Monday, August 29, 2011

Speaking of Barack's Base...

Sometimes we forget how tied up with big business Obama really is.

That to me has been curious. Most pundits proclaim that he's an 'enemy of the free market' system, but if that is the case what is he doing with friends like these?

Or is he fooling them also?

I was writing about Obama's base support the other day, and let me add another to that list that won't abandon him, or at least hasn't in the thirty years I've been paying attention.

That segment of his base are those who have no clue how tight Buffett, GE, et. al., and Obama really are.

Let alone know who George Soros is or how he makes his money...wait a minute Soros does want to wreck economies! Maybe there is something to that whole 'enemy of free market' shtick after all.

Anyways, those supporters of Obama do know something about Enron that I don't know about, and they are really pissed at Haliburton. Thus demonstrating bona fide economic credentials. These folks know numbers.

Do you think they will abandon Obama?

After all, the economy is Bush's fault. Just like 9/11.

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

I certainly hope I'm wrong about this, but I'm afraid Obama's re-election is just about a lock.

This isn't a position that has struck me like an epiphany, I've been inclined to believe he'll be re-elected and will continue to do so until the day he should actually lose.

There are a number of realistic scenarios and arguments that could line up to create the conditions favorable for an Obama re-election.

First of all, I'm dubious of any talk of Obama losing his base. What is his base? Its a collage of mini bases, and its nothing new. Its the blacks who have historically voted overwhelmingly Democrat for generations. Are they going to abandon him? Exactly.

His base consist of the Unions. Here we have hope. Just like the Unions had when they voted for this guy. But in the end, I gotta see it to believe it.

The Liberals are his base too. Another segment that not in my life have they abandoned the Democrat party.

They are just as steady in their vote for Democrats as the Blacks.

Just the facts.

So I don't see his base breaking up.

That has been my original reasoning for a strong Obama re-election showing.

You also gotta be aware of the traditional presidential scheme to back-load his schedule of achievements to climax with enough time for to fuel his campaign.

What achievements you snidely ask?

Begin with Health Care, which as poorly its regarded on the right, the left will champion it to their benefit.

The economy will rebound. Perhaps my biggest reach, but I return to the re-election shedule, plans were made, programs will commence soon enough to turn the economy around, finally.

And speaking of plans. You reap what you sow. Libya can easily be spinned as a safe and cost effective way to topple governments. Contrasted with the Bush approach that we still have to deal with, nearing a decade later.

Is it any wonder why he hasn't pulled out of Iraq or Afghanistan yet? They've become useful as they are.



Could Iran be far off?

Don't think its going to be a lay up to beat this guy.

Sunday, August 21, 2011

This is a beautiful article to prove a point with.

A reader suggested that he could probably troll the web and find a story or the statistics that would support Buffett and or refute the numbers in this article.

That a little bit of both tax increases and spending cuts is what we need.

I don't doubt that he could find what he's looking for in someone's opinion.

Not one bit.

However, by what margin are they going to refute these numbers?

We're in a deep hole here, to not recognize it as a voter is really a disservice to the idea of a general right to vote.

I'm not even championing a plan or a side, I'm saying that those numbers in my link have to be awfully inaccurate to move me off the idea that slashing government is the first priority.

Increased taxes shouldn't even be a rider on a NEA bill at this point or anytime prior to severe governmental reshaping.

Why punish the wealthy cause the bumbling fools in D.C. aren't half the statesmen they wish to be?

But more pointedly, why would we not recognize that the need to cut government is preeminent?

Are we really that wedded to party affiliation that we'll accept the tax hike plea as the first step in fixing a problem where there is not enough money to tax to fix it with?

Sunday, August 14, 2011

The above takes you to an opinion piece by a Mr. Glenn Cook from the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

Harry Reid is an esteemed Senator from Nevada, so Mr. Cook has the privileged of covering the newly re-elected Senator, entering now his 25th year in service.

I'm happy to reveal that I have wasted no vote nor esteem on this long serving Senator, he's gotten esteem from somewhere, just not from me.

But you'll read that Mr. Reid is now spending that esteem on blocking real budgetary reform all the while continuing the illogical, but self-serving spinning of the Tea Party as a bunch of juvenile detractors and obstructionists who will soon need to grow up and leave the real business of running the country to the trained professionals.

The Tea Party faces its biggest challenge to existence now and through the next fifteen months. They survived a primary and general election, they faced the establishment GOP and have not been whipped. Their sails are tall, unfurled, and full of head winds.

Now they'll face off against the Democrat establishment, and lest the detail be overlooked, the GOP primaries are the perfect spot to quietly sink the ship. Or slice the sails.

The good news is that John Kerry and Harry Reid are taking the charge, handling the knife.

Trust me, this is a good thing. Two long serving Senators upbraiding the heady new kids on the block. Except don't accept their vision.

The Tea Party isn't a bunch of youngster, but just Americans who are still youthful in thinking, in a fresh zest for politics and political reform. Thankfully they hadn't been burnt out from this whorish system years ago. That they are here when needed.

Here is a truth that needs to be disseminated. The Democrats my not like the Tea Party, and the paid bosses will do everything to stigmatize them as undesirable in the minds of their loyalist, but the Democrats have nothing going on to provide an alternative to the GOP's growing Tea Party Brand.

There is an opportunity, like Sean Hannity proffered, to overtake the political opposition for the Tea Party, a The Tipping PointTipping Point.

Little details sometimes matter so much more than their apparent weight, or maybe just the opposite.

A couple of entrenched, long term Senators aren't upbraiding a movement of naive kids who stumbled out of their role, into an arena of politics they have no business being in.

A couple of Senators are exposing a long serving political party that hasn't done much in the last forty years to solve any problems its been confronted with, has only spent tax money frivolously and put priority on the need of government to take more of your money first before reforming.

When encountering a stereotypical negative response to the Tea Party, ask what the plan is from the Democrats.

Little details help reach the tipping point. Why Kerry and Reid, don't they have anyone fresh? Not as fresh as my tea, that's for sure.

Tuesday, August 9, 2011

Yesterday the White House and Democrat congressman point the finger in every direction but inwards and the market plunge.

Today the the sound of silence. Markets soar.

Please do not disturb.

(with all due respect to Paul Simon)

Monday, August 8, 2011

Obviously I was wrong.

I anticipated that the liberal democrats would blame the Tea Party for raising taxes, when that eventually does happen,

I didn't anticipate that they would blame them for the credit lowering.

Its like a sick patient blaming the doctor for his health.

Or something like that.

And to have John Kerry start the ball rolling, as if he hasn't been there in D.C. for thirty years approving every spending increases and opposing every spending cut.

What a joke.

Its time to rally round the Tea Party. They are the target of the Democrats, they will get the "dumb" treatment.

Every attempt will be made to get the dumb label stuck to them, like Palin two years ago, Bush before that, Quayle before that, Reagan before that...

Sunday, August 7, 2011

While I was working out the other day, I caught a little of the Sean Hannity show. Sean was in is usual animated self, the bombastic voice on the edge of the vast right wing conspiracy. Today's the day the left will wreck America, so we need you now more than ever.

But that day, that day Sean said, we were at a tipping point. Conceptually borrowed from the Malcolm Gladwell's The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference book, Sean enlightened his fellow Conservatives that in the wake of the budget deal, we have reached a point as a movement wherein we have gained the forward momentum, almost irreversibly.

As usual, Sean was engrossed with too things -- historical events to support his arguments, and fervent certainty of his opinions. I agree with Sean most every time I listen, I can't listen often cause I don't agree with his predilection to dire consequences everyday.

As a society we are in bad shape, no doubt. Its not very productive for me to listen to it all the time. I'm glad he's on that wall though, if only it saves me from doing the job myself.

But as to the tipping point reached. I sure hope he's right.

I still expect Obama to be re-elected, and until he isn't I have no belief of my own that enough voters have reached the tipping point.

Yet I like the message, the forward looking and optimistic vision that we have been fighting this fight for a long time, and we've reached critical mass, that political conversation in this land is now directed by the conservative voice, and not the liberal or moderates.

Its certainly the time, as it always is anyways, to push the agenda further, much further.

We need more conversation on the right and correct role of government in this land, and we need to make sure its uncomfortable.

Comfortable conversation hasn't gotten us much. In fact its been counter productive. We have got to take the conservative agenda into conversations and really expose the realities.

Here's a reality that I think we should put on every voters' mind.

Raise your hand if you've been in this conversation before, your talking with an acquaintance and there is a shared lament that there is too much welfare, too much handouts, and that every year there seems to be more.

I happen to agree, I'm fed up with it, and its time we expose the ugly truth to the people who agree with the notion, but who perpetuate and aggravate the situation with their vote.

Before I go further, what I'm expanding upon is a linchpin rationale for my approach to discourage the uninformed or ill informed from voting.

Here's the beef. By and large liberals and baseline budgeting are expanding the welfare state. Baseline budgeting because this a system whereby welfare agencies grow. Liberals, cause, well that's what liberals do, they expend government.

If you want to cite a conservative cause that expands government, then lets villainize that too.

The fact is the people on welfare don't vote. That's a fact. Oh, sure your going to get some people on welfare who make it to the polling grounds on that first Tuesday in November, but usually they have something better to do then, voting for their own best interest isn't high on their list of things to do.

Why is that? The answer is that there are enough Americans willing to do that for them.

There are plenty of voters, not on welfare, who on a chilly November Tuesday take the time out of work or play or family, head out and vote for a candidate or party slate that is going to see to it that more of our tax money is going to people who won't make the effort themselves.

I don't. Any chance I get to vote in my own best interest, I do, when its a vote that is going to work against my own best interest. I choose not to make that choice.

Bluntly, if your a Democrat, and your not on welfare, and your complaining about welfare, then do me a favor, quit voting.

Your voting for people who are too lazy to vote for themselves. Who rely on you to make sure they get more free money. In Pennsylvania, we give them free cell phones now. I know, I live in Pennsylvania. Sean spoke about it too.

If we reached a tipping point, I'd like to see the cell phone program tipped into the abyss.

Now consider this, less than half of eligible voters actually vote. Typically the national vote is split at about 47% one way, 47% the other way, with about 5-6% on third party. That's less than 25% of the eligible voters making the decisions.

That truth is that if can just persuade a small number of the voters to not show up or please just vote responsibly, we can make this tipping point an inflection point.

Look forward to more examples on this blog of how certain voters are empowering politicians who do not have their best interest in mind when setting policy.

I'm inspired, or enraged, by a conversation I had where it was stressed to me that someone who may not know all the issues but votes, is a better citizen than someone who doesn't vote.

I don't think so, voting just for the sake of it, or worse -- out of party loyalty is not being a good citizen. Its also distorting the priorities of our culture in a way where people who don't even make an effort in society are beneficiaries at no cost or investment.

Wednesday, August 3, 2011

Many a good political commentary contains a healthy dose of conspiracy or even paranoia. Hopefully, this post is both healthy and good.

I've come out against a balanced budget amendment, and with good reason, which I'll expand upon in a moment. Yet I think it would be great if the gosh darn thing were put up for a vote.

Anytime, in this modern age, where we the people have a more direct role in the laws that are crafted the better we are for it.

As a corollary, anytime that we can keep power out of the hands of the bunglers in D.C. the better we are for it.

Keeping power away from the bunglers in D.C. is why we all should be against a balanced budget amendment. Which is not to say we shouldn't be for a balanced budget.

So we got what we had here last week, if I may borrow a phrase.

Last week the Democrats wanted a tax hike and were against a balanced budget amendment.

This week, they compromised and accepted defeat on both issues. How's that?

Last week, the GOP wanted the "cut, cap, and balance", got it, and many a conservative thinks we lost the budget battle this week after the deal with the Democrats. Truly?

Well, there are many reasons why the conservatives feel defeated, expounded upon quite eloquently by many talk radio hosts.

I haven't heard anyone lay out what I'm about to lay out.

The Democrats haven't given up on taxes. Obviously this war isn't over, though the one battle is. The budget deficits are here, they aren't going away, and this deal is scant relief.

What's more, for some peculiar reason, the basic math of spending more than you take in does not equate to cutting what you spend for liberals, it means taking in more, and more, and more, and more.

Orin Hatch said, they love to take money that isn't theirs, spend over what they got, and say we lack compassion because we don't want to give them more.

But its true, although this spending isn't sustainable, even if you taxed the rich to the utmost, budget cuts aren't a serious consideration for liberals. Its so crazy a notion that I have trouble elaborating on it at times.

But why did they cave on those two issues, tax hikes and a balanced budget amendment(at least a vote)?

Because don't think for a minute that they won't love to have a clean and necessary reason to raise taxes all the while pinning the negative faults on the GOP, the Tea Party, and or the Conservatives in general.

With a Balanced Budget Amendment, they'd get that pre-written invite to raise taxes every year.

And whose going to take the blame?

The well meaning political activist on the right who are pushing for this amendment.

They are pushing and they will take credit for a victory if it should so pass, but mark my words, a balanced budget amendment is not what we want, we want a balanced budget.

Unless of course you're alright with your taxes being raised every year the budget isn't balanced. I'm not, and history doesn't have any examples of a nation taxing itself into prosperity.