a hole.” It is inconsistent with President Obama to ever leave any doubt laying around that something might be his fault. He would have tagged his mission to “plug the hole” with some blame gaming.
2. It is inconsistent with President Obama to take responsibility for anything without first blaming somebody else. If you have to bet on the “somebody else,” put your money on George Bush. So, if acting in character, and if actually consulting with his daughter Malia, he would have said, something akin to “I have to plug the hole George Bush caused,” or “I have to plug the hole the Oil industry caused.” Thus, his daughter would have asked, “Did you plug the hole George Bush caused, Daddy?” Or maybe, “Did you plug the hole the oil industry caused, Daddy?” Or “Did you plug the hole Republicans caused, Daddy?” Or even, “Did you plug the hole that unregulated free enterprise caused, Daddy?” Now if these were the question his daughter asked, I’d believe the story.
3. Consistent with President Obama’s inability to accept responsibility on steps one and two of crisis management (Step one: What happened and who is at fault? Step two: What is the solution and who’s going to be responsible for the solution?) and President Obama’s narcissistic inability not to take credit for the third step, the actual solution, there is no way he would allow his daughter to surmise that if he didn’t “plug the hole,” it would be his fault. Nothing is his fault according to him. I’ve wracked my brain and I can’t come up with a single example of him taking the blame for anything. On the other hand, and in the opposite, he does have an inclination to take credit for most everything, regardless of two important points of consideration. POINT 1. Did he actually do anything allowing him to take credit? POINT 2. Is there anything for which he can take credit? As an example, see the economy. Notwithstanding the Stimulus Package’s failure to keep unemployment at 8%, President Obama is taking credit for an improved economy that is not improved.
4. Even if his daughter did ask such a question, and if President Obama told the entire story of the routine morning dialogue with Malia, he would have told us of his response, which if the story is to be believed, would have been, “What hole are you referring to Malia?”
Because, and this is a transitional paragraph, President Obama has a lot of holes to plug. He has the economy hole which is going down the drain due primarily to the tangible fear of business of Obama’s policies. He has the national debt hole. It is almost literally off the charts. He has the foreign policy hole. His apology tour didn’t work. North and South Korea are no longer hugging. Iran is going nuclear. Israel is miffed at us. He has the war hole. No end in sight. He has the immigration hole. Huge numbers of illegals are leaking in. And he has the Joe Sestak hole, the primary point of my commentary today. Here goes:
Here’s the news: Former President Bill Clinton was tasked by White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel to make an approach to Rep. Joe Sestak — allegedly offering him an unpaid advisory role on an intelligence board in exchange for getting him to drop his primary bid against Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.). Rep. Joe Sestak says he declined the offer. This stinks of tripe in so many ways. No way. Here’s why it is nothing more than a cheap charade.
QUESTION NUMBER ONE: Who would go to a candidate in a senatorial race and offer him an unpaid job in exchange for pulling out of a race?
ANSWER NUMBER ONE: Nobody.
QUESTION NUMBER TWO: Why would Joe Sestak state that he was offered a “job” when, if you believe the White House, it was an unpaid position?
ANSWER NUMBER TWO: He wouldn’t.
QUESTION NUMBER THREE: If it was so legal, innocent (and worthless) a proposal, why wouldn’t Joe Sestak reveal its details?
ANSWER NUMBER THREE: Because it wasn’t so legal, innocent and worthless a proposal?
QUESTION NUMBER FOUR: If it was so legal, innocent (and worthless) a proposal, why wouldn’t the White House reveal the details?
ANSWER NUMBER FOUR: Because it wasn’t so legal, innocent and worthless a proposal?
QUESTION NUMBER FIVE: If it was so innocent (and worthless) a proposal, why did the White House employ Bill Clinton as a go between to make the offer?
ANSWER NUMBER FIVE: Because it wasn’t so legal, innocent and worthless a proposal?
QUESTION NUMBER SIX: Given the merits of the alleged proposal, give up your costly senate race and the White House will give you an unpaid position, would Bill Clinton actually go to Joe Sestak and make such a proposal?
ANSWER NUMBER SIX: No way. He would have laughed in their face and said, (think Bill Clinton’s voice after he laughs) “No way in hell he’s going to take that deal! What if we offered him women?” (The second sentence in Bill Clinton’s predicted response is a joke.)
QUESTION NUMBER SEVEN: If it was so legal, innocent (and worthless) a proposal, why did the White House and Joe Sestak employ so much delay in their response to repeated inquiries of the media?
ANSWER NUMBER SEVEN: Because it wasn’t so legal, innocent and worthless a proposal?
Come on folks. These guys are lying. If a five year old answered a poignant and imperative question with so much delay, distraction, ambiguity, and illogical response, you would never believe the child. You would know that something was amiss. And there is something amiss. The White House and President Obama are lying to us. This truth is right there in their false, taunting, demeaning, insulting, arrogant and audacious words and actions. They are betting on Americans being stupid. A bad bet Mr. President, a real bad bet.
Here’s a recap. President Obama is lying about his morning father-daughter dialogue, just like he is lying about “nothing improper occurring” with Joe Sestak and just like he is lying about not knowing the circumstances of the director of the U.S. Minerals Management Service, Elizabeth Birnhaum’s departure, (he had to know or he has to be inept, pick).
It was not Malia Obama that Glenn Beck mocked, it was President Obama. I believe he brought this on himself when he exploited his daughter for political gain and to massage his disturbing and troublesome ego. I also believe it was low brow to use his daughter in the way he did.
Note One: It has been learned that the “Top Kill” attempt to “plug the hole” was stopped and was in a holding strategy well prior to the press conference. Thus, and equally nefarious, President Obama could have been aware of this and, metaphorically, bet on a horse that had already won the race when he held his press conference. Another way put, he could have been demonstrating faux bravado and faux responsibility for the task of “plugging the hole” that had already been plugged by somebody else.
Note Two: I once used reference to my daughter in a closing argument. I was remanded by the District Attorney and the Judge. They were right and my reference to my daughter to make a point was improper in all respects.
Note Three: I looked up the definition of the word “mock.” By definition, if Glenn Beck was imitating Malia, regardless of whether the morning father-daughter conversation occurred, then he was “literally” mocking her. However, his obvious intent was to mock her father. I’m sure Mr. Beck feels bad about this. President Obama should feel worse.
CO-EXIST! That is the bumper sticker of the inveterate liberal I see them all the time, usually on a Volvo, or some sort of quote “green” car. Co-exist. What does that mean? I’m not sure, but actually I’ve figured it out. It is an expression of demonic ludicrous that reveals the liberals penultimate desires. Wow, that’s a big sentence with a bunch of poly-syllabic words. On its face, the bumper sticker means “get along,” don’t be pious, other cultures are just as good as our American culture, but different, and how arrogant and condescending of us to demean these other cultures. That’s the intent of the bumper sticker and of course, the folks that sport those bumper stickers are so intellectual, so smart, so much more intellectual than us blue bloods.
Thus, I did what is necessary. I put myself in their shoes, the liberal apparent shoes, just to see if I was or wasn’t co-existing appropriately. Wow, am I naïve. Here’s what I discovered:
First, I have no friends that employ clitorectomies. None. Not one of my friends feel it is appropriate to excise a young girls clitoris in order to cause her to remain celibate and to not enjoy sex. Not a one. I am definitely not in a position to say that I am socializing with folks who endorsing clitorectomies. Shame on me, I am not co-existing.
Second, none of my friends have endorsed stoning a women to death for being raped. God, I am awful, I’m not co-existing. We need to embrace other cultures, we need to understand that they are not wrong, they are just different, and when a women gets raped in Saudi and then stoned for being a victim, we need to understand, we need to embrace, we need not to be so arrogantly righteous. Again, I am so bad, so arrogant, so not co-existing.
Third, It get’s worse! None of my friends discriminate against women. In fact a lot of my friends are women. I treat them no differently than I do my male friends. Yet, other cultures, the one we have to co-exist with, find women to be second class citizens, wear a mask, bow, don’t socialize with another male or we’ll stone you, just be deferential, after all, we have a penis and certainly that makes us better than you. I am so ashamed that I am not co-existing with folks who condemn women to second, even third, the children rank higher, class citizens.
Fourth, Oh shit, none of my friends are killing their new borns if they are female. Uh Oh. I can’t believe how arrogant I am not to be hanging with folks that employ infanticide when the wrong sex is born. Shame on me. I am not co-existing.
Fifth, I do not have a single friend who wants to pass his debt onto his children like they do in India. Again, shame on me. I am such a bad co-existor. How narrow of me? I need some friends who run up debt, live the good life, and pass it on to their children like in India. Well, if it’s any salvation, Obama’s imposing this reality upon us, so I guess I can say that I am involved. Still, I have no close friends who endorse this policy.
I could go on, but I’ve made my point. Co-exist? Get real Libs. The oxymoronic truth of the flagrantly ridiculous “co-exist” mantra reveals your abject stupidity. Don’t believe me, try to reconcile women’s rights with the cultures you inspire us to co-exist with, you’ll get stoned, to death my friends.
Here’s my ultimate point. The Co-Exist bumper sticker is an in your face, challenge me, revelation of the abject ignorance of the left. It’s impossible. It’s insane, It’s all illogical. All the tenants of evil if we have to cut the chase. \ So libs, keep putting those bumper stickers on your cars, keep revealing your inherent stupidity and evil for us to see. Here’s the kicker libs: We’ve seen through it. We know who you are and more importantly, we know what you are.
Come on knuckleheads. You want to co-exist with folks that will stone you for being who your are? The reality is that you don’t. The reality is that the bumper sticker simply reveals another trite illogical effort to destroy and demean what is good. Go for it libs. You are up against God. By the way, did you ever watch the exorcist? God won, he, she, it, always does. And here’s a final thought libs, even if you think you won, you always lose. Losing is consistent with your druthters.
What is the common denominator of Obama policies? The Destruction of America is the sole theme I can find in Obama’s policies and in his statements for that matter. Let’s check it out.
TAXATION. Obama is for higher taxation. Already some folks pay more than fifty percent of their income, of their productivity, in taxes. The Bush tax cuts will expire next year and Obama will do nothing to extend the cuts. Take a look at developed countries with high tax rates and then take a look at the entrepreneurial opportunities in those countries. It’s bleak and that’s where we’re headed. The CBO predicts only a two percent growth of gross product at best for the foreseeable future which is not quarters, not years, but decades. His drunken spending will provide a platform for him to raise taxes astronomically, further breaking another campaign promise. This is bad for America.
HEALTH CARE. Notwithstanding the socialistic anti-American theme in Obama-care, the cost alone, which is increasing by the week as we, and Washington, gets to understanding the implications, are going to be a wet blanket on our economy. Obama-care also takes away freedom, which last time I checked, is a bad thing. Companies are planning on eliminating their health care programs and turning employees over to the feds which inevitably fails at almost everything. Obama-care will hurt America. It already is.
CAP AND TRADE. This policy will explode bureaucracy and make business drastically more complex. It will increase costs and regulation and will decrease opportunity and productivity. It will grow the government and shrink the private sector. It will lead us closer to global government. Check out how it’s working in Europe. Not well. Bad for America.
IMMIGRATION. Obama is doing nothing about immigration except condemning Arizona, the one state with the fortitude to be responsible for their problems. Obama has lied about the law Arizona passed. Obama’s view on immigration is simply to, when the time is right, provide amnesty for illegals in order to create more left leaning voters who will vote for more redistribution of wealth, more government and therefore, less freedom. He has lied about the Arizona law. Bad for America.
FINANCIAL REFORM. Obama’s plan will burden the free market and again explode the federal bureaucracy. His plan ignores Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, entirely leaves them out of the “reform” and they are the two biggest culprits in our recent financial woes. Why isn’t Obama addressing the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac issue? Because they are agents for the government, that’s why. They are his folks. How can you claim to be fixing something when you’re ignoring the biggest cause, the root cause, of the problem? You can’t. And he doesn’t want to fix it. He wants to grow government and the people be damned. Bad for America.
BAIL OUTS. Obama loves a good bail out because it grows government power and influence and it takes care of the Unions in the case of the Auto industry.
GREECE. Obama pushed Europe to bail out Greece. Why? Why when we have trillions of dollars of debt is he borrowing money from China to give to Greece? There are a number of reasons. First, he adores the massive government in Greece. Second, if Greece fails more than it already has, it might reveal the flaws with Obama’s policies. (if they can be any more revealed as being awful). Third, it leads us closer to global government.
UNIONS. Obama is in favor of card check, his biggest ally is the SEIU union chief, he tired to exclude unions from the mandates of Obama-care. Are unions a good thing? Nope, just run down the list of union controlled industries. Auto industry, failed. Post Office, failed. Steel industry, gone. Government, the zenith of inefficiency and waste. Public education, struggling. Government pensions gifted to Unions and driving localities, municipalities, states and the Federal government closer and closer to bankruptcy and yet, Obama loves a union. Unions have proven to be a deadly albatross to so many American principles. Obama’s union policies are bad for America.
THE WARS. Now this is a strange one. Why is Obama breaking his promises regarding the wars on a regular basis, most recently retracting his position on exiting Afghanistan? Why does he continue with apparently no exit strategy in both wars? Here’s why. Wars run up the deficit. They further in debt our nation leading us towards collapse. That’s why. Maybe on the surface he doesn’t like war, but what he likes more is the destruction of America. And wars, especially wars of the ilk we’re in, are good ingredients for an American demise. Bad for America.
ENERGY. He lied about off shore drilling is now, given the gulf crisis, back tracking from his lie during the State of the Union Address. He keeps arguing for “going green” despite the established proof that it costs jobs, hurts the economy, and is a camouflage for more government control, regulation and burden on the economy. If you think “green” is good, check out Spain with its twenty percent unemployment rate. Bad for America.
DEFICITS. Deficits are a looming if not already arrived disaster for America and yet Obama keeps spending, keeps growing government, keeps borrowing. Bad for America.
I could go on with more examples of his policies, i.e. “don’t ask don’t tell, offshore drilling, contempt for profits, contempt for information (he recently said there was too much information and argument on the internet and talk radio which injures emancipation and democracy), his anti-Second Amendment, his belief that the Constitution is incomplete because it doesn’t address redistributive justice, and more. But I’ve said enough. You get my point. Obama doesn’t like America, at least not the America we love and cherish and the one that the world needs so desperately.
So face it folks, the facts of the matter reveal it. He says it. His minions say it. Obama and his minions want to destroy the America that saved Europe from Hitler, the America that is prosperous and generous, the America that has freedom and liberty as its driving force. He said as much when he repeatedly said that he wants to fundamentally change America. I’ve said it before, but fundamental is defined as the origin of existence and that’s what Obama wants to change, our origin of existence which are our god given, not Washington allowed, rights as set forth in our Constitution.
Rush Limbaugh was right when he said he wants Obama to fail. I do too. Any true American should, because his failure means we’ve saved America, the greatest nation in the history of man built on a simple yet exquisite document which our President has contempt, which our President doesn’t even understand. And I have hope and confidence that he will fail, because no man is capable of fighting our fundamentals, they are God given, and regardless of what our main stream media thinks of Obama, he’s nothing compared to God. And there’s nothing wrong with desiring a foe to fail. Just like a sporting event, you want your team to win and the other team to lose and that’s metaphorically what we have here, two competing teams with diametrically opposed philosophies. O.K., I’ll say it another way. I want our side to win. I want it to be a blow out. I want good to prevail over evil but notwithstanding that I believe that our fundamentals are God given and the obvious implication that if you are against our fundamentals you are fighting with God, a bad fight to pick, I’ll save the good versus evil for another blog.
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL HAS HIM FIGURED OUT!
The Obama Presidency – by Eddie Sessions:
I have this theory about Barack Obama. I think he’s led a kind of make-believe life in which money was provided and doors were opened because at some point early on somebody or some group took a look at this tall, good looking, half-white, half-black, young man with an exotic African/Muslim name and concluded he could be guided toward a life in politics where his facile speaking skills could even put him in the White House.
In a very real way, he has been a young man in a very big hurry. Who else do you know has written two memoirs before the age of 45? “Dreams of My Father” was published in 1995 when he was only 34 years old. The “Audacity of Hope” followed in 2006. If, indeed, he did write them himself. There are some who think that his mentor and friend, Bill Ayers, a man who calls himself a “communist with a small ‘c’” was the real author.
His political skills consisted of rarely voting on anything that might be deemed controversial. He went from a legislator in the Illinois legislature to the Senator from that state because he had the good fortune of having Mayor Daley’s formidable political machine at his disposal.
He was in the U.S. Senate so briefly that his bid for the presidency was either an act of astonishing self-confidence or part of some greater game plan that had been determined before he first stepped foot in the Capital. How, many must wonder, was he selected to be a 2004 keynote speaker at the Democrat convention that nominated John Kerry when virtually no one had ever even heard of him before?
He outmaneuvered Hillary Clinton in primaries. He took Iowa by storm. A charming young man, an anomaly in the state with a very small black population, he oozed “cool” in a place where agriculture was the antithesis of cool. He dazzled the locals. And he had an army of volunteers drawn to a charisma that hid any real substance.
And then he had the great good fortune of having the Republicans select one of the most inept candidates for the presidency since Bob Dole. And then John McCain did something crazy. He picked Sarah Palin, an unknown female governor from the very distant state of Alaska . It was a ticket that was reminiscent of 1984’s Walter Mondale and Geraldine Ferraro and they went down to defeat.
The mainstream political media fell in love with him. It was a schoolgirl crush with febrile commentators like Chris Mathews swooning then and now over the man. The venom directed against McCain and, in particular, Palin, was extraordinary.
Now, nearly a full year into his first term, all of those gilded years leading up to the White House have left him unprepared to be President. Left to his own instincts, he has a talent for saying the wrong thing at the wrong time. It swiftly became a joke that he could not deliver even the briefest of statements without the ever-present Tele-Prompters.
Far worse, however, is his capacity to want to “wish away” some terrible realities, not the least of which is the Islamist intention to destroy America and enslave the West. Any student of history knows how swiftly Islam initially spread. It knocked on the doors of Europe, having gained a foothold in Spain .
The great crowds that greeted him at home or on his campaign “world tour” were no substitute for having even the slightest grasp of history and the reality of a world filled with really bad people with really bad intentions.
Oddly and perhaps even inevitably, his political experience, a cakewalk, has positioned him to destroy the Democrat Party’s hold on power in Congress because in the end it was never about the Party. It was always about his communist ideology, learned at an early age from family, mentors, college professors, and extreme leftist friends and colleagues.
Obama is a man who could deliver a snap judgment about a Boston police officer who arrested an “obstreperous” Harvard professor-friend, but would warn Americans against “jumping to conclusions” about a mass murderer at Fort Hood who shouted “Allahu Akbar.” The absurdity of that was lost on no one. He has since compounded this by calling the Christmas bomber “an isolated extremist” only to have to admit a day or two later that he was part of an al Qaeda plot.
He is a man who could strive to close down our detention facility at Guantanamo even though those released were known to have returned to the battlefield against America . He could even instruct his Attorney General to afford the perpetrator of 9/11 a civil trial when no one else would ever even consider such an obscenity. And he is a man who could wait three days before having anything to say about the perpetrator of yet another terrorist attack on Americans and then have to elaborate on his remarks the following day because his first statement was so lame.
The pattern repeats itself. He either blames any problem on the Bush administration or he naively seeks to wish away the truth.
Knock, knock. Anyone home? Anyone there? Barack Obama exists only as the sock puppet of his handlers, of the people who have maneuvered and manufactured this pathetic individual’s life.
When anyone else would quickly and easily produce a birth certificate, this man has spent over a million dollars to deny access to his. Most other documents, the paper trail we all leave in our wake, have been sequestered from review. He has lived a make-believe life whose true facts remain hidden.
We laugh at the ventriloquist’s dummy, but what do you do when the dummy is President of the United States of America ?”
That’s my Reetzality for the day. Thank you Mr. Sessions.
Here’s an interesting analysis of big government. Maybe there’s hope after all, although its tough to root for embedded incompetence. Read on.
PROGRESSIVES CAN’T GET PAST THE KNOWLEDGE PROBLEM
By: Glenn Harlan Reynolds April 4, 2010
“If no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else?” — President Reagan, Jan. 20, 1981.
Economist Friedrich Hayek explained in 1945 why centrally controlled “command economies” were doomed to waste, inefficiency, and collapse: Insufficient knowledge. He won a Nobel Prize. But it turns out he was righter than he knew. In his “The Use of Knowledge In Society,” Hayek explained that information about supply and demand, scarcity and abundance, wants and needs exists in no single place in any economy. The economy is simply too large and complicated for such information to be gathered together.
Any economic planner who attempts to do so will wind up hopelessly uninformed and behind the times, reacting to economic changes in a clumsy, too-late fashion and then being forced to react again to fix the problems that the previous mistakes created, leading to new problems, and so on.
Market mechanisms, like pricing, do a better job than planners because they incorporate what everyone knows indirectly through signals like price, without central planning.
Thus, no matter how deceptively simple and appealing command economy programs are, they are sure to trip up their operators, because the operators can’t possibly be smart enough to make them work.
Hayek’s insight into economics and regulation is often called “The Knowledge Problem,” and it is a very powerful notion. But recent events suggest that it’s not just the economy that regulators don’t understand well enough — it’s also their own regulations. This became apparent when various large businesses responded to the enactment of Obamacare by taking accounting steps to reflect tax changes brought about by the new health care legislation. The additional costs created by Obamacare, conveniently enough, weren’t going to strike until later, after the November elections.
But both Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and Securities and Exchange Commission regulations require companies to account for these changes as soon as they learn about them. As the Atlantic’s Megan McArdle wrote:
“What AT&T, Caterpillar, et al did was appropriate. It’s earnings season, and they offered guidance about , um, their earnings.”So once Obamacare passed, massive corporate write-downs were inevitable.
They were also bad publicity for Obamacare, and they seem to have come as an unpleasant shock to House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., who immediately scheduled congressional hearings for April 21, demanding that the chief executive officers of AT&T, John Deere, and Caterpillar, among others, come and explain themselves. Obamacare was supposed to provide unicorns and rainbows: How can it possibly be hurting companies and killing jobs? Surely there’s some sort of Republican conspiracy going on here! More like a confederacy of dunces. Waxman and his colleagues in Congress can’t possibly understand the health care market well enough to fix it. But what’s more striking is that Waxman’s outraged reaction revealed that they don’t even understand their own area of responsibility – regulation — well enough to predict the effect of changes in legislation. In drafting the Obamacare bill they tried to time things for maximum political advantage, only to be tripped up by the complexities of the regulatory environment they had already created. It’s like a second-order Knowledge Problem.
Possibly this is simply because Waxman and his colleagues are dumb, and God knows there’s plenty of evidence that Congress isn’t a repository of rocket scientists. But it’s just as likely that adding 30 or 40 IQ points to the average congressman wouldn’t make much difference. The United States Code — containing federal statutory law — is more than 50,000 pages long and comprises 40 volumes. The Code of Federal Regulations, which indexes administrative rules, is 161,117 pages long and composes 226 volumes.
No one on Earth understands them all, and the potential interaction among all the different rules would choke a supercomputer. This means, of course, that when Congress changes the law, it not only can’t be aware of all the real-world complications it’s producing, it can’t even understand the legal and regulatory implications of what it’s doing.
There’s good news and bad news in that. The bad news is obvious: We’re governed not just by people who do screw up constantly, but by people who can’t help but screw up constantly. So long as the government is this large and overweening, no amount of effort at securing smarter people or “better” rules will do any good: Incompetence is built into the system. The good news is less obvious, but just as important: While we rightly fear a too-powerful government, this regulatory knowledge problem will ensure plenty of public stumbles and embarrassments, helping to remind people that those who seek to rule us really don’t know what they’re doing.
If that doesn’t encourage skepticism toward big government, it’s hard to imagine what will.
Examiner Contributor Glenn Harlan Reynolds, a law professor at the University of Tennessee, hosts InstaVision at PJTV.com and blogs at InstaPundit.com.
Back to Reetzality. Thank you for the read Mr. Reynolds.
And thank you readers for the read.
