Economic Conservatism

Green Energy Has a Potent Rival

2011-12-27T17:27:00.000-08:00

I hate to say I told you so but on June 27th, 2011 I posted an article on “gas fracking”, a growing, efficient, and cost effective drilling and fracturing technique to release the gigantic reserves of natural gas trapped in shale rock. The U.S. has more shale gas reserves than anyone on earth, including the Mid-East, which gives us a chance to reach our, heretofore, seemingly unreachable goal of energy independence.

My Prediction Came True

In that post I said that this administration will attempt to slow or eliminate this chance because they are hell-bent on so- called “green” energy and are against the continued use of oil and gas. The fact is natural gas is actually more “green” than many of the so-called green energy options!

Well, just as I predicted the Obama-appointed leadership of the EPA just released a report that “fracking” many have contaminated drinking water in Pavillion, Wyoming. It may make for a good and scary headline but does not hold up to scientific scrutiny. It is neither definitive nor applicable to anywhere else but Pavillion.

The Facts

1. The EPA acknowledged that the “dangerous” chemical in the drinking water was 2-butoxyethyl phosphate a chemical not associated with fracking fluids. In fact, it is a fire retardant associated with plastic components used in drinking water wells.
2. The “pollution” was actually found in deep water monitoring wells drilled by the EPA which were located near the natural gas reservoir not the actual drinking water wells.
3. The EPA admitted that drilling chemicals detected in monitoring wells may be from old wells that were drilled many years before fracking was ever developed.
4. The fracking activity in Pavillion takes place in unusually shallow wells (1,000-1500 ft.). Most fracking occurs at 10,000 ft., far below drinking water wells. Even the EPA acknowledges this. This certainly questions the relevance of the Wyoming findings.

Why the “Greens” Are Upset

I’m not saying that our drinking water should not be protected. I think we all can agree on that. What I am saying is that this EPA’s credibility is open to inspection. It is dominated by people from this administration bent on raising the prices and limiting production of carbon-based fuels. Natural gas has a much smaller carbon footprint than coal and oil, and shale gas can price wind and solar out of the market. Solar companies are going out of business in droves. The “greens” are terrified by the specter of natural gas becoming the preferred alternative fuel even though it would mean freedom from relying on foreign sources of energy and is the best option for our economy and the job market.
This attack on our only hope for energy self-sufficiency won’t stop until we make a change in who is living in the White House after 2012. One of many reasons this election is so important!

How to Convince Obama to Quit

2011-12-12T13:02:00.000-08:00

Recently, the Wall Street Journal had an op Ed column written by two moderate Democratic pollsters who were not very happy that the extreme left wing of the party is firmly in control, and the pollsters did not like the direction the Left is taking the country. They advocated that Obama should step down and be a one term President and pass the gauntlet to Hillary Clinton. They then proceeded to elaborate on Obama’s failed Presidency.

Of course, the premise of the article was not very feasible in the first place, but the idea that you can convince a bona fide narcissist to step-down because he is a failure, is totally wrong. The way to do it is exactly the opposite of that point of view. This was clearly illustrated this morning on the “Morning Joe” program, which I occasionally watch to get my conservative blood flowing and pressure up for the day.

Jon Meacham, an uber-liberal “historian” of sorts and author, and Mike Barnicle, a former liberal columnist for the Boston Post, were in a discussion trying to rationalize why Obama has been so ineffective thus far. “I cannot understand it, he is so eloquent, so smart and convincing”, bemoaned Meacham, “it must be that the job is not commensurate with his great gifts”. If that doesn’t get you to switch off MSNBC what will? Eloquent? Maybe, as long as he has a teleprompter, but in a debate on his feet with no notes, a resounding NO! Why, Hillary whipped his back-side in almost every debate in the 2008 Democratic primary, and who can’t beat John McCain in any debate?

So smart? Based on what? They don’t even want to tell us his grades. He was virtually kicked out of Occidental College in California and hardly anyone knew him at Columbia or Harvard. In fact, we still can’t figure out how he got into those Universities. Convincing? The polls show that less independents and young people will note for him again, 75% of the country thinks we are on the wrong track, and 66% think he is doing a poor job. Convincing?

While the Republican primary candidates have to take an anal exam on their religion, we still really don’t know Obama’s religion. He actually went to a Christian church this past Sunday, the first time since last Easter. His early education in Indonesia was in a Muslim school and we know that for almost 20 years he went to a church that promoted “black liberation theology”. Do we know his religion? I know that Perry is Protestant, Gingrich is Catholic, and Romney is Mormon, and the liberal media is concerned about this but Obama gets a free pass.

Then Meacham said, “He is stuck in an 18th century constitutional government structure and that’s why he cannot get anything done.” Well, that doesn’t seem to have bothered all of the Presidents before him! Meacham thinks we or our governments are not good enough for Obama’s great gifts, he needs to be in a world job. The world needs him. Well, you get the idea. That’s how you tell a narcissist to quit. You tell him he’s too smart for us, that his skills are best suited for a bigger job than President of the United States. How about those really productive jobs; like a University President, or Head of the UN, or the nominating committee for Nobel Prizes. Maybe, just go back to the old neighborhood with Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright, and be a community organizer; but I understand you weren’t very good at that, either.

Letter to the WSJ Editor That Didn’t Make It

2011-10-25T16:33:00.000-07:00

Last Saturday, Representative Ed Markey (D-MA) wrote a letter to the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) entitled, “Clean Energy is Winning”. It was full of mistruths and half-truths which many in the public would not appreciate. I could not let him get away with this, so I wrote a letter to the editor refuting his points. Well, as of today it did not publish. Here is his letter and my retort.

His letter:
Regarding your editorial: A Better Idea for Green Jobs: (op-ed. Oct.15): Here are the facts. Employment in the U.S. solar industry has doubled in the last two years. Solar energy now employs more than 100,000 Americans, tens of thousands more that in coal mining. The wind industry employs 85,000. According to the Brookings Institutions, the clean economy now employs 2.7 million Americans, more than the fossil-fuel industry.
By comparison, Exxon-Mobil, BP, Shell, and Chevron, which made $546 billion in profits between 2005 and 2010, actually reduced their U.S. work forces by a combined 11,200 workers.
Despite rhetorical attacks, clean energy is winning. New wind projects are selling their power for as little as three cents per kilowatt-hour, cheaper than natural gas. America is currently a net exporter of solar technology. We have a renewable energy technology trade surplus with China. From 2007 to 2010, America constructed nearly 32,000 new megawatts of wind, solar and biomass electricity. That is more than three times the amount of new coal during that time. Yet the only clean-energy company that conservatives seem to be able to talk about is Solyndra.
Clean energy employs millions of Americans and provides power to millions more. Most Americans want to see their nation dominate a sector estimated to be worth $12 trillion over the next two decades.
Rep. Ed Markey (D., Mass)

My letter to the Editor:
Representative Ed Markey’s (D. Mass) letter in response to your editorial “A Better Idea for Green Jobs”, Oct. 15th once again illustrates how liberal Democrats will provide you with “facts” to make a point but don’t put the “facts” in perspective. The premise of his letter, “Clean Energy Is Winning in the U.S.”, is an extremely misleading thesis and far from the truth. The fact that the solar energy industry employs more than 100,000 Americans, slightly more than coal mining, he says, is nothing to brag about since with this administration many coal companies have been forced to shut down and new ones haven’t started as a conscious result of government regulations which makes it too expensive. He also asserts that 2.7 million people work in the “clean economy” more than what he calls the fossil-fuel industry. This is ridiculous, since more than 9 million are employed in the oil and gas industry alone. Also, he forgot to tell you that if you drive a school bus with a hybrid engine you are counted, by this administration, as working in the green energy industry. He also boosts that America is a net exporter of solar technology with a trade surplus with China. The reason is, there is no market in the U.S. because energy costs are among the lowest in the world, so solar is not competitive. Also, Mr. Markey, we will be soon hearing about many more fiascos’ like Solyandra, and if you would vote for more U.S. oil development and encourage shale-gas production, we would generate more than 1 million jobs almost instantly. You may think “clean energy” is winning, but we are losing because you are in the House of Representatives.
George Ahearn, Ph.D.
Naples, Florida

America’s Becoming a Robin Hood Republic

2011-10-02T13:06:00.000-07:00

I heard something on the radio which really illustrates what is happening to this country, and it is quite disturbing. Apparently, Governor Cuomo of New York was a guest on the Today Show this past week and they showed a clip of his visit to a 2nd grade class in Jamaica, Queens , which is predominately an African-American neighborhood. Cuomo asked a young girl, probably a 7 year old, what she wanted to be when she grows up. She said “President”. Then he asked what would you do as President? “I would have the rich people give me their money so I could give it to the people who need it”, she said. Then Cuomo said, “What if the rich people didn’t want to give you their money?” The little girl answered, “Well then, they’re just greedy”.

I’m sure she will get an “A” from her teacher for that answer. Probably because the teacher believes that and the little girl likely heard her parents talking like that. Unless this little girl read “Robin Hood”, and I don’t think that’s required reading in the 2nd grade, where would she get that kind of a value system? When I was seven, I wanted to be a doctor, a fireman, or a baseball player, so I could make money and be successful. I knew that I had the freedom to be anything I wanted to be. I had the desire to improve myself, and the opportunity in this great country to achieve my dream, even though my family was far from rich. In addition, I had a support system, my parents, my teachers, and my friends encouraged me. That was the American culture we lived in, and that was the value system most of us had.

Is this the kind of culture we are building today? It certainly doesn’t look like America anymore and I’m beginning to be glad I’m 76, because I don’t want to live in that kind of America. I was not born in a Banana Republic, or Russia, or Sweden, where we have a state controlled government, a police state, or socialism, where the economies are stifled and you can predict what your future will be because you cannot control your destiny.

President Obama is a role model for kids, particularly black children, therefore everything he says influences their value system. This is what they hear from him….. It’s only fair to spread the money around and I get to decide what is fair, I pick the winners and the losers, I give you money and I decide who needs it.

This is tyranny, this is slavery, this is Un-American, and history tells us this will eventually end in failure and tragedy. America is a great country and no one can change us by force. The only way we can be defeated is from within. And unfortunately, we elected a President who brought in people , like him, who don’t really know or understand this country. Crony capitalism is not a substitute for a free market and fair competition. We must remove these people from our government, or else this successful 250 year experiment in democracy cannot be saved and the damage will be irreversible.

You can’t be complacent about this, it’s too important!

Now We Know the Problem – It’s Us!

2011-10-01T09:29:00.000-07:00

Just yesterday President Obama finally gave us his scholarly analysis of the cause of our economic problems. I was eagerly waiting for this, since many economists have had conflicting views. In a radio interview in Orlando, Florida he said, “Well, we just got soft and complacent over the last two decades, and it just caught up with us”. Wow, is that deep! So we are the problem, we just got lazy and soft in the last 20 years. Boy, I’m glad it’s not him and his policies that kept this recession going.

I wonder where he’s been living for the last 20 years. Africa? Indonesia? South Chicago? What happened during those great Clinton years when we actually had a budget surplus? Those first seven years of the Bush administration, as the market boomed and corporate profits and growth was something never seen before in the free world. I guess we got soft, started giving loans to poor people just to bring them up to the status of rich people, and started thinking we could actually eradicate poverty.

We’re just too lazy to implement his economic plans, let’s get out there and get a job, “take off your bedroom slippers”, and get out there. Why should I, Mr. President? You keep giving me unemployment money and more food-stamps. And thanks for controlling those energy markets, so we can use those subsidized sources of energy, rather than that dirty oil and gas. Maybe you can manipulate the markets, so that the price of oil and gas increases and then I can change to solar, and windmills. But what’s going to happen when we can’t afford those subsidies? Like that Solandra company that was making solar panels for $6.00/ft and selling them for $3.00/ft in order to compete in the world market. I guess they were going to make it up on volume, except that the loan money you gave them ran out.

Anyway, I am glad Mr. President that you can do no wrong and the problem is us. The lazy American worker, who just built the greatest economy the world has even seen, and all of a sudden got soft, just before you got elected. What a coincidence, just your luck. I for one, hopes that your luck runs out in November, 2012.

Elevating Our Guilt Rather Than Our Triumphs

2011-08-26T06:36:00.000-07:00

Most of you who actually read some of the posts I write probably think that all I do is pick on President Obama. The problem is that there is such a fertile field here, that every time I look it’s another stupid or rather insensitive thing he does.

Since AOL purchased the leftist Huffington Post (for an outlandish price), I get daily news items on my computer which I would not normally read on purpose. Today they featured an article showing our President and his wife hanging a rather controversial Norman Rockwell painting, illustrating a dark period in our history, in the West Wing adjacent to the Oval Office. It shows a little black girl being escorted to her elementary school in the South accompanied by federal marshals with graffiti splattered on a wall showing the word “nigger”. The painting was made in 1963 and is titled “A Problem We Have to Live With”. It apparently was on the cover of Time Magazine in the 60’s during the civil rights integration crisis.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/22/ruby-bridges-visits-the-w_n_904710.html

Maybe the Huffington Post and Mr. Obama should instead recognize the multi-million dollar memorial to Martin Luther King soon to be unveiled in our Nation’s capital which celebrates our triumph over bigotry and shows how far we have come on the race issue. Mr. Obama and his wife have certainly benefited from the affirmative action we have implemented over the last 50 years which allowed them to go to schools “unescorted” or be admitted to Princeton, Columbia, and Harvard even though their grades may not have warranted it.

If we think that the White House should be a place to hang pictures about some dark periods in our history why don’t we hang paintings of dead bodies lying in the battlefields of the Civil War, or the bombing of Pearl Harbor, or perhaps a painting of our current unemployment lines, or conditions in the ghettos of some of our major cities where drugs and all sorts of crime occur every day and call that a “Problem We Have to Live With”.

This event got me thinking and just hit me the wrong way, I really feel for that little black girl in the painting, but like the exceptional country we are, we acted to address and rectify this injustice. So, if you think I sound like a racist, well you’re entitled to your opinion, but I think Obama’s decision to hang that picture in the White House was insulting and racist to the American people. If you disagree, I’d like to hear your perspective.

More Dirt On The Chrysler Deal - Part 2

2011-08-16T05:49:00.000-07:00

“With that list of dealerships being closed down, a weird thing happened in Arkansas , North Louisiana, and Southern Missouri . It seems that Bill Clinton's former White House Chief of Staff, Mack McClarty, owns a chain of dealerships in that region, partnered with a fellow by the name of Robert Johnson, Johnson happens to be founder of Black Entertainment Television and was a huge Obama supporter.

These guys own a half dozen Chrysler stores under the company title of RLJ-McClarty-Landers. Interestingly, none of their dealerships were ordered closed - not one! While all of their competing Chrysler/Dodge and Jeep dealership were closed! Eight dealerships located near the dealerships owned by McClarty and Johnson were ordered shut down. Thus by pure luck, these two major Obama supporters now have virtual monopoly on Chrysler sales in their zone. Isn't that amazing?

There are voices in Washington demanding an explanation, but the "Automotive Task Force" has released no information to the public or to any of the senators demanding answers for what was done.
Keep your ear to the ground for more on this story. If you've ever wanted to make a difference about anything in your life, get on the phone to your national senator or representative in the House and demand an investigation into this.

No More Car Czar

Then an amazing thing happened as this story progressed. Obama's Car Czar, Steve Rattner, resigned and was promptly replaced by former steel workers union boss Ron Bloom. According to CBS News, Rattner left "to return to private life and spend time with his family." Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said, "I hope that he takes another opportunity to bring his unique skills to government service in the future." By the way, Rattner is under investigation for a multi-million dollar pay-to-play investment bank scandal in New York .....UGH!

But, we're certain that had nothing to do with his resignation. And, according to several news sources out there, there are rumors he's being investigated for what could be pay-to-play scandal involving the closing of Chrysler and GM dealerships. Really? Again, that couldn't have anything to with his resignation-that's ridiculous! Like CBS said, this guy just wants to "spend more quality time with his family."

Obama has 32 personally appointed "czars" who answer to no one but him, all of whom are acting without any Constitutional authority. But hey, we're sure they all have "unique skills,"... as Tim Geithner likes to say!

SOOOOO. HOW’S THE CHANGE WORKING FOR YOU?..”

More Dirt on the Chrysler Deal - Part 1

2011-08-14T12:37:00.000-07:00

The takeover of Chrysler is a very dirty story. Sooner or later it will all come to light!

This could be a scandal of epic proportions and one that makes Nixon's Watergate or Clinton 's Monica Lewinsky affair pale by comparison. Back in 2009, I wrote a post on the Chrysler bankruptcy and how Obama swindled the bondholders out of their rightful ownership in the company under conventional contract law and gave most of the company to the UAW union, who was directly the primary cause of the bankruptcy, http://conservativesideas.blogspot.com/2009/05/chrysler-bankruptcy-saved-by-fiat.html. Here is a footnote to that story, sent to me by a blogger, which shows how corrupt that deal really was.

“Why was there neither rhyme nor reason as to which dealerships of the Chrysler Corporation were to be closed as part of the bankruptcy? Roll the clock back to the weeks just before Chrysler declared bankruptcy. Chrysler, like GM, was in dire financial straits and federal government graciously offered to "buy the company" and keep them out of bankruptcy and "save jobs."

The feds organized their "Automotive Task Force" to fix Chrysler and GM. Obama, in an act that is 100% unconstitutional, appointed a guy named Steve Rattner to be the White House's official Car Czar - literally, that's what his title was. Initially, the national media reported that Chrysler “had made this list of dealerships”. Not true! The Washington Examiner, Newsmax, Fox News and a host of other news agencies discovered that the list of dealerships was put together by the "Automotive Task Force" headed by no one other than Mr. Steve Rattner.

Now the plot thickens.

Remember earlier we said that there was neither rhyme nor reason why certain dealerships were closed? Actually there's a very interesting pattern as to who was closed down. Again, on May 27, 2009, The Washington Examiner and Newsmax exposed the connection. Amazingly, of the 789 dealerships closed by the federal government, 788 had donated money, exclusively to Republican political causes, while contributing nothing to Democratic political causes. The only "Democratic" dealership on the list was found to have donated $7,700 to Hillary's campaign, and a bit over $2,000 to John Edwards. This same dealership, reportedly, also gave $20000 to Obama's campaign.

Does that seem a little odd to you?

Steve Rattner is the guy who put the list together. Well, he happens to be married to a Maureen White. Maureen happens to be the former national finance chairman of the Democratic National Committee. As such, she has access to campaign donation records from everyone in the nation- Republican or Democrat. But of course, this is just a wacky "coincidence," right? Now comes another really wacky "coincidence." Stay tuned for Part 2 of this story.

How Environmentalists Are Killing America

2011-06-27T07:34:00.000-07:00

As a conservative who tends to support Republican candidates that espouse the values of our founding fathers, I automatically am looked upon by liberals as someone who is against global warming or anything that purports to “protect” the environment. Well, nothing could be further from the truth. However, as a technically trained person I am suspect of what I consider “junk science” or environmental research that actually is driven by a liberal political agenda.

Since the left identifies itself as a champion of causes such as the environment (now labeled climate change), gay rights, minority rights, poverty, unions, a woman’s right to choose (commonly known as abortion), and a rather questionable concept known as “social justice”, I have concluded that all this is merely lip-service to pander to special interest groups to advance their “progressive” agenda.

While most of these “causes” are not black and white issues, liberals have proven to be quite hypocritical when their support of these values does not promote their political agenda. This is a point that conservatives have used quite handedly come election time. The title of this post is meant to emphasize how the environmental wing of the Democratic party is actually crippling our economy, causing unnecessary costs to consumers and wasting taxpayers’ money to the tune of billions of dollars, while the rest of world goes merrily along off-setting any good America does about the environment.

A case in point is in the area of energy self-sufficiency, as this administration tries to force our conversion to alternative energy long before it is economically viable. Thus, it artificially drives up the cost of petroleum sources while subsidizing uneconomic sources like wind and solar. This is doomed to failure and will “kill” our economy, if successful.

The latest farce is the environmentalists attack on hydraulic fracturing, which when combined with the new technology of horizontal drilling has unleashed massive reserves of natural gas trapped in shale formations throughout the U.S. As a result, the U.S. now has the largest reserves of natural gas in the world! Natural gas will eventually replace crude oil as the world’s energy source, it’s cheaper, cleaner, easier to transport, has greater BTU (heat/energy) output, and no residual emissions or waste.

The boom in shale-gas is transforming America’s energy landscape. In the last 10 years it has gone from 1% to 25% of our current gas production, and has created over 100,000 new jobs in Pennsylvania and even North Dakota where the unemployment rate is 3.2%, the nations lowest. What we are now hearing from environmentalists is that fracking contaminates drinking water, releases chemicals and radioactivity, causes cancer, earthquakes, pollution, and is not adequately regulated. All of this is poppycock!

In reality, 99.5% of the fluid injected to fracture shale is water and sand, with benign chemicals such as water thickeners (also in food additives), and citric acid (which is in soda pop). Also, shale formations are thousands of feet underground while the water table and aquifers are a few hundred feet deep and they are separated by impermeable rock. There are no proven cases where frac fluid has ever contaminated water supplies and the technology has been used for over 60 years. You will be hearing more of these allegations in the next few years, all aimed at slowing development of this technology in the name of protecting you.

Unfortunately, it is all bogus and another attempt to push us away from energy independence and lower costs, and preventing us from becoming an exporter of natural gas and improving our trade balance.

Don’t be fooled by this attempt of environmentalists to further destroy your economy.

Watch Out For Bogus Articles

2011-04-28T14:58:00.000-07:00

I recently received an email that was forwarded to me by one of my blog recipients. It contained an article purported to be written by Dr. Walter Williams a conservative African- American professor who currently teaches at George Mason University. Williams is very well known in conservative circles and I was very surprised with the article because it claimed that Obama was a shoe-in in 2012 regardless of the state of the economy and all our other problems. When I searched this out I found that this was a bogus article written by some left wing nut and published in several leftist blogs like Move-on.com and others. You can check this on http://www.acnation.com/forum/topics/walter-williams-did-not-write, along with the article. Obviously, this was a ploy by radical liberals to make it appear that a credible conservative was already throwing in the towel on the 2012 election. The following is my response to each of the 10 points in the article before I knew it was a fraud.

1. We all know that the blacks will vote for him by 90%. However, they only make up 12% of the population and less than 50% even go to the polls to vote even when a black is running. That means that as a voting black they are less than 6%, even less when you count eligible voters (excluding prison inmates and under 18’s).

2.His point that college educated women will vote for Obama because of his looks and oratory is somewhat sexist, good looks is a subjective thing and his oratory which is no longer novel, in fact, he is rather boring when he does not have a teleprompter.

3.Liberals will vote for him but most of them are disenchanted with him because he is not liberal enough. They won’t vote Republican, but less will turn out for him than in 2008.

4.I agree that Democrats will vote for him but many party moderates are less enthusiastic about him and therefore less will turn out than in 2008, when they were trying to get back the White House.

5.Traditionally the Hispanic vote is split down the middle, and Hispanic’s are basically Republican in their values i.e. work ethic, anti-socialistic, for personal liberties, pro-life, and many do not favor amnesty for illegals since they got here by following the rules. Most want stronger border enforcement, particularly those who live in Border States. Obama should not take the Hispanic vote for granted.

6.His point about union members is also incorrect. Union leaders will certainly push the membership on to Obama and donate the money, but history shows that union members do not vote the way their leadership dictates, and, anyway, union members represent a very small voting block.

7.Williams’s point that big business will support Obama is also exaggerated. No doubt Obama is a great fund raiser with his base, most Presidents are, but you can be sure that this is not so in the energy industry, defense industry, or the financial industry. In fact, a recent article in the Wall Street Journal showed that hedge-fund managers and employees who supported Obama in 2008 have already greatly reduced donations they made to Democrats. Donations to Republicans were $13M in 2010 compared with $7M in 2008. Donations to Democrats dropped to less than $5M in 2010 versus $12M in 2008.

8.The media does love him but the race card accusation against people who criticize Obama has been defused and is ineffective.

9.Not sure special interest groups will be as strong for Obama in 2012, certainly not Jews; also homosexuals are not a strong voting block. I do know that Asians, who make up almost as much as the black population, will be in the Republican camp.

10.The polls currently show that Obama has lost the Independent vote compared to 2008; now less than 40% will vote for him in 2012. So Williams is wrong on this point.

All I can say is that if the article you get is somewhat fishy, it probably is, so don’t send it on.

How Do We Get This President to Move?

2011-03-15T17:12:00.000-07:00

We are witnessing a vacuum of leadership in Washington. Never in my days on earth have I ever seen an administration that focuses on low priority issues and avoids high priority issues. Now I understand how Obama could abstain or vote “present” on most of the legistlation that came before him in the Illinois State Legislature before he became a Senator and why he sponsored so little legislation in his two years in the U.S. Senate.

I really don’t want this to be another Obama bashing post, but you all know that the world is in turmoil and the only superpower left is just filing in line behind lesser nations waiting for global initiatives that will never come.

1. We await action on the nation’s 2012 budget, and on the deficit ceiling that is not being addressed. Instead, we fund our government via legislation for 2 weeks at a time because the Democrats do not want to deal with the real need to cut spending, which Obama completely ignored in his budget proposal.
2. Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, Bahrain, and Libya all are in various stages of regime change, much of which can be very favorable for our interests and adverse to Al Qaida. Yet we watch on the sidelines reluctant to take any action while the world waits for the U.S. to lead. Even the Arab League and the President of France plead for action to save Libyan lives, and our President clearly doesn’t want to appear too “aggressive or arrogant”.
3. The earthquake and tsunami in Japan has serious repercussions for the U.S. economy as well as the world; they are the world’s 3rd largest economy. Surely, we will provide aid to a staunch ally but now the Democrat left has another reason to stop development of nuclear power in the U.S., just as the BP oil spill caused a ban on offshore deep water drilling. So now we can develop more expensive and less viable energy sources (wind and solar), while we sit on top of the largest natural gas and oil reserves in the world, and send billions to Brazil to develop their offshore oil industry.

While the world is on fire, our President plays two rounds of golf during the Japanese crisis, goes to some high schools with his wife to discuss the major problem of “bullying” and devotes his Saturday afternoon radio speech to the nation on spending more attention to women’s history month. Nero fiddles while Rome burns!

I can’t wait until he whales in on his prediction of the final four of March Madness (the NCAA basketball tournament for you non-sports fans) at his next press conference. I have previously written at least two posts on the characteristics of great leaders and how this President doesn’t measure up. Leadership is being a great communicator, but also setting an example through actions that we all want to emulate. How do we inject some energy into our President? He runs this country like he has overdosed on valium.

On Leaving Cleveland - The Gem on Lake Erie

2011-02-26T13:50:00.000-08:00

I am reflecting on my life experiences here in Cleveland, Ohio, as my wife and I go through 50 years of our life’s possessions (otherwise known as stuff), deciding what we will leave behind for an estate sale, and what personal belongings will go to our Florida location. I am one of the few lucky ones to have a potential buyer with a legally binding contract on my Ohio home.

This process is one that your kids usually go through when you die, so we have saved them the trouble. Having your adult life reviewed before your eyes in a few days is a bittersweet experience. Looking at old photos and reading old letters and documents reminds one of how great things were in simpler times in the 60’s, 70’s, 80’s, and also how crude communications were compared to the technology we have today. However, I feel sorry for today’s generation who have little time for deep analysis and pensive thought in their lives and only have sound bites to get their news, and little quality time with their spouse and children; where multi-tasking is the desired skill and there is little patience for focus, concentration, and meditation.

Based on what I see coming our way and coupled with the rapidly changing geopolitical environment, I am glad that at my current age, I won’t have to deal with most of it in the future. However, I am optimistic about America. Although we are going to go through a difficult time, we will eventually purge ourselves of this growing socialist tendency and the political correctness that has completely subverted our value system. After all, we are the last bastion of freedom on this planet; after us there is no hope, no resort.

So, I will say goodbye to Northeast Ohio after 22+ years of wonderful memories, great people, beautiful rolling hills and majestic greenery. I will miss the seasonal changes, the great sports tradition of the Browns and the Indians, and what might have been with LeBron. Cleveland, once a great manufacturing metropolis at the turn of the century, home to John D. Rockefeller and many Presidents, now finds itself struggling for survival in this new service-oriented economy. It may never be what it once was, but with its great people, ethnic diversity, family values and tradition, it will take its place as one of the great cities in the glorious history of this great country we call America!

Obama Finally Adopts the Freedom (Bush) Doctrine

2011-02-12T07:44:00.000-08:00

After two years of playing the nice guy to all the evil players and enemies of the U.S. in the name of political correctness, President Obama has finally adopted the Bush freedom doctrine in the Mid-East, albeit in a rather slow and indecisive manner. Trying to give the impression that he was on top of the situation in Egypt and in close contact with Mubarak, it was quite clear that he and our CIA Director, Leon Panetta, really didn’t know what was going on nor could influence it in anyway. Making rather nebulous statements and getting his face on television every day, it appeared that Obama was starting his 2012 presidential campaign.

Tell me, where was he when the youth of Iran were doing the same thing a year ago trying to rid themselves of that oppressive theocracy that has sponsored terrorism all over the world. While a young girl was lying in the street bleeding to death, he was silent, saying that this was Iran’s internal affair, blowing an excellent chance to overthrow that tyrannical regime.

Finally, Mubarak got a knock on his door yesterday morning and was told by the military that they would no longer support his government and he was going on vacation to Sharm el-Sheikh, we finally had a peaceful military coup and thankfully there was no significant violence. What will come in the long term is still in doubt. However, the media will never concede that the Bush freedom doctrine, starting in Afghanistan and Iraq, sparked this movement towards democracy in that part of the world. And if we play this right it will forever change the future of the entire Middle East in a positive way.

After watching the many tributes to Ronald Reagan on his 100th birthday, I became somewhat nostalgic about the 1980’s when we had a President that really influenced world events, faced our enemies from strength, and motivated our nation with his optimism and vision for the future. In his farewell address to the nation he said, “Whatever else history may say about me when I’m gone, I hope it will record that I appealed to your best hopes, not your worst fears; to your confidence rather than your doubts”.

I hope that Mr. Obama is beginning to realize that decisiveness and strength is the only tact that Jihadists respect and that cow-towing to Islamist extremists by apologizing for our past “indiscretions” only fuels their confidence. Reagan stared down the Soviet Union and won the cold war without firing a shot. Let’s hope that simply a view of our western values and liberties via the Internet and social media will have the same result in the Middle East.

Why I Really Enjoyed Super Bowl Sunday

2011-02-06T14:26:00.000-08:00

As I write this on Super Bowl Sunday 2011, I don’t know who won the game, in fact, it hasn’t started yet. At this point it really doesn’t matter because I’ve just witnessed an inspiring and moving tribute to President Ronald Reagan on his 100th birthday. This televised tribute came from his museum in Simi Valley, California where he was laid to rest some seven years ago.

The tribute included the traditional laying of the wreath and a 21 –gun salute, wonderful patriotic music and entertainment, and great photos against the backdrop of this beautiful setting in the warm mid-day California sunshine. It included brief remarks of thanks from Nancy Reagan with introductions of members of Reagan’s cabinet, staff, diplomats from around the world, and Reagan Foundation members, which I’m proud to say I have supported for many years and will continue to until after my death.

Remarks by Gary Sinese, the actor and patriot, John Ryan, the Chairman of the Foundation were wonderful, but the highlight was an awesome and inspiring speech from Jim Baker, Reagan’s chief of staff and Secretary of Treasury, and Secretary of State under George Bush, the elder. It was probably the best speech I have heard in many years. It was delivered by Mr. Baker in a moving and poignant manner as someone who was very close to Reagan and Nancy. There was not a dry eye in the audience, including yours truly watching it from some 2,000 miles away. Those of you who saw this had to be moved, and wonder whatever happened to America since those days.

Baker’s speech recalled an era not much different from today coming out of the Carter presidency with double digit inflation, high interest and unemployment rates, threats from abroad, particularly the mid-East (Iran) were Carter bungled our response to the Iran hostage crisis, and our international reputation in ruin. Not to mention the ominous cloud of Communism and the Soviet Union hanging over our heads. I can remember Jimmy Carter telling us, like Obama tells us today, that we were at the end our reign as a great power and future generations would not be as blessed.

Suddenly from the West came this man who talked about our “rendezvous with destiny” and this “shining city on a hill called America” and told us our best days were ahead of us. He told us that we, the American people, would control our destiny, not our government. He said we will have “peace through strength” and built a defense force that is the greatest in modern history, with air power that is unprecedented. In fact, this military built under Reagan and used by Bush during the Gulf War, virtually eliminated the Iraqi army in less than 48 hours after Saddam Hussein’s attack on Kuwait, and less than 3 weeks during the Iraq war after 9/11. Last night, during a similar tribute, televised by C-Span of the Young America Foundation’s Reagan tribute, Dick Cheney said that he called Reagan after the Gulf War, as Secretary of Defense under Bush, and thanked him for building this marvelous defense machine to protect the American people.

How does this make you feel after seeing what we have today? Do you think Reagan would ever apologize to the world for America’s “arrogance”? If this doesn’t get you off your duff to make sure we get something better in 2012, nothing will……Thank you, Mr. Baker.

State of the Union # 2 - More of the Same

2011-01-26T07:24:00.000-08:00

The State of the Union address is usually filled with optimism, platitudes, promises, appeal to our nationalism and pride, and examples of American heroism and success stories. President Obama did not let us down in this regard. What it didn’t have was a sense of the real world. He showed no sense of urgency about the economy and our growing debt. In fact, he said “Now that the worst of the recession is over we need to address the question of deficit spending”. Everyone knows this remark is ridiculous and that if the economy is showing any signs of improvement it’s because of the November election and extension of the Bush tax cuts for two years, not his policies.

The unemployment rate and housing market continue to show us that the worst is not over. His main proposal to address the debt is to freeze government spending for the next 5 years. That gets us $400B after he just added $3 trillion to the debt in the last 2 years. How’s that for a frontal attack! And all this after he’s just added thousands of people to the federal payroll as well. Since federal government spending has increased 84% (stimulus included) in the last two years, a freeze is absolutely worthless.

His comment about our corporate tax rate as being too high to be competitive is something that conservatives have been saying for years. However, he said we need to cut the rate without adding to the deficit. This means that the government takes back an equivalent amount and, therefore, some companies benefit and others don’t. The government gets to decide who wins and who loses. You can bet the evil oil companies and those greedy health insurance companies will pay, and companies like GE, GM, alternative energy, etc will benefit. More hot wind here!

We continue to hear about simplifying the tax code, transparency in government by putting spending online now for all to see, trade agreements with Columbia, South Korea, and Panama (as long as the American worker is protected), all promises he’s made during his campaign and in the last State of the Union speech but never acts upon.

His comments about our eroding infrastructure were really laughable. He says we are corroding away while China and Korea outspends us on infrastructure. Well, Mr. President, that’s because they’ve done nothing in infrastructure for the last 50 years! What do you expect? And what happened to that $875B in stimulus money that was supposed to go to infrastructure. Something doesn’t smell right here.

Well, you get the idea, don’t you? The biggest applause line was about the end of the Iraq war and our great military, and you know who should get the credit for that. I seem to recall he voted against funding that war and was against the “surge”.

He concluded his speech on the optimistic note of acheiving the American dream and almost had Speaker Boehner have another emotional breakdown. The irony is that only a few months ago he said the next generation may have to settle for less than previous generations.

This President continues to fail to connect with the American people and, as they say, “if you put lipstick on a pig, it’s still a pig”. I’m afraid Mr. Obama failed to inspire me last night.

Sarah and Jeb - The More I See the Better They Look

2011-01-18T07:22:00.000-08:00

It’s clear that the new Republican majority in the House will result in a significant change in the direction this country is moving. The conservatives now control the agenda in Congress and they have considerable leverage to put an end to the reckless spending and waste that has characterize the Democratic controlled Congress since 2006.

The November election and the extension of the Bush tax cuts have already had an impact on business and consumer confidence and this has been reflected in the recent rise in the stock market, which just hit a 2-year high last week. No doubt Mr. Obama will soon claim that his stimulus bill and economic policy are responsible for this new –found confidence, but the American public is smart enough to know what is driving the recent surge of optimism.

With the Republicans beginning to jockey for position in the race to challenge Obama in 2012, my attention in recent weeks has been to observe their behavior and the reaction of the main street media, particularly the far left media. I notice that there is a concerted move to label the expected standard-bearers as the Republican “establishment”. This covers Romney, Gingrich, Huckabee, and the Rove types which attempts to separate them from the Tea Party movement and Sarah Palin. I think we will see more of this as the campaign heats up and I believe it to be a tactical error on the part of the left.

I must say that the left’s obsession with Sarah Palin is fascinating. They obviously fear her and will do anything to denigrate her skills and intelligence to create an image that she is not qualified for the presidency. Of course, Obama was no more qualified when he started his run for the presidency; the only difference is that he had a higher profile because he was a Senator and was not located in Alaska.

As I observe Palin’s handling of the media and listen to her improving rhetoric, I must say she looks better as time goes on. I know many of you may gag at that comment, but just wait. Another potential nominee who I think will be a great candidate is Jeb Bush. Did I hear somebody scream out there? Another Bush, people don’t want a Bush, it will never happen!

As a Florida resident, I can tell you he was an outstanding governor. He would capture the large Hispanic vote, is more articulate than his father or brother, and is well versed on the key domestic issues like education, immigration, fiscal integrity, and national energy. He also has close relations with the key military leaders of our effort in the Mid-East who operate out of Tampa. If he wants to run, he’d be a hellava candidate. Just listen and watch when you see him on the news.

Well, that’s my early speculation. Watch Palin and Jeb Bush! I bet you think I’m crazy.

To the Lame "Schmuck" Congress - Goodbye

2010-12-23T14:59:00.000-08:00

As we end this rather memorable year we say good riddance to a Congress that will go down in history as the worse collection of losers to ever reside on Capitol Hill, particularly the devious and pathetic leadership. I have never seen the likes of the methods and processes used to pass bad legislation in my memory, and I’ve been around a few years. The reams of paper and convoluted proposals written by the unknown staff of clandestine czars and academic re-treads was exemplified in the healthcare bill, stimulus package, and the recent omnibus budget bill that was killed during the lame duck session. Thank God.

This blatant insult on the American public peaked when a series of rotten bills was attempted to be pushed through this month in the lame duck session by a Congress in which 20% of its occupants have just been voted out of office. Most of the bills were either non-consequential or should have been handled many months ago.

To top off this circus, here is President Obama heroically delaying his Christmas vacation in Hawaii and taking all the bows on legislation that he has been campaigning against for the last two years, once he realized he was on the wrong side of the argument (i.e. extension of the Bush tax cuts), which he said was the cause of the economic disaster in 2008. Then he proceeded to patronize the gay coalition with the passing of “don’t ask, don’t tell”, when 77% of the public was for it, as well as most Republicans. Boy wasn’t that tough to get through! And why wasn’t this done months ago? And who really cares, except the Joint Chiefs?

And then there is the ill-conceived “Dream Act” in the hope of kissing up to the Hispanic coalition. Who created this fiasco? General amnesty for all those poor innocent children of illegal aliens as old as 34, who can join the military or go to college (they don’t even have to graduate) and automatically become citizens. Then they can make any illegal in their immediate family legal, even bring some more over from their home country. Just be glad that reason prevailed on this one, due to Republicans and moderate Dems who shot it down.

Then there is the great peace-maker, Barack Obama, and the Start Treaty with Russia. This stupid treaty calls for the dismemberment of most of the technically obsolete nuclear weapons of both countries and brings them equal in size, which means we have to do most of the elimination. Unfortunately, it has none of the verification standards of past nuclear treaties with Russia. This is supposed to be a “giant step to stop nuclear proliferation” according to Mr. Obama, while he sits on his hands and watches Iran and North Korea proliferate. Nuclear weapons in the hands of the U.S. are not a threat to world peace. In fact, it ensures world peace! How do you feel about nuclear weapons in the hands of Iran, North Korea, Russia, and China? Tragically this treaty passed because Pelosi had all those Democratic lame ducks in the House so the Republicans could not delay ratification until next year, when it would have crashed in a heap.

So let Mr. Obama bask in his “so-called” December accomplishments. We will have a different Congress in 2011 and his agenda for this country will hit a wall, starting with the repeal of Obamacare.

Have a Happy New Year; good things are coming!

Beginning to Miss George Bush? Here’s Why.

2010-11-14T14:43:00.000-08:00

I just started reading former President Bush’s new book, “Decision Points”, and I find it very interesting and well written. Rather than proceeding to give us his life story and a day to day description of White House meetings, as Clinton did in his book, “My Life”, Bush focuses on a dozen key decisions he made during his presidency, the facts leading up to each crisis, and his rationale that led to each decision. I find it much more enjoyable than Clinton’s rather tedious book.

Early in the book, Bush describes his various ventures, including his childhood, education, and the ten year period after he left college and was trying to find his way, which I found fascinating. Although born to privilege, he never really was dependent on his parents and was determined to make it on his own.

George Bush was truly an entrepreneur and once he became a Governor and then President, he was trained and well prepared for those responsible positions. Notwithstanding the erroneous judgment of most Europeans and liberal elitists who characterize him as an intellectual buffoon, Bush is street smart, has a great work ethic, and an excellent educational background in economics. In fact, he elected to return to school after a period to go to Harvard for an MBA. What I also found was that he has an excellent grasp of history and a real understanding of the American psyche.

Reading this book makes it abundantly clear what we are missing in the White House today. We have a President who is ill-prepared for the job, with no early life exposure to the values and principles of our system and absolutely no connection with the majority of the American people. He is a man who can write two autobiographies before the age of 50, and received a Nobel Peace Prize, without really accomplishing anything other than getting elected and becoming the first “half black” President of the United States.

Nowhere has this been more apparent than his recent trip to Asia (which cost us $3 billion) where he was treated like the leader of a second-rate power, scolded by our Allies and China for his economic policies, embarrassed by South Korea for losing a trade deal that he could have acted upon two years ago, and gaining none of the U.S. initiatives at the G-20 Summit.

They may love Obama in Europe and Asia but their leaders treat him like an underling. It’s hard to negotiate when the other side thinks you’re in over your head and don’t have the support of your constituency.

I’m beginning to miss George Bush.

2010 Election - No time to Gloat

2010-11-07T07:34:00.000-08:00

Over 70 million Americans voted in the 2010 midterm elections, representing 42 percent of registered voters, about 1.2 percentage points higher than in 2006. Turnout was up in at least nine states, including significant increases in Florida, Minnesota and Texas; it appeared to be down slightly in several other states, including Ohio and Pennsylvania as the Democrats stayed home.

Even as results from the 2010 mid-term elections were still coming in, America was seeing a shift in the makeup of the political landscape both in Washington, D.C. and in state legislatures across the country. Republicans gained control of the U.S. House of Representatives and closed the gap in the Democratic majority in the U.S. Senate. They had a net gain of at least 60 seats in the House.
Democrats retained a slim majority in the Senate, where Republicans picked up 6 seats.

At the state level, Republicans will control at least 29 governorships, Democrats at least 16, and an Independent will be governor in Rhode Island. Combined with Republican pick ups in the state legislatures, this will have major implications for "redistricting" in 2011, where boundaries are established every ten years for congressional representation, which will favor Republicans for the next 10 years.

To say I’m ecstatic about the results is an understatement, even though it was expected. However, this is no time to gloat and the road ahead will be difficult. We must remove from office the most destructive President in our history. I’m amazed that many of these races were so close and how many people still don’t understand the magnitude of Obama’s flawed agenda. It certainly points out the need to continually hold him accountable for his errant policies and actions in the next 2 years and to counter the toxic propaganda of unions like SEIU, the leftist media and internet, and the misguided theories of about 40 Socialist and Communist “czars” who have found a home in this Administration.

The new conservative-controlled House will be the source of much legislation in the coming months that will refute and repeal the garbage that was past in the last 2 years under Pelosi’s authoritative and intimidating reign of terror. Obama will be forced to veto much of this legislation which will make him more vulnerable in 2012, because he is an ideologue not a politician like Clinton.

Now that the political landscape has changed and the country has sent Mr. Obama a resounding message, it is time for a new leader to emerge, one who loves America and is capable of unseating him, one who can get this country back to the optimistic world power it once was before we elected a President not worthy of his own people.

Obama, Divider-in-Chief

2010-10-28T11:53:00.000-07:00

As we wind down this mid-term election campaign there is no doubt in my mind that the Democratically controlled Congress will soon face a tidal wave they have not seen in years. It has happened four times since the 60’s, when the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress and governed from the left, the American voters vigorously drove them out of control. This time the rejection will be the most resounding in history.

President Obama, our psychiatrist-in-chief, claims we are “angry, scared, nervous, confused, and not thinking clearly”. Well, we are none of that. We just don’t want what he and this Congress has been dishing out for the past 20 months. The President, who campaigned on hope and change, now sounds more like he’s diagnosing depression rather than offering inspiration. I guess he believes we will resort to our “guns and religion” to find solace.

It’s the President who is angry and confused, he can’t understand why we have rejected his policies. His campaign rhetoric clearly illustrates this. Never in my adult life have I heard a President sound like a Chicago ward captain or community organizer pitching black vs. white, union vs. non-union, rich vs. poor, and telling Latinos that they must “punish their enemies” (presumably white people who want to stop illegal immigration and support the Arizona immigration law). Have you ever heard a President talk in such a way to demean the office and with such a lack of class? It almost seems that we have a Caesar Chavez in control of the office. Just amazing!

In other posts, I have talked about the traits of great leaders and showed how Obama has continually failed the test of meeting the requirements of an effective leader. Now he has lost the most important test of a leader……trust. The majority of the American people really don’t trust him or his minions, because we now understand where he comes from, how he thinks, and what drives him. His book “Dreams from My Father” tells it all, and from is the operative word here.

This President is driven by a man he never knew, his father, a professed Socialist and anti-colonist from Kenya. A man he only met once, at the age of 10, but was idolized in his mind by his mother, also a professed anti-colonist. This analysis is clearly laid out in Dinesh D’Souza’s new book “The Roots of Obama’s Rage”. In D’Souza’s words he concludes, “Our President is trapped in his father’s time machine. Incredibly, the U.S. is being ruled according to the dreams of a Luo tribesman of the 1950’s. This philandering bigamist, inebriated African socialist, who raged against the world for denying him the realization of his anticolonial ambitions, is now setting the nation’s agenda through the reincarnation of his dreams in his son. The son makes it happen, but he candidly admits he is only living out his father’s dream. The invisible father provides the inspiration, and the son dutifully gets the job done. America today is being governed by a ghost”.

Remember to vote on Tuesday.

Why This Election Means So Much (Part 2)

2010-09-23T09:34:00.000-07:00

In my last post I dwelled on the importance of this coming mid-term election and its potential to change the course of this country. I also talked about what was at stake, the mood of the American voter, what we might expect, and how to avoid electoral mistakes. In this post I want to explore your thought process in casting your vote, what I think you should look for in your candidate, and the role of leadership.

What Factors Are Important to Your Vote?
Obviously, your political bent is a key factor in influencing your vote, but other factors are equally important. As a matter of fact, most Americans tend to be independent and not party-aligned, as illustrated in the recent election of Republican Chris Christi as Governor of New Jersey, a strongly Democratic leaning State, and Republican Scott Brown, in the Senate, winning the seat of Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts, a Democratic icon.

Qualities such as character, values, education, experience (non-political experience as well), track record, ideas, motivation, and communication skills should all factor in a voter’s decision. When you look at these qualities they usually are good indicators of potential great leaders. Leadership skill is not only important for a President; it also is for a Governor, a Congressman, a Senator or any public or private official that is head of a productive group or enterprise.

For our elected officials, it is clear that leadership skills are the key to success. Successful leaders are different and have different strengths and skill sets. One thing is sure however, most are charismatic and eloquent speakers and can mesmerize their audience by their commanding presence and message. Think of Roosevelt, Kennedy, Reagan, Clinton; even Hitler, Castro, and Chavez had that skill, so although this attribute is important, it alone does not identify a successful leader.

In delivering these qualities, the methods and tactics a candidate uses are critical and usually separates the great leaders from the mediocre. I believe leadership or leadership potential to be the most important aspect of this coming election. It is essential if we are to change the course of any failing corporation or government. In our politics today, the signs are already there. The mood of America has deteriorated and become angrier, more cynical, sometimes foul, and in some cases even murderous. Joblessness is eating at the core of our cities, creating a powerful need for innovative and courageous leadership to provide the initiatives that will spur employment, revitalize investment in our economy, and uplift our spirit. The failure of leadership in our “ruling class” is in many ways more urgent and more dangerous than the problems we face because our problems won’t be solved without it and because lack of leadership is slow to recognize and little understood.

Voter Empowerment Is What’s Needed Now
Two hundred thirty-four years ago, when the Founding Fathers gathered in Philadelphia to write the Constitution, America had a population of only three million people, yet six world class leaders, at least, were present there as authors of that extraordinary document. Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, Adams, Franklin, and Madison all helped to create our form of government. Today we are over 300 million and you will be hard pressed to identify six leaders of that quality in Washington D.C.

Where have our political leaders gone? Have we become too cynical to care? Has making politics a career fostered mediocrity and corruption, or have we become too saturated with information to make clear and informed decisions? I think not. Voter empowerment is the key. If you feel your vote will make a difference and you take the time to understand the priority issues and listen to the candidates, you will go to the polls and find the leaders out there we so urgently need. It’s happening now, be a part of it, and be sure to cast your vote on November 2nd.

Why This Election Means So Much (Part 1)

2010-09-22T11:15:00.000-07:00

November’s mid-term election is essentially a national referendum. No time in recent memory has a mid-term election had such importance. The populace is angry; politicians have no credibility, and the policies of our current "ruling class” are out of sync with the majority of our citizens. Interestingly enough, political party, liberal or conservative, left or right, are not the issues, as illustrated by the rise of the so-called, T-Party adherents. They believe that America needs to click on delete and go back to the basics, I mean the Founding Fathers, and start all over again.

The Issues
The issues are really centered on the historical trend of America and the belief that the future for our grandchildren will not be better than their grandparents, and that our reign as the greatest economic force on the planet is passing, and American exceptionalism is in doubt.

The rising influence of government in our lives, discriminating taxation, the redistribution of our wealth as individuals and as a nation, the trend toward 3rd party control of our health decisions, our changing population and out moded immigration policies, our mounting debt, the threat of a different kind of enemy from abroad, and worries about our safety and security, and the apparent waste and corruption in our financial and political class, all contribute to the uncertainty and worry about the future, which in turn exacerbates our economic woes.

What’s at Stake in November?
We are a graphically diverse society and financial, socio-economic, political, and geography issues define our divisions. All contribute to our differences and our free society allows anyone to express their opinions. The newspaper, the Internet, books of many kinds, demonstrations and rallies, are major outlets for this expression. In the final analysis, what we do at the ballot box is more important than anything we can do to influence events.

Although we are the most educated and informed country on the planet we will be lucky if we get 40% of all eligible voters to cast a ballot in this vitally important election. Since many voters push their own special interests and are relatively uninformed on a broad range of other topics of equal importance, our elections don’t always get a result that is in the best long-term interests of the country. However, generally speaking, the American people have made the right decisions during the major periods of crisis in our history. It is probably because regardless of our backgrounds and education, we have that unique quality of “common sense” that seems to transcend our differences. Obviously, the best way to avoid these electoral mistakes is to bring as many of the voters as possible to the polls and avoid “special interests” results.

Since many Democratic seats in both the House and Senate that are up for grabs this November; control of Congress is at stake in this election. Because the growing discontent has been fueled by one-party control of Congress for the last 4 years and now with the Executive branch for the last 2 years; this mid-term election can alter the current course of our country.

The Shot Heard ‘Round the World – Is Silenced

2010-08-18T12:46:00.000-07:00

Bobby Thompson passed away yesterday and with him goes a whole host of childhood memories of my youth. As a kid I was a die-hard Brooklyn Dodgers fan and for the decade 1947-1957, I was pretty spoiled. The Dodgers won 6 National League (NL) pennants in that time and should have won 8. In 1950 they lost in the last game of the season to the Phillies and in 1951 Bobby Thompson hit a 3-run homer in the 9th inning with the Dodgers ahead 4-2 in the last game of a 3- game play-off because the season had ended in a tie.

The interesting thing about that 1951 season was that the Dodgers were 13 ½ games ahead of the second place Giants in August and still the season ended in a tie. I thought how could we lose? All we needed was to play .500 baseball for the rest of the year and we’re a shoo-in. Well, the Giants hardy lost a game from mid-August to October. They won 37 of their final 44 games. Quite a feat in baseball!

I hated the Giants! The rivalry with the Dodgers was one of the most intense in the NL, as it is today between Los Angeles and San Francisco, but not quite the same, since they are not in the same city now. Even though the Dodgers dominated the league in that decade, the Giants always managed to give them a tough battle no matter how bad a team they had. To top matters, my best friend and eventually the best man at my wedding was an avid Giant fan and he finally had his moment that dim day in October, 1951.

The Yankees went on to beat the Giants in 5 games in the World Series and over the years Ralph Branca (the Dodger pitcher who gave up the homer) and Thompson became good friends and appeared together at many functions when their playing days were over. I grew up to appreciate both of them over the years as good competitors who managed to etch their names into baseball history, even though neither made it to the Hall of Fame.

An interesting footnote to this story is that Yogi Berra, the famous Yankee catcher, attended that famous game with some teammates, eager to see which team they would face in the Series. After the Dodgers scored three times in the eighth inning to lead 4-1, Berra decided he had seen enough and left the ballpark to beat the traffic. That’s when he developed one of his most famous “Yogi-isms” which many of us still use today and will be indelibly engrained in our lexicon, “it ain’t over till it’s over”.

Don’t worry Bobby, you won’t be forgotten and they’ll still talk about your historic feat long after we’re gone. It still ain’t over.

The Gulf Spill - Where Did All the Oil Go?

2010-08-01T11:38:00.000-07:00

Although we are not out of the woods yet, it would appear that the Deepwater Horizon blow-out is under control after 100+ days and oil is no longer spewing into the Gulf of Mexico. Also, you should note that all sorts of scientists, environmentalists, and government agencies are out there in planes and ships looking for the oil but can’t seem to find it, except for some disconnected patches. However, you don’t see much of this reported in the media. Some 40-60,000 barrels of oil per day were released for almost 100 days, where did it all go?

Well, a small amount did find its way to the Louisiana shore line and wetlands, and maybe some tainted the beaches in Pensacola, and unfortunately some pelicans and turtles may have been lost but not many relative to their population. Some of the oil was burned, mostly at the site of the blow-out, some of the lighter components were evaporated by the warm temperatures in the Gulf, and most of the rest has been and is being broken up and bio-degraded by the many organisms that inhabit the ocean. How can this happen so fast? Simply, the use of the dispersant, COREXIT 9500™.

The COREXIT™ Story

COREXIT™ has been the go –to dispersant in the oil industry for decades, it was developed by Exxon Production Research (EPR) and Exxon Chemicals, and yours truly speaks with some knowledge about this, since I had a part to play in its development and application in major oil spills. Its inventor was a microbiologist named Dr. Gordon Lindblom, a friend and co-worker I met at (EPR) in 1962. No matter what you read in the press, COREXIT™ is not Dawn™ or Joy™ dishwasher soap. The media love to use this over simplification. It is a unique class of chemical that is particularly effective at dispersing crude oil, which is different from most of the refined and natural oils that you and I come across in our daily lives.

Since the chemical was not patentable itself, Gordon was able to obtain a “use” patent for this class of chemicals for use in oil spills, which gave Exxon exclusive rights for these applications for 17 years. When I transferred to Exxon Chemical I encouraged Gordon to join our research organization and added COREXIT™ to our product line and encouraged him to develop better application techniques for offshore spills. He proceeded to become the world’s expert on aerial spray applications, designing specific equipment for aircraft used in these applications.

In the meantime, we contracted long-term toxicity studies to determine the effect of the dispersant on fish and other sea creatures, as well as evaluate its impact on the food-chain. No significant long-term toxic effects have ever been proven or illustrated, plenty have been speculated.

The Ixtoc 1 Blow-Out

In 1979, when the Mexican oil company, PEMEX, had a blow –out on the IXTOC 1 platform off the coast of Cuidad del Carmen in the southern Gulf of Mexico, I was in charge of the chemical division involved with the COREXIT™ product and spent may weeks and trips to Mexico convincing the authorities in charge of the clean-up that COREXIT™ would prevent environmental damage to their beaches and resort areas. As the spill moved north towards the Texas coastline, the EPA would not permit us to use the dispersants to prevent damage to the U.S. coastline at Padre Island. The Mexicans made the right decision and not one drop of oil ever hit the Mexican coast, while Padre Island resorts were basically closed for many weeks while the manual work of clean-up went on. The IXTOC spill went on for 10 months although it was only in 100 ft. of water, but was worse than the BP spill in terms of volume.

BP’s Handling of the Clean-Up

I believe that the key to minimizing environmental damage in the case of BP was the sub-surface application of the dispersant directly at the well head, combined with the aerial application. This technology did not exist at the time of the IXTOC spill.

We are now hearing rumblings from legislators how BP and the U.S. Coast Guard ignored President Obama’s executive order and the EPA to terminate the use of dispersants early in the process. Thank God, they did or our Gulf beaches would be badly contaminated, our fishing and resort industries would be in shambles, and a lot more pelicans would have died.

So that’s where all the oil went, and now I await a rebuttal from some of my environmentalist friends who are trying to protect us in their well meaning but misguided way.

A Footnote

P.S. Exxon sold its Specialty Chemicals business and the COREXIT™ technology to Nalco Chemicals in the early 90’s and Nalco was the vendor to BP for the spill. To my knowledge no change was made in the formula and Exxon was not involved other than offering counsel in its oil spill expertise. Exxon was not permitted by the government to use COREXIT™in the Valdez tanker spill.

Welfare or Unemployment Benefits?

2010-07-22T12:43:00.000-07:00

This corner has been quiet for several weeks as I sit on the sidelines and view the utterly incomprehensible and inept decisions and statements made every day by the Administration. This is covered daily by both sides of the blogosphere and the cable network adversaries. If I were making a living at this, there would be enough grist to write an article every day. So why the silence?

Well, first of all I don’t want to sound like a right wing nut, or another Obama basher. Frankly, there is nothing I could write in recent weeks that would give this President a fair shake and, therefore, I would be just another member of the chorus. Poor leadership and an uncontrolled propensity for deception, political maneuvering, race baiting, contradictions, and hypocrisy, characterize this man from the Gulf oil spill, to foreign policy, national security, and a worsening economy.

To make matters worse, early this week he paraded out three unemployed people in the Rose Garden to announce another “great accomplishment”, the eighth extension of the unemployment benefits program since the recession began. He also criticized those “evil” Republicans who opposed this great achievement and attempted to block it because they merely wanted to offset the cost ($30B) by cutting some expenditures or taking it out of unspent TARP or Stimulus monies. What a terrible idea! Why this is a mere drop in the bucket, what’s $30B to this year’s $1.4 trillion deficit?

Tell me,at what point does 2 years of unemployment benefits become a welfare program? When will these extensions run out? This exercise is a testament to a failed Stimulus package and a contradiction to the “summer of recovery” touted by our totally clueless Vice President. A record 6.7 million Americans have been out of work for at least 6 months, that’s 45.5% of the total jobless, close to the highest ever recorded. The number was 23.4% in February, 2009. How’s that for recovery?

These results confrm several recent studies which conclude that extended unemployment benefits actually raises unemployment rates. If you pay people not to work, they tend to delay looking or get more selective and pass up jobs to wait for the right one, which never comes along. None of us want to deprive our citizens of support in times like this, but if you’re going to extend benefits you ought to make it deficit neutral because the action will stimulate unemployment rather than the economy.

So the beat goes on and this President, his economic advisors, and this bumbling Congress, continue to make the wrong moves that run counter to getting us out of this rut. I keep watching, trying to say something positive about this Administration, and counting the days until November.

Leadership 101 - Obama Needs the Course

2010-06-10T14:55:00.000-07:00

Earlier this year on these pages, http://conservativesideas.blogspot.com/2010/01/economic-or-leadership-crisis.html, I wrote an article about leadership, where I described the traits of true leaders in certain circumstances. I then went on to illustrate President Obama’s actual actions in those types of situations to make the point that he is not a leader. He is nothing more than an ideologue whose friends and associates are cut from the same cloth. Academics, politicians, and bureaucrats who have no experience in the private sector and when a crisis arises always look for someone to blame or criticize rather than take charge.

Here again , we see in the Gulf oil spill the same kind of response that I illustrated in that article, which usually comes from someone who has no operational experience, has never run anything, and whom 53% of us have given the most difficult job in the world. Heaven help us!

If you recall the actions of some our past Presidents or political leaders you will see what I mean. JFK in the Cuban missile crisis, Ronald Reagan in the Iran hostage crisis, George Bush, Sr. in the Gulf War, George Bush, Jr. after 9/11, and Rudy Giuliani during and after the 9/11 attack. These men illustrated leadership, compassion, and a determination that gave you the sense that they were in charge and will take care of the problem.

Contrast Mr. Obama, who 52 days into the crisis has yet to talk or meet with the CEO of BP to go over their clean-up plan and make sure that they are using all the best minds in the industry to focus on this problem. Instead, his first move is to send his Attorney General down to Louisiana to make sure we have someone to blame and pay for the damages (as if anyone thought BP was going to skip town), plus his Homeland Security advisor who knows nothing about off-shore drilling, his Climate Control Chief, who will check on whether this will affect the climate (as if we care at this point), the Secretary of Energy who advised that he will “keep his boot on the neck of BP” (which was very comforting), and Mr. Obama goes on the Today Show to let us know that he will “kick ass” for all those who are at fault and then tells us that his administration was “on this from day one”, which is a total fabrication.

Leaders don’t have to tell you repeatedly that they are in charge of the situation. You know it, usually by their actions not their words. Unfortunately, we are finding out the hard way that what we really have is a leadership crisis. Let’s all pray that we don’t face an international or terror event in the next two years. Heaven knows that Iran, North Korea, the European economic situation, Venezuela, and many other hot beds over the world can erupt at any moment.

Let’s try to get Obama into a Leadership 101 course within the next two years and then elect a real leader in 2012.

Obamacare - The More You Know It The Less You Like It

2010-05-23T15:20:00.000-07:00

It’s beginning to be apparent that all we said about Obamacare was true. Nancy Pelosi said, “Let’s pass this bill first, and then we find out what’s in it”. Mr. Obama said “those who like their current coverage will be able to keep it” (not true), and “your coverage and quality of care will remain unchanged”, again (not true).

Soon millions of American workers will discover that they no longer have employer-provided health insurance because employers now realize that it is cheaper to pay government fines than to insure their employees. According to the House Energy and Commerce Committee several major companies have made internal calculations to determine how much can be saved by dropping their employer-provided insurance, paying a $2,000 fine for each employee, and leave their employees the option of buying government subsidized insurance in the newly created private health insurance exchange created by Obamacare.

Well, if the answer is what AT&T just came up with, you can kiss the 50+ year system of employer-sponsored health insurance, goodbye. Last year, AT&T paid $2.4B to cover the medical costs of its 283,000 active employees. By dropping its health plan and paying the annual fine for each uninsured worker, the cost will total $600M, leaving AT&T with a handsome profit of $1.8B. That may be better than the deal they got with Apple on the iPhone! A new income stream compliments of Obamacare.

The unfortunate thing is now that cost will be subsided by the government (or the U.S. taxpayer) across all income levels by those who pay tax. The problem is that with this new set up, low income employees (i.e. $30,000/yr) paying no income tax get an annual subsidy in the new insurance exchange of about $19,400, almost $17,000 more than the current employer-sponsored system as the government pays almost all the premium and most of the out-of-pocket costs. The employees making $100,000/yr get no subsidy in the insurance exchange.

In Massachusetts, people who get subsidized insurance from an exchange are put in health plans that pay health providers Medicaid rates plus 10%. That’s less than Medicare pays, and significantly less than rates paid in private plans. So now that we pushed 32 million more people into the system with Obamacare, and employers will eventually push millions more into subsidized health plans, and no one is doing much about adding new doctors, it looks like people with low reimbursement rates will have to get in the rear of the line.

My doctor just told me that her income went down by 1/3 last year and it may be 1/2 this year. If you have a government subsidized plan, how long will you wait until she gets to you? And how much time will she spend with you? So, Mr. Obama said this will lowers costs, with no change in the quality of your care. Do you believe it?

The Cap & Trade Heist - Part III

2010-05-08T11:50:00.000-07:00

Thus far you’ve seen how the same clique of people is planning to benefit from Cap & Trade legislation. Former discredited executives from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, investors in CCX from the Joyce Foundation, the Tides Foundation, GIM, the Center for American Progress, and the Apollo Alliance, the group that actually wrote the $780B Stimulus Bill for Congress, and the 24 Czars who will be running all this from inside this administration.

Mind you, less than six percent of the people in this administration have had private business experience, most of them are socialist organization leaders, union thugs and bosses,evironmentalists, and academics. So now the stage is set to pass this misguided legislation that has already been shown in Europe to be a disaster. Spain adopted it and, like Greece, is on the verge of bankruptcy and will need to be “bailed-out” by the European Union and/or the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for which the U.S. has a 17% liability, 3x as much as any country who participates in it.

Remember the Cap & Trade (or Climate) bill passed the house in June 2009 as Nancy Pelosi hustled it through by a slim 7 vote margin. She was actually able to get 7 Republicans to vote for it, and then it quickly went on the shelf as it was apparent that it wouldn’t get by the Senate, so the emphasis went to Obamacare. Obama would love to get this passed in order to generate the estimated $600B/yr it would provide for the government coffers and help offset the $2+ trillion that Obamacare will eventually cost. This is in addition to the money in increased energy prices that you will bear.

The Progressives need Cap & Trade to complete their transformational agenda and they need to get it done before the November election when they will lose control of the House. The public does not want this bill, but that does not concern this Congress. Therefore, the stage is set for a fight that will eventually break the back of the Obama presidency. They have the investors the technology, and the cover in place, all those no-name individuals who lurk behind the scenes. What is lacking is the law that will open the way to make it happen.

The Cap & Trade Heist - Part II

2010-05-06T16:14:00.000-07:00

The people who established the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) claim that when it is fully operational it will be trading carbon emissions valued at $10 trillion/yr. To put that in perspective the New York Stock Exchange trades securities valued at about $14 trillion/yr. Wow! This global warming thing is really going to be good! Sounds like marketing to me.

One of the investors in this is the Joyce Foundation of Chicago. This foundation was established in 1948 by the Joyce family who generated their wealth in the lumber mills and retail building materials market in the Midwest and Louisiana. Its original mission was with religious, charitable, scientific, literary, and educational endeavors, but when the sole heir died the foundation was taken over by a liberal-minded Board which now emphasizes programs for welfare oriented causes, the environment, gun violence, money, and politics.

When State Senator Obama and his friend Valerie Jarret got on the Board, grants were provided that went to the establishment of CCX and other programs for entitlements in the in the South Chicago area for education and gun violence. Since the State is now considering bringing in the National Guard to stem the tide of violence in South Chicago this year and the fact that the schools are still among the worse in the country, these funds don’t seem to have been used effectively.

After Joyce, some of the other usual suspects surfaced to put money in the CCX. The Tides Foundation, which is chaired by Wade Rathke (ACORN) gets money from George Soros and the Center for American Progress. At the end of 2006 the Tides Foundation and Center had assets of $185M and passes money along to many radical and even Communist organizations so that it is “laundered” and donors can avoid a paper trail. More investors have surfaced for the CCX. Al Gore’s Generation Investment Management, LLC (GIM) is a London based management investment firm that focuses on the green revolution and various global warming projects. The Managing Partner is David Blood, former Goldman Sachs executive, so obviously money from credible organizations goes to GIM, since they don’t want to appear to be negative about all these money-losing green projects.

Now that the investors are on board we must have the technology for the CCX, so right after the Democrats took control of Congress during Bush’s second term, the infamous Franklin Raines, a Clinton appointee who was presiding over Fannie Mae (FM) used FM money to secure a patent for the U.S. CCX idea. You remember Raines, the housing bust can be laid in his lap for his sub-prime mortgage policies, and he eventually was discredited and exiled to the woodwork, but not after he pocketed $90M ($52M in bonuses) because FM results were so good during this fiasco. He now is a Board member of Enterprise Community Properties an organization dedicated to good housing for all deserving people. It’s trying to undo the mess he created, so I guess that’s why he is on the Board!

Well, we now have the investors and the technology. In the finale, Part III, let’s look at the law and the cover.

The Cap & Trade Heist - Part 1

2010-05-02T13:56:00.000-07:00

In my last post I called this Cap & Trade concept the biggest heist in American History. This scam being pushed on an unwary public reminds me of the derivatives market and the consolidated debt obligations (CDO’s) concocted by Wall Street, only this is designed by left wing politicians and environmental zealots to scam money, develop celebrity, obtain government funds, write articles, and make a good living, all in the name of social justice and saving the planet.

Since beginning this blog in February, 2009 I have written several articles related to this subject. It would be beneficial to review these before you get into this subject. They are as follows:

Global Warming Uncovered 12/02/09
Climate Change Facts – Obama Lies 6/29/09
Global Warming and Bad Science 6/11/09
Nuclear Waste: An Imagined Problem 3/16/09

Cap & Trade is a concept that is aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions by placing a cap on these emissions based on a company’s current levels and providing cap “credits” to companies with emissions below the cap. These credits can be traded among companies to help those that are unable to “meet” their cap while they change their processes to get into compliance. Obviously, large companies with high carbon footprints can “buy” these credits from companies with smaller footprints who don’t need the credits. This will be costly for the energy-oriented industries so these costs will be passed on to the consumer and as President Obama said “energy costs will sky rocket” but in the long term this will be better for the planet.

His administration’s stated goal is “80 by 50” (80% reduction in CO₂ emissions by 2050), a reduction of 20 tons/person which would give us a carbon footprint like the one we had during the Mayflower days. This goal is obviously unrealistic and unachievable, but as long as most of us don’t know that, President Obama can set it anyway, he most likely won’t be alive then so he won’t be held accountable. Remember, there is no conclusive scientific evidence that man-made CO₂ affects the climate in anyway, it is only a theory at this point!

Well, in order to trade these emission credits we need some sort of commodity exchange, right? Also, in order to set up this exchange we need investors, we need technology to justify the concept, we need laws to develop the rules of operation, and we need some sort of cover so it can operate without a lot of public scrutiny. We don’t want the people to know how all these union and labor groups, elected officials, former scam artists, and environmental and social justice groups are making out on this. So, believe it or not, the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) was set up in 2003. Hummm….…Chicago, now that’s interesting.

This exchange really started rolling when the Democrats took control of Congress, Barack Obama was a presidential candidate, and Cap & Trade became more than a concept in the U.S. Also, remember now what we are doing, trading puffs of air (containing a small amount of CO₂) which hasn’t been generated yet, and currently has no value at all. Who would be crazy enough to invest in that?

Part II of the Cap & Trade heist next.

America Adrift with Inept Leadership and Shady Characters

2010-04-30T16:23:00.000-07:00

Are you concerned about where this nation is headed? Is this leadership bringing us together as promised? Do you see a gathering storm in the immigration situation, are racial tensions increasing, does the Iranian nuclear threat have you worried, why have we abandoned our reliable allies for Muslim political correctness, do you feel our homeland is now less secure, and is the massive redistribution of wealth that is currently underway to “fundamentally transform this nation” something you wanted?

Why is our Congress voting on Puerto Rico independence when this question has already been resolved by the Puerto Rican people in previous elections and there’s plenty more important things to do? Why is the White House trying to control the U.S. census? What we are seeing is a massive grab of power and control by the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, a Party which I don’t recognize anymore. Where is the main street media in all of this, and why aren’t they holding this hypocrite of a President accountable for breaking most of his campaign promises after only 16 months in office?

Glenn Beck, a Fox political commentator at 5 PM EST, has finally uncovered the leftist tactical moves going on in the White House with people we have never heard of before, who are part of the Chicago political mafia and have been involved in this economic meltdown and are now prepared to make billions from the taxpayers in an effort to force Cap and Trade and the Green Revolution on this country. The Green Revolution is the biggest hoax in American history. It is no more than a scheme to redistribute our economic wealth to enrich corrupt politicians and strip this country of the entrepreneurial spirit that has made us great. Enron (remember them?) put this scam together years ago.

This is a Progressive action plan to undermine the religious foundation of our country, our Constitution, and the vision of our founding fathers. It is based on the theory of modern progressives that our Constitution is “outdated” and should be an evolving document reactive to developing events and the current social mores, unfounded in basic Judeo-Christian values and based on their definition of “social justice”.

Our system is based on “equal justice”, predicated on the rule of law not on one’s color, race, economic condition, or political status. I don’t know what social justice means or who is the omnipotent regulator of such a justice system.

Anyway, if you’re not able to see Glenn Beck’s program about this sorry attempt to hijack this country, I’ll start with Cap and Trade in the next post. Believe me this is no conspiracy theory, it’s the real thing and it’s going on in our backyard right now.

Will Progressives Ever Learn?

2010-04-16T13:23:00.000-07:00

I am writing this on ”tax day”, the day that half of us give to the government far more than we take back, and the other half who pay no taxes, takes back all they can get from our massive entitlement system. Tim Ryan, the Republican Congressman from Wisconsin, said that even before discounting for the uncontrolled spending of the current administration, in 10 years 70% of the population will be pulling out more than it puts into the entitlement system. Imagine what the numbers will be when we consider the Stimulus Plan, the Omnibus budget, and Obamacare not to mention the extended unemployment programs, and all the other “temporary” entitlements put in place by this out-of-control Congress and Administration.

The myth that government can create jobs or control the economy is just that…a myth! FDR proved this during the Great Depression. All those government programs failed to create sustainable jobs and in 1939 the unemployment rate still exceeded 20%, while in Europe the average rate was about 12% in 1938. Even with WWII, when you consider that 10-12M soldiers were at war and 15M people were making tanks and guns, most of those jobs had little use after the war. So in October of 1944 FDR spelled out his vision for a post war America. And you guessed it; it was more of the same. Government subsidized housing, federal health care, more TVA projects, all those goodies compliments of the federal government.

Roosevelt died before the war ended and his successor, Harry Truman, urged Congress to enact this New Deal encore. Both chambers of Congress gave him a resounding NO! No federal program for health care, no full-employment Act, limited federal housing, and no increase in the minimum wage or Social Security benefits. Instead, Congress reduced the income tax rates for the rich and middle class, corporate rates were trimmed, and FDR’s “excess profits” tax was repealed, so that corporate rates effectively went from 90% to 38% after 1945.

By the late 1940’s, the invigorated economy was generating more revenue than during the war when tax rates were higher. Price controls were eliminated in 1946 and the U.S. began running budget surpluses. Unemployment, which was double digit during the 30’s, was 3.9% in 1946 and remained in that range into the next decade.

I’m not saying that our current great recession is the same, the factors that contributed to it are different than those that existed in the 30’s. However, the lesson is clear, when a bipartisan Congress has the will to stop an ego-centric leader who is on the wrong path, it can. The people are beginning to wake-up to the fact we have the power in the ballot box to change things even in a mid-term election.

The facts I have provided are cited in a book I read recently entitled “New Deal or Raw Deal” (Simon & Schuster, 2008), by Dr. Burton Folsum, Jr., a professor of history at Hillsdale College. I hope that President Obama picks up a copy, it’s far more useful at this stage of his life than the writings of Saul Alinsky or anything that Hugo Chavez would give you.

"You Can Do It" America

2010-04-02T09:46:00.000-07:00

Thinking objectively in this crazy world these days is an awesome chore. We have the main street media that bombards us every day with information that is purported to be news but contains nothing more than slanted headlines designed to give the reader a bias before he even reads the article and then spins the article to match the headline so you get their version of the “news”. It seems that the editorial pages spill over to the front page. The sports page is only where I get the facts. Somebody won and somebody lost! Except when you read about Tiger Woods, where it looks like everybody lost (or won), depending on your perspective.

All this is counteracted by talk radio and the dueling cable news network’s which give you their version in sound bites, video clips, and interviews with people that agree with them. There may still be pundits and news reporters that try to give you objective analysis with no spin, but they are a dying breed.

Last night my wife and I called Christopher Lowell, the celebrated designer, who is a good friend and confidante. The moniker “designer” is a misnomer for Christopher, who really is a philosopher, writer, motivational speaker, and an expert in consumerism, marketing, lifestyles, and a forecaster of future consumer trends. You may remember that Christopher Lowell was a pioneer in the early days of cable with the “You Can Do It” approach to interior design and has written 6 books on the topic. This is before cable got on the reality craze and he got off the train.

Christopher now resides in Santa Fe, NM and is working on new marketing techniques using the Internet, Twitter, Facebook, and other social media. Obviously, he has a sizable following and an active Twitter network and mentioned the political questions, anger, and fear in many of the messages he gets pertaining to the antagonism and partisanship that now prevails in our society. Christopher is an apolitical person and very sensitive to what is happening to his friends and fans as a result of this economic crisis.

In one of his recent blogs http://www.christopherlowell.com/interactive/blog/?p=1258 he talked about all the good people he meets who are working their tails off for the benefit of their community, city, and town, regardless of what’s going on in Washington. This is the backbone of “American exceptionalism” which we see going on every day regardless of race, religious beliefs, or political inclination. People who wonder why there are others out there who want to kill us and our culture and why they have to send their sons and daughters to a faraway place across the globe to defend our freedom.

Christopher bemoaned, “if only we can hear their stories instead of shows about the kooks and the anger fringe, we will come together regardless of political preference”. Christopher, you have the right idea and I know you will give your followers the right advice because you have no political agenda and you love your country. America needs to buy in to your motto “You Can Do It”.

USA - Not a Banana Republic

2010-03-25T09:05:00.000-07:00

Yes, we are now in the throes of a fundamental transformation of the United States, all in the name of “social justice”. Did you ask for this? Do you want this? Do you think that we have an unjust social system? It seems to me that for decades we have been the most charitable nation in history. When we defeat our enemies, we help to build them back up. We are first on the scene in any natural disaster no matter where it happens, and we are generally a moral and just people, admired and emulated all over the world.

There may be things in our history that we are not proud of, like our Civil War and our treatment of black people, etc., but we are no different from most countries with similar faults, and we have taken actions to correct those wrongs. We also have poor people, just like other countries, but we help people in poverty with government programs and private charitable organizations, faith-based and private, and we have spent billions to help people in this condition. Has this eliminated poverty? No, and it never will, because when you just give money to people you become an enabler, and people expect it will keep coming and they protest when you take it away.

That’s why governments that expropriate money from the wealthy class via excessive taxes and other means and redistribute it to poor people, generally have stagnate or shrinking economies. Make a list: Cuba, Venezuela, France, UK, Russia, Greece, Italy, etc. Also, there are countries where the money stops at the government level and goes in their pockets, like many nations in Africa and parts of Central and South America. The key is to provide an environment where people want to invest, create jobs, and grow their businesses. Uncertainty is the biggest deterrent to this, and that’s where we are today in the U.S.

Getting back to fundamental change, poverty is relative. In the U.S. most of our poor people have two televisions, a car, an apartment, free schools, health care even if they can’t afford it, and the opportunity to improve themselves. Giving them more entitlements won’t change their condition nor incentivize them to improve. Yet every time I turn on the TV there is our President yelling at me about how we need to give more money to the disenfranchised and how our poor people are dying because of those bad health insurance companies or because they are uninsured. It’s almost like a Fidel Castro or Hugo Chavez speech marathon with the same old BS. He makes us sound like a banana republic or a third world country; all in the name of “social justice”.

Well, Mr. President, we are not an unjust and oppressed society and we don’t need fundamental transformation. We need a President for all the people and one who builds us up and doesn’t tear us down. We need a government that gets out of our way and makes things easier, less regulations and laws, not more. We have inalienable rights given to us by God not government, and we don’t want to be lectured to. And, by the way Mr. President, we are smarter than you think and we know what you’re up to.

Tyranny Trumps in Healthcare

2010-03-23T09:51:00.000-07:00

You haven’t heard much from this corner in quite some time as I have watched things unfold in the health care debate. I predicted that Obamacare was dead after the Scott Brown election to the Senate from Massachusetts and I was dead wrong. I guess I had underestimated Obama’s tenacity to get his way regardless of what the people want. That’s what ideologues do.

Also, I never thought that the complete annihilation of this country right before my eyes on Sunday night would be gross entertainment, as I actually laughed myself silly listening to Nancy Pelosi’s remarks about this fiscal Frankenstein of a bill. She actually said this bill was about the American character, yes Nancy, back-room deals, bribes, arm-twisting, threats, patronage, political payoffs, and the like. Just like our founding fathers designed. She quoted the Declaration of Independence, after a few flubs, something about inalienable rights and life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Yes, Nancy, the right to have the Federal government determine your healthcare and force you to buy health insurance or be fined if you delay, with increasing interest penalties. The right to have 17,000 new IRS agents enforce this and harass you if you don’t comply with this new law. Yes Nancy, the right to have some Washington bureaucrat overrule your doctor by using some actuarial table to decide whether you “qualify” for life-saving treatment, based on your age and some productivity factor. And if your doctor decides to give you that treatment he gets fined because he “spent” too much government insurance on you.

We now have the House of Representatives being controlled by a pot-smoking, flower child from San Francisco, who sounds like she’s still on an acid trip when you listen to the distorted logic in her outlandish utterances. The crazies have been in charge of Congress for the last 4 years and they can’t keep blaming George Bush.

Obama’s remarks were equally outlandish, when he said this illustrated government of the people, by the people, and for the people, with a straight face, when 2 out of every 3 people absolutely reject this legislation. Yes, they both said this was an “historic moment”, just like Medicare (broke!), and Social Security (going broke!). I likened it to Pearl Harbor, 9/11, and the Great Depression, historic all right!

There are good things in this bill that both parties like, and that’s what the Democrats will be selling you in the coming months, but they won’t tell you about the government takeover buried in the 2,700 pages of this piece of progressive garbage. We will test the constitutionally of this bill in the coming months and thank God it won’t be operative for another 4 years, but you’re going to start paying for it now. And as the wheels come off this economy, this President stands by and continues to spend another 2.5 trillion of money we don’t have.

He continues his objective to transform this country into a European style socialist state that we don’t want and can’t recognize. Just another community organizer, but this time the community is the United States of America!

Ryan's Plan Reverses the Path to Progressivism

2010-02-09T18:17:00.000-08:00

Paul Ryan, a young Republican Congressman from Wisconsin, is a ranking member of the House Budget Committee. He first introduced an alternative fiscal policy in 2008 called a Road Map for America’s Future, and has since fine-tuned it as the current administration and congressional leadership continues to pursue the reckless expansion of government and a progressive fiscal policy that is leading us towards a European style welfare state, where excessive unemployment, and higher taxes, and reduced productivity become the normal state of the economy.

Ryan’s Road Map provides us with hope that our current course can still be turned around and we can restore our economy to the elements rooted in individual initiative, entrepreneurship, and innovation, which made us the envy of the world. It explicitly describes a completely different vision about Health Care, Medicare, Social Security, and Tax Reform that refutes the charge that the GOP is the party of “No” and has offered no alternative to the progressive agenda now being forced upon us by the current Democrat leadership.

Health Care: Ryan’s plan shifts the control and ownership of health insurance from away from the government and employers to the individual, by providing refundable tax credits of $5,700 for families and $2,300 for individuals to purchase coverage in any state and keep it if they move, or change jobs, and with high risk pools being created that make affordable care available to those with pre-existing conditions.

Medicare: This program is secured for Americans currently 55 or older and for those under 55, it creates a Medicare payment, averaging $11,000 to be used to purchase a Medicare certified plan. The cost is adjusted to reflect inflation, and pegged to income. It also funds tax free Medical Savings Accounts (MSA’s), which will keep Medicare solvent for generations.

Social Security: The Road Map preserves the existing Social Security program for those 55 or older. For those under 55, the plan offers the option of investing over 1/3 of their current SS taxes in personal retirement accounts, similar to the Thrift Savings Plan that is available to Federal employees. It allows individuals to pass these assets to their heirs and guarantees they will not loss anything they contribute. It also makes SS permanently solvent by modestly adjusting the growth of higher income accounts and providing a modest increase in the retirement age.

Tax Reform: The tax code is simplified with a form that is the size of a post card; just two rates, 10% on income up to $100k (joint filers), and $50k (single filers), and 25% for higher incomes. It eliminates the alternative minimum tax, taxes on interest income, capital gains, dividends, and the death tax. It replaces corporate taxes with a business consumption tax of 8.5% which is roughly half the average of the industrialized world and will make American companies compete more favorably in the global economy.

I think you will see that this plan is bold and innovative and sets us on the path to a smaller government and lower taxes. Something you may not expect from the party of “NO”.

Party Affiliation is Now Meaningless

2010-02-04T11:15:00.000-08:00

I got a call last night around 9:30 PM from the Republican National Committee trying to solicit more money to continue my long term membership into 2010. I get letters and calls every week from Jeff Sessions, Michael Steele, Jim DeMint, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, and their aides, all asking for money. I usually tell them to get lost and I tear up and throw out the mail.

I sometimes go into a long tirade with the callers telling them I won’t give a dime to a political party with no leaders, and uncertain message, and no horse to ride in 2012. I guess it took the “Massachusetts Miracle” to wake the Republicans up, but they still don’t know what to do.

Most of you who read my posts know that I tend to support the policies that are espoused by the Republican Party and I have been a registered Republican for many years. Surprise! However, I am quite disappointed in Republican politicians who only spend their time criticizing the President’s agenda, rather than clearly articulating their policies and vision for America.

A good example recently occurred when a vulnerable President went before a conference of House Republicans a few days ago after the Scott Brown election in Massachusetts. Obviously, we must treat our President with respect, but most of these Congressmen completely let him off the hook and failed to ask penetrating questions and to hold him accountable for the multitude of mistakes and bad decisions we have seen from this Administration ranging from the economy, to national security, to foreign policy. Instead, they worked from prepared notes rather than engage him in real debate about the outlandish remarks, mistruths, and manipulation of the facts that we hear in most of his public appearances.

The Republican Party has a cadre of very young and talented Congressmen and Senators such as Jim Spence, Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan, John Thune, Tim Pawlenty, and now Scott Brown, not to mention former governors and senators such as Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, and Rick Santorum, etc. Until I see the Party get behind a few of these fellows and initiate an effort to bring them forward to the public and the opposition and not only showcase them on Fox News, I am unaffiliated.

I guess right now I’m a member of the Tea Party. One of those who are angry and frustrated with what’s going on in Washington and in the financial community and neither Party gets a dime from me until I hear a coherent and consistent message, see the vision, and observe the choices available for 2012. After seeing what’s happening to this nation under the current progressive Pelosi, Reid, Obama agenda, I am in a panic mode and a man without a Party. Perhaps that means I’m an Independent and judging from the polls there’s a lot more of us these days.

Does Progressivism Mean Progress?

2010-02-01T19:17:00.000-08:00

Progressive is a term you will hear more often in the coming months and as long as Obama is President. It is a positive–sounding word because it sounds like “progress” or “change” which are words that most of us like, whereas, conservative sounds like “stuck in the past”, traditional, and those boring images. This is where semantics can be deceiving. Remember when “liberal” was very positive, now it’s somewhat of a liability if you are a politician, thus the word progressive. We should learn to understand words in the context they are used, before we make judgments as to what they really mean.

Progressivism in our domestic politics started at the turn of the century; and Woodrow Wilson was our first progressive President. Wilson believed that our Constitution was anachronistic, mired in the past, and irrelevant to modern times. In fact, he felt we should not bother with the Declaration of Independence because it was just a list of grievances against King George III. Wilson put the State before the people and was an elitist as well as a dedicated racist. He even re-segregated our military, and as a believer in the redistribution of wealth, gave us the progressive income tax that we have today. He was a co-founder of the League of Nations which was a precursor to the United Nations, and we all know how those ideas worked out.

Like Wilson, modern progressives do not believe in natural rights but believe that people can be made more perfect by a strong central government, but when left to their own designs will go astray. The founding fathers believed that man is flawed, but they also believed that power corrupts and therefore they set up a system of checks and balances to insure that control is not delegated to a select few.

Progressives also have a strong interest in eugenics as a means to improve the masses. This is the science dealing with the improvement of hereditary qualities by forced selection. One can see this in some of the progressive language in Obamacare, where the elderly are given less preference in health care than the “more productive” segment of the population.

Progressives are found in both parties, with Wilson, Roosevelt, and now Obama being the most extreme Democrats and Teddy Roosevelt a Republican example. In fact, I would include John McCain as one of our contemporary Republican progressives. Progressivism is different from Communism, in that, it does not promote violence or revolution but believes that evolution is the preferred route to transformation. I think you should look at progressives as conservative Socialists, but clearly at the opposite end of the spectrum from our constitutional values of small federal government, rewarding individual initiative, and God-given natural rights.

We need to ponder what the influence of progressivism will be to a centrist nation like us, should progressives continue their dominance of the Democratic Party during Obama’s tenure. Will it affect our social values, our economic growth, our rule of law, and our global status?

More on this later.

The Sad State of the Union and the Presidency

2010-01-28T06:59:00.000-08:00

When I hear State of the Union speeches I always come away with a cynical attitude about politicians and the President didn’t let me down last night. He was supposed to talk about the state of the union but we got another campaign speech. Of course, he concluded on a high note about how great we are as a people in difficult times, but continues to be tone deaf to what the people are telling him. He forges ahead with his big government programs and his rhetoric does not match his actions.

We still have a President in a state of denial that he can ever be wrong in anything he does, while he makes me dizzy with programs and initiatives that do little to affect a “change we can count on”. Asking Republicans (or anyone) to give him some ideas on healthcare was disingenuous, saying things were “a mess when I walked in the door”, talking about more exports when he has pursued protectionist trade policies (the Columbia free trade pact has been on his desk for a year), and now saying he’s for nuclear energy and off-shore drilling while pushing windmills and solar for years, is an insult to our intelligence.

In terms of national security (which was hardly mentioned in his speech), he talked about swift action against terrorists, disrupting terror plots, and taking credit for ending the Iraq war. All of this was another affront to an informed public. I was glad to hear that Michelle and Joe Biden are working together on helping military families. Now I understand why Michelle needs 22 aides when all the previous First Ladies had one.

Then he had the audacity to talk about putting all earmarks on the Internet, when he signed a stimulus bill with almost 9,000 earmarks, more of the hypocrisy that is a trademark of his presidency. Not to mention his scolding of the Supreme Court for “opening the floodgates” to corporate and foreign campaign contributions; after he just raised more money in history for his recent presidential campaign while the current rules were in effect and won’t tell us where all that money came from.

By contrast, the Republican response by Bob McDonald, the newly elected governor from Virginia, was well organized, concise, and focused on the issues that concern voters as evidenced in the recent Massachusetts special election. No heart-tugging platitudes or a lengthy list of initiatives, McDonald said it very clearly, “the Federal Government is doing too much”, illustrating the disconnect between Obama and the people.

If you ever had any doubt that Obama is an ideologue leftist who thinks government can create jobs, prevent poverty, and spend your money with abandon, you should be convinced after this speech. Given the poor performance of this administration, this President continues to push his progressive agenda despite putting this country on the brink of insolvency, and severely weakening our national security by giving foreign combatants and terrorists the civil rights of American citizens. One of the basic tenets of elite liberals is that the public is stupid or just doesn’t have the time or desire to become politically informed. This speech was an excellent example of that.

Obama will eventually pay for this condescending address to all the informed voters of this nation.

In America: The People Talk

2010-01-20T12:54:00.000-08:00

The results in Massachusetts last night illustrate a point I’ve been making for some time in this corner. The people eventually call the shots and if you have an arrogant President and Congress who think they know what’s best for you and then proceed on a path completely out of sync with what you want, the ballot box is how we do it in America. I’m just surprised it came this fast, even before the 2010 mid-term elections in November. We’ve seen it in Virginia, New Jersey, and now Massachusetts. Two of those states are so blue that this result is an utter rebuke of Mr. Obama’s policies and those of the Democratic controlled Congress by their own constituents.

We are a centrist country and move left or right of that periodically. If either party allows extremists to get control, the inevitable happens. The Democratic Party is currently controlled by the radical left. This President has deceived the voters by campaigning as a moderate, broken most of his promises in his first year, and has laden himself with advisors and staff that promote socialist, radical, and even Communistic approaches to government.

From this we can only conclude that Obama believes these theories and plans to follow this path, as illustrated by his track record, education, associates, and friends. For a long time most Democrats have been in denial. They have followed him down this path because his story was truly an American one; he is youthful, eloquent, and an African-American. Truly a statement of how far we have come as a nation. Too bad he is arrogant, aloof, close-minded, and a poor leader. Yes, he seems like a nice person with a lovely family, but these are dangerous times and there are serious questions about his leadership and the outlandish dealings in Congress.

The people are tired of corruption, self- serving special interests, back room deals, and creating legislation on the fly. They don’t want big government that tells you what car to buy, how to heat your house, what you can eat, what kind of medical treatment you deserve, and what your salary should be. An administration that believes it is solely the economy causing the tea-party demonstrations of “angry red-necks”, is in total disconnect its the people.

Will the results in Massachusetts finally get Washington to listen? Not likely, but I believe Obamacare is dead and we will eventually get bi-partisan healthcare reform and it will be much better than this deplorable legislation that is currently on the table. If not, a lot of Democrats will be out of work in November.

An Economic or Leadership Crisis?

2010-01-07T11:44:00.000-08:00

As President Obama concludes his first year in office, I attempted to evaluate his leadership skills since that is a key characteristic of great Presidents. Also, as a student of Leadership, it’s clear that successful leaders are different and have different strengths and skill sets. One thing is sure, however, most are charismatic and eloquent speakers and can mesmerize their audience by their commanding presence and message. Think of Roosevelt, Kennedy, Reagan, Clinton; but even Hitler, Castro, and Chavez have that skill, so this attribute is important but not essential for great leaders.

What do people expect from their leaders? Usually, the following four things:

1. Purpose, Direction, Meaning
2. Trust
3. Optimism
4. Action and Positive Results

In delivering these things, the methods and tactics a leader uses are critical and separate the great ones from the mediocre.

Characteristics of Great Leaders

• Leaders have vision and develop a plan to implement that vision. They don’t make promises before they determine if the plan is feasible or achievable. Plans help them make go-no go decisions.
Think about GITMO and campaign promises.
• Leaders never look for blame in others. They are accountable and take action to make changes to correct poor implementation.
Think the Christmas Day bomber, Bush policies.
• Leaders never blame their predecessors for their problems or what they “inherited”.
Think the Bush policies, the recession, Iraq.
• Leaders admit when they make mistakes and don’t let their ego get in the way.
Think GITMO, Iran Policy, Stimulus, Healthcare, deficits, unemployment.
• Leaders encourage debate and try to reach compromise or a consensus among their managers or constituency.
Think healthcare debate, cap & trade, global warming scandal, Pelosi & Reid, Congress.
• Leaders don’t take credit for achievement, they know their limitations and look to give credit.
Think economic recovery.
• Well lead organizations are coordinated and provide a consistent message.
Think Robert Gibbs, Janet Napolitano, Joe Biden, Pelosi and Reid, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and the Czars.
• Leaders do not deride their organization in public or apologize for its behavior. This will demoralize their employees or constituents.
Think European Tour, Nobel Speech, Copenhagen Climate Conference, Latin American Conference Speech, Reagan’s quote “that shining city on the hill”.
• Leaders will support and come to the defense of their allies and not worry about offending their enemies.
Think Israel, Iranian demonstrators, Columbia, South Korea, former Soviet nations, Eastern Europe, Poland missile defense, Honduras.
• Leaders never come to conclusions, particularly in public, until they know all the facts.
Think the Christmas Day bomber, Louis Gates affair, Fort Hood shootings.
• Oh Yes! Leaders never say “knock on wood”.

Now I would like you to grade our President……… Enough said!

The Decadent Decade

2010-01-02T08:32:00.000-08:00

I am writing this post on New Year’s Day 2010 at the end of a turbulent decade that started with the Y2k uncertainty of the previous computer decade and ends with another uncertainty of greater magnitude: The economic viability of the United States.

After realizing that Y2k was an overblown concern, we continued on a spending binge of great proportions as we ran up the largest consumer debt in our history and started a 10-year housing boom that was encouraged by our politicians, relished by lenders, and virtually ignored by our Federal Reserve which kept interest rates at record low levels and fueled the fire.

In the midst of this excess, we were savagely attacked by a cowardly enemy hell bent on killing Americans for religious reasons. We lost over 3,000 innocent civilians in New York, Washington D.C., and Pennsylvania on one day in September of 2001. We became engaged in a war with an invisible enemy that can’t be identified by a uniform, a country, or a government; only a concept called radical Jihad. This is an enemy with no great army or high-tech weapons, but one that uses human suicide bombers, women and children as human shields, and puts no value on life or human rights. No country other than the United States by the shear force of its values, its will, and its extensive wealth, can fight this evil. We will be in this war for many years and we will eventually prevail, but future generations will have to shed their blood again to preserve the American dream.

Then, like a flash, we end the decade with an economic meltdown unlike anything we’ve seen since the Great Depression, a fitting end to a decade of financial excesses and greed.

In my life of 7 1/2 decades, I may not see the end of another decade, but one thing I do know for sure; no matter how politically divided we may seem to be, the freedom to express our opinions without retribution, to welcome all diverse cultures to our shores, and our dedication to human rights and the value of the individual, will permit us to survive and flourish in the decades ahead regardless of the challenges that are put before us.

I want to wish all of you who read this column a Happy and Healthy New Year. I will continue to inform you as best I can on the important issues of the day, and trust you will use your right to be heard, so that you can impact the future destiny of this great country in a positive way.

American Democracy: Is the End in Sight?

2009-12-21T18:32:00.000-08:00

I recently had one of my readers e-mail me to request I write an article on how our elected officials in Congress can pass legislation that approximately 2/3 of the population is not in favor of, or believes we need right now. This is not easy to answer when for 200 years we have had a democracy, “of the people, by the people, and for the people”. Obviously, this was the intent of our founding fathers, but it no longer appears to be the practice of our legislators. Our population has become more diverse with many special interest groups and the federal government has taken upon itself to cater to the demands of these groups, invade every aspect of our lives, and than decide the winners and losers.

Now that the “progressive” wing of the Democratic Party has dominant control of Congress, and we just elected a President who is a believer in big government and the re-distribution of wealth, we have a situation where these progressive politicians think they know what’s best for you. Maybe it’s because they believe that we are not an informed public or don’t have the time or interest to become more informed. This has always been the credo of the elite liberal establishment.

The fact that this healthcare package, which affects 1/6 of the economy, is being rushed through Congress to meet some artificial deadline created by Obama because he says we need it now, is a vivid illustration that he knows what’s best for you and your opinion is not important. Also, the method by which this legislation is being debated (or not debated) is what one would expect from a corrupt regime:

The pretense of a debate
Partisan rules and involvement only
Bribery for votes via favors and pressure
Legislation written behind closed doors by a selected few
Media pressured to ignore the process

Does this sound like the United States of America or more like Red China, the old USSR, or maybe the new Venezuela?

I hope this answers my reader’s question. If we still are the democracy we once were, the only way to reverse this is in the ballot box. We will see in the 2010 and 2012 elections whether we are informed or care enough. Since Obama’s election victory came, in large part, from precincts populated by the less educated and those who pay no taxes, the current result is obvious.

An apathetic or impotent public leads to tyrannical government, it happened in Rome, Germany, China, Africa, and many countries in the Mid-East. It is almost unbelievable that it can happen in the United States, the most informed and wealthiest populace in the world. But just remember the words of Ronald Reagan, “Our freedom is only one generation away from extinction”. The next few years will tell us if this is so.

Harry Reid: Majority Nitwit

2009-12-08T08:11:00.000-08:00

Who is this fellow Harry Reid and how did he get to be the Senate Democratic Majority Leader? I realize that Nevada has not exactly been a reservoir of great statesmen, but it is a beautiful State with great vistas and I love Las Vegas, spent a fun night in Ely once, and enjoyed a scenic drive to Carson City as well. I guess Mr. Reid had established a record with important people in his party to earn this position, since he was the Minority Leader prior to the last election when the Democrats took control of the Senate.

He looks like a shy but likeable gent until he stands before a camera and opens his mouth. He has a hesitant and insecure way of expressing himself, sort of like Speaker Pelosi, and most of the stuff that comes out is stupid and dumb. That’s why I was wondering how he got to this position. If anyone knows, please let me know. I always say to my friends that, “ I love when he and Speaker Pelosi get in front of the television cameras, because that’s the best thing for the Republican Party!”Let them talk, please.

In keeping with his reputation, Harry Reid made a ridiculous, callus, and desperate statement yesterday which illustrates that he really has trouble in pulling enough Democratic votes together for this misguided healthcare legislation we now have before the Senate. Reid equated the current Republican opposition to the bill as the same as the opposition to slavery and the civil rights legislation of the 60’s, when opposing legislators said we need to “slow-down” and discuss this drastic legislation further. You may recall that there was a filibuster of the 60’s Civil Rights Bill, however, Mr. Reid neglected to tell you that 80% of the senators participating in that filibuster were Democrats. I also seem to recall that the Emancipation Proclamation abolishing slavery was made during a Republican administration. Nevertheless, the analogy of civil rights legislation and this healthcare bill is obviously ridiculous, out of context, and as I said, stupid!

Legislation that will impact one-sixth of this giant economy and result in hundreds of government regulations and mandates that affect every part of the lives of all our people, should not have a timetable for passage. This is not a football game. Also, the argument that the other side does not have an alternate plan is patently false, since I have heard it from Representatives, Eric Cantor, Mike Spence, Tom Ryan, and Senators John Thune, John McCain, Mitch McConnell and many more. The alternate plan is much cheaper, gets at the real reform need to cut costs, and retains the quality of healthcare while providing more competition. It does not throw out the baby with the bath water or cost anywhere near $2.5 trillion.

Why we need to rush this through in these economic times, no matter how damaging, and leave the mess it creates to future generations, is beyond me. The choice is between Obamacare and a better reform alternative, which Mr. Reid does not want to be heard.

Thank God, he will be on the unemployment lines in 2010. I’m rooting for you Nevada.

Global Warming Uncovered

2009-12-02T08:39:00.000-08:00

This corner has previously written articles that address the “junk” science of global warming, the posts were on March 11th, June 11, and June 29th, in which I discussed some of the scientific facts to illustrate that labeling CO₂ as the culprit in climate change is a farce that has already swindled billions of dollars from the economies of Europe and the U.S., which now threatens to reach trillions should the cap and “tax” legislation ever succeed in the Senate. Thank God the recent revelations about how overzealous scientists have attempted to hide data and prevent the publication of conflicting opinions may have finally put the nail in this coffin.

This is the story of how a very weak and fragmented climate theory has turned into a political ideology that has become a virtual industry in itself, while those who oppose it are considered heretics and obstacles to “progress”. It is a story of how misguided scientists, the media, and politicians can take noble environmental research and turn it into a money machine for their own self interests at the expense of those of us who are too busy living our lives to get informed.

For centuries the climate has always changed, sometimes drastically, even when the level of CO₂ was but a fraction of what it is today. What you don’t hear is that the global temperature has risen a mere ½ a degree centigrade in the last century and there is no evidence that the human production of CO₂ has any relationship to global temperature. In fact, volcanoes produce more CO₂ than man does; and decaying vegetation and oceans emit almost all of the CO₂ on this planet. The theory that man-made emissions can impact this is ludicrous and arrogant. Particularly when we consider that CO₂ is a minor greenhouse gas which represents only 0.054% of the total, and therefore any human impact would be even far less than that. Water vapor makes up 95% of greenhouse gas.

Regardless of all this, just follow the money and you will understand why the media and politicians continue to propagate this myth. Since many of these so-called reputable scientists elect to suppress and provide bias “peer reviews” of articles that refute this theory, there must be many research grants, consulting fees, books, and articles that provide a good living for them.

With the uncovering of thousands of emails and files that illustrate how this secretive group of scientists has suppressed data, frozen open debate, and ignored freedom-of-information laws in order to protect their money tree, we now see the quality of the science we are dealing with. At least the discourse will now be more open and objective and more of you out there will see that this inconvenient truth is one gigantic fib.

The Dumbing Down of America

2009-11-25T05:30:00.000-08:00

I hate to sound like a snob but as I wait for our President to make a decision about what he is going to do in Afghanistan concerning General McCrystal’s recommendation, I can’t help but think what got us into this ridiculous situation. I also thought that in my years as a CEO, if it took me four months to make a decision about a high priority issue and then announced to an awaiting constituency about issuing that decision after that amount of time, I would have been a laughing stock to the employees and the shareholders would probably have shown me the door. I guess in politics the bar is not set as high.

The question then came to me about how we put an individual into the most powerful job on this planet with virtually no experience in running anything and educated in the Saul Alinsky school for radicals. Recently, Professor Joseph Olsen of Hamline University School of Law, in St. Paul, Minnesota did an unusual analysis of some interesting facts concerning last November’s presidential election. Although Obama won by a convincing electoral vote margin, many of us thought that the margin would be greater given the Republican candidate, the bias press coverage, the enormous amount of money spent by Obama, and the economic developments just prior to the election. Consider these facts:

The number of States won by Democrats: 19, Republicans: 29
The square miles of land won by Democrats: 580,000, Republicans: 2,427,000
Population of counties won by Democrats: 127 million, Republicans: 143 million
Murder rates per 100k residents in counties won by Democrats: 13.2, Republicans: 2.1

Dr. Olson also added that “in the aggregate, the map of the territory Republicans won was the land owned by most of the taxpaying citizens of the country. Democratic territory encompassed those citizens living in low-income tenements and living off various forms of government welfare”.

Olson believes that the U.S. is now somewhere between the “complacency and apathy” phase in the evolution of democracy, with some 40% of the population already having reached the “government dependency” phase. Since the liberal wing of the Democratic Party is hell bent on amnesty and citizenship for 20 million illegal’s who will eventually vote, along with the lowering of the voting age, the educational level of the U.S. voting public will be similar to that of a Banana Republic. The fact that Obama was elected primarily by minorities and the youth vote with the popularity of a rock-star, are you surprised at what we are contending with today?

Ronald Reagan said that, “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction”. It’s time to stop this train to extinction. In this country we do it in the voting booth.

America you better start getting serious about this before its too late.

Fort Hood - Outright Terrorism and Political Correctness

2009-11-07T07:48:00.000-08:00

As I contemplate the events that occurred at Fort Hood, Texas the other day, I can’t help but believe this really was a terrorist act caused by political correctness run amuck even in the U.S. army. Although 13 people were murdered and 30 injured this could have been far worse, were it not for the brave acts of a few people. The density of unarmed people in a small space and the assumed secure surroundings existent at Fort Hood were a perfect scenario for an entrepreneurial terrorist like Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan to carry out his dirty deed.

More facts will eventually emerge, particularly as people who came in contact with Hasan over the years are questioned and his computer files are inspected, however, one thing is certain in my mind; this was clearly a planned and calculated terrorist act of the entrepreneurial variety. Hasan was not a member of the “corporation”, Al Qaida, but in business for himself. This act was driven by his Muslim religious beliefs and it was executed in the name of Allah as he shouted “Allaha Akbar” the Arabic phrase for “God is Great!”. The frightening thing is that sentiments like this are cultivated in many mosques all over the U.S. Although the vast majority of people who practice the Islamic faith here are peaceful and law-abiding, there are pockets of people like Maj. Hasan who are capable of this type of terrorism and, in fact, we have stopped many these terrorist attempts with the help of law-abiding Muslims. However, the silence of the Muslim community in condemning these acts is deafening, this also is a result of political correctness in their own community.

The U.S. is extremely vulnerable to entrepreneurial terrorism; since our armed forces and intelligence community are in dire need of people who speak Arabic, who can act as counter-intelligence agents for us, and will integrate with the local population in efforts to stabilize political factions where our forces are deployed. The problem is that the forces of political correctness exacerbate this vulnerability as exemplified in the Hasan case. Hasan may have been provoked by harassment, but it now appears that his actions as a psychiatrist for army returnees and his vocal tirades against our military policies made him a lightning rod for this harassment. His training as psychiatrist should have been enough for him to realize the consequences of his behavior.

Yes, this may have been the act of a desperate man but most of the suicide bombers recruited by Al Qaida are desperate men and women with no future and caught up in a religious justification for their acts. Maj. Hasan had a future, an education, a profession, and a job, all paid for, compliments of the U.S. government and yet he chose this action in the name of Allah. Most Americans abhor this, yet political correctness prevents us from speaking out about this apparently unique Islamic concept.

Health Reform: Bad Assumptions versus Good Logic

2009-10-27T16:32:00.000-07:00

I have been watching this "so-called" debate in health reform with interest and, as most of you know, this really has been a debate amongst Democrats only. The Republicans have been essentially squeezed out of the key meetings in the Senate except for Olympia Snow of Maine, since she seems to support this monstrosity of a bill. The specifics of the actual Senate bill are now being "worked out" behind closed doors between Rahm Emanuel, the President's Chief of Staff from Chicago, and Harry Reid the Majority Leader of the Senate along with a couple of aides, who basically take notes of the wondrous utterings of these gigantic intellectuals who single handedly are going to tell us what we should now do with 1/6 of our economy. Does that send shivers down your spine?

As this goes on, the President is telling you that we now have a bill that represents the best ideas of the Congress and of Republicans, Independents, and Democrats alike. It is a "bi-partisan bill that will not add one dime to the deficit". If you really believe that, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you or you can continue to read on in order to make your own judgment based on facts and history.

First, as a rational human being, does the idea of adding more than 20 million uninsured to the roles subsidized by $500 B in savings from cuts in Medicare fraud and benefits in addition to a 40% tax increase to private insurance companies, make you comfortable that the quality or availability of your health care will stay the same or even improve? If you said "yes" to this question then please stop reading this post because it appears that you have imbibed too much of the Kool-Aid.

Not only is the $827 B ten year cost of this bill a fantasy, but the bill is effective for only 7 years of the ten years. How is that for doctored math? Let's now look at the government's track record of estimating the costs of these health plans:

Government Cost Overruns - $B

Program	Year	Predicted Cost	Actual Cost
Medicare	1965	12	110
Medicare Hospital	1965	9	67
Medicaid Hospitization	1987	1	17
Medicare Home Care	1988	4	10
Schip	1997	5.4	6.8
Medicare Prescription Drug	2003	49	41

These overruns were recently published by the Wall Street Journal. Ironically, George Bush's prescription drug plan has actually underun predictions. How come we hear no kudos for Bush on this? The Congressional Office said that the primary cause of the success of the prescription drug bill was that "the pricing is better than anticipated, which is likely a reflection of the competition that's occurred in the private market". Wow! Look what happens when you let the private market operate instead of having politicians regulate what they think is warranted. I don't think Obama will admit he "inherited" something good from the Bush Administration, do you?

At this point I think you should let your logic dictate over what you're hearing from Washington and then decide whether this is reform or just putting your children and grandchildren further into hock.

Nordic Revenge

2009-10-11T14:43:00.000-07:00

While you’re still basking in the glow of President Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize, I thought a few comments were warranted. As you know, this corner has not been kind to our President but obviously he was not looking for this and his aides are actually mortified, since this raises world expectations that will obviously not be fulfilled, at least, if the first 9 months of his presidency is any indication of the future.

The Politics of Peace

Unlike some of the other Nobel prizes which actually are awarded for accomplishments, the Peace Prize has become a political comment by the Nobel Committee, which in recent years has been a cheap shot at the U.S. Since no one cares what the Nobel Committee says anyway, I wouldn’t get too upset about this. Norway is an ultra Socialist society where citizens give almost all of their money back to the government to take care of them for the rest of their lives. The economy goes nowhere, the suicide rate is off the radar screen, they are notorious for their prejudice about anything non-Scandinavian, and they rarely smile. So those of you who are irate about this, just relax and remember that Obama is part of a line of recent recipients, such as Al Gore, Jimmy Carter, and Yassar Arafat, that never did anything for peace or worthwhile for that matter. If I were Obama, I’d consider this an insult!

The End of American Exceptionalism

Obama won this infamous award because he professes all that Norway extols: pacifism, green radicalism, socialism, high taxes, the distribution of wealth, big government, global disarmament, and mediocrity. Now that this administration wants us to “blend in” with the rest of the crooks and despots in this world who have an equal vote in the U.N. with the greatest nation in the history of the world, the Europeans, particularly the likes of Norway, are elated. Thus, Obama gets the Nobel Peace Prize.

Potential versus Accomplishments

As a technically trained person, I always considered the Nobel Prize in the sciences as credible, but when it comes to literature, economics, and peace, the prize is generally awarded on how far left the recipient leans rather than real accomplishments. To Obama’s credit, his comments were appropriate considering his admission of his lack of accomplishments to date. However, he is scheduled to go to Oslo to accept the prize in December so he can make another speech apologizing for past U.S. transgressions and preach global disarmament and the new world of “multilateral diplomacy”. The period of American exceptionalism may be dormant for a while, at least the next three years, but we will rise again when a real leader emerges.

I was disappointed, I thought Michael Jackson might win the Peace Prize for his song, We are the World, We are the Children. What about Bono, what about Sean Penn, maybe Oliver Stone………?

Love at the Office

2009-10-10T07:48:00.000-07:00

The recent admission by late night comedian, David Letterman, to numerous sexual encounters with his staff members and interns over the years, has caused some interesting dialogue that illustrates the changing trends in our values. Many people thought this was funny; in fact, the way Letterman related this to his audience it appeared that he was telling a joke. He also said that he was concerned that his admission might embarrass the women involved. Now, tell me that wasn’t a sexist remark! Of course, he wasn’t embarrassed at all. I never thought I’d see the day that a married man with a child, admitting to such an indiscretion on national TV would be applauded and laughed at.

Now, I’m not a moralist or a prude, but since I was born in a different era I may be considered “a little behind the times”. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against love in the workplace, in fact, surveys show that 40% of us have been involved in romance with a co-worker. Most people don’t mind if it’s a peer relationship, however, when it’s between a boss and a subordinate and either one is married, it gets a negative reaction. It’s particularly egregious when the supervisor controls the promotions, salary, and career path of the subordinate. In many companies the involved parties are shown the door. In fact, some executive contracts have language to that effect.

It’s clear that in Letterman’s case, the affairs were well known by co-workers, they occurred when he was married, CBS was aware of it, but nothing was done, even though Letterman controlled the destiny of these people and they were considerably younger. In fact, it’s been revealed that he offered to pay for law school for one of them and then hire her as his attorney once she graduated.

I encountered such a situation as an executive when a manager who reported to me was caught in a comprising sexual situation by a cleaning woman when she unexpectedly arrived at his office. She reported it immediately to our Human Resources person, who was still in the building, and the act was verified. The manager was married for 30 years, had married children, and the female involved reported to him. She had been aggressively promoted and given generous salary treatment. I immediately took action by sending the female to another division and the manager was re-assigned and demoted. He eventually divorced his wife and married another workplace mate.

I was eventually thanked by many people in the organization who were aware of what was going on but were intimidated by the manager and his indiscretions and didn’t make me aware of it. I guess today my actions would be considered as somewhat of an “overkill”, but I think most of you over 50 believe I did the right thing. In the meantime, Letterman keeps using it in his monologue, the audience keeps laughing, and his ratings are sky-high.

I never did think Letterman was funny…now I know why.

France: The New Leader of the Free World

2009-09-30T15:34:00.000-07:00

We are now beginning to see the fantasy foreign policy of President Obama. In fact, his performance at the recent annual meeting of the U.N. General Assembly and his chairing of a ridiculous Security Council session on non-proliferation was particularly un-nerving. Do you really think that the permanent members of the Security Council, U.S., China, Russia, really want to get rid of nuclear weapons while North Korea, Iran, and Pakistan are busy building their stockpiles?

The fact that President Obama knew of Iran’s other previously undisclosed nuclear site and did not confront them at the UN session, was a clear error in judgment and a major disappointment to our allies. President Sarkosy of France and Gordon Brown of the U.K. were mortified that Obama waited until the G-20 meeting in Pittsburgh to give a rather tempered rebuke of Iran while Messrs. Sarkosy and Brown made very strong statements and looked like the real leaders of the free world.

It seems that President Sarkosy has been frustrated for months about Obama’s reluctance to confront Iran, but was told by the Administration that it didn’t want to “spoil the image of success” for Obama’s debut at the UN and his formal speech calling for his “dream” of total world disarmament. In fact, Sarkosy’s speech to the Security Council included a section about Iran’s latest deception, but was scrubbed at the last minute.

Sarkosy’s remarks, after Obama’s rather muted scolding of Iran at the G-20, were telling and seemed to be directed at Obama and not Iran. “We are right to talk about the future, but the present comes before the future, and the present includes two major nuclear crises (Iran and North Korea). We live in the real world, not in a virtual one”. Wow, is this France talking? “I support America’s extended hand but what has this produced for the international community? It has resulted in a statement by Iranian leaders calling for wiping off the map a member of the United Nations. What conclusions are we to draw?” Looks like Israel now has a more reliable friend.

On TV last night a credible reporter for a major Pittsburgh newspaper, said that aides of Sarkosy said to him that Sarkosy considers Obama naïve about foreign relations and is so egotistical that he doesn’t listen to those with more experience and just will do what he wants. This is shocking stuff coming from people at that level.

If you remember Obama’s opening line of his UN speech, he said “I know you have great expectations about me”. I guess he now thinks he is President of the whole world. A naïve President with a major ego is a dangerous combination. I never thought I’d see the day France would lead in confronting the bad guys for the free world while our President hides in his virtual world of disarmament.

Obama: Commander-in-Chump

2009-09-28T12:34:00.000-07:00

The events of the past few weeks must put a scare into the public as recent terror plots of Al Qaeda cells in the U.S. were nipped in the bud while an urgent proposal by our Commander in Afghanistan goes unheeded. These terror plots remind us that we are at war with an enemy that will stop at nothing to kill Americans here or abroad. Meanwhile, our Commander-in-Chief acts as though a war doesn’t even exist. In fact, his Commanding General in Afghanistan admitted last night on television’s 60 Minutes that he has spoken to the President only once in the last 70 days! Does this sound like a President engaged in a war?

What Are the Priorities?

General Stanley McChrystal’s memo urging a troop build-up of an additional 30-40,000 was sent to the White House in late August. Here we are a month later and the President has enough time to make the rounds of every network (except FOX News and the Food Network channels) to push his healthcare reform package (a package he doesn’t even know exists at this point), talk about the White Sox’s chances to make the playoffs on the David Letterman Show, and today announced that he and his wife are flying to Copenhagen on Friday to plea for holding the 2016 Summer Olympics in Chicago instead of Rio. This must be pay-back for his Windy City cronies so they can make big bucks, particularly his real estate friends. Frankly, I think Rio is a much better site for such an event and there are other more deserving cities in the U.S. that can use the economic lift from an Olympic event.

What Really is the Strategy?

In the meantime, our military is in harm’s way while Mr.Obama decides if he now wants to change the strategy in Afghanistan from the one he just set in March. That strategy was one in which he said was “a stronger, smarter, more comprehensive strategy” which would build schools, hospitals, roads, and enterprise zones, and address issues of energy and trade. We have thus far seen none of this! Where are the agricultural specialists, educators, engineers and lawyers? He said he was directing Secretary of State Clinton to develop a diplomatic plan to run in tandem with McChrystal’s military plan. Have you seen that plan? In fact, our Ambassador to Afghanistan, Karl Eikenberry, made a plea to the White House for funding this civilian support last month only to be told it was “premature”. Does this sound familiar?

Governing By Proclamation

The President makes these proclamations implying that he now has the answers, but there are no plans to implement them or know whether they even can be implemented. Remember, let’s get out of Gitmo? Well, we are still there with no plan to get out. He recently proclaimed that the school year should now run through the summer. Apparently, we can’t get all the work done in the conventional school year because in the 21st century we now have more things to do. Boy, we have computers for kids, i-phones, Twitter, texting and still can’t get all the work done. Maybe he ought to first ask the teacher’s union why. Perhaps our teachers aren’t as efficient as they used to be.

Mr. Obama, I hope you can be more efficient, stop making proclamations, just stay at your desk for awhile and make a decision on this war, because saving the lives of our soldiers is more important than lowering yourself to run a UN Security Council meeting or run off to Denmark to make the case for a Chicago Olympics. You lose your sense of priorities when you don’t have a plan. That’s a cardinal rule in the business world and you’re obviously no businessman.

Obama's Endless Summer

2009-09-09T06:55:00.000-07:00

August has been a horrible month for the Obama administration and the Democratic Congress. Not only have the poll ratings and public support deteriorated significantly, but town hall meetings and the President’s bungling of the healthcare message has capped a summer that exposed many things about this President that most of us feared; he can make a great speech but when it comes to running things and developing political strategy, he is what most of us thought…..a novice.

From Bungled Events

From the Louis Gates affair, where he actually illustrated racial bias (a trait that would get a white President impeached), to the resignation of his Green jobs Czar, Van Jones, a professed communist, anarchistic, white hater, and supporter of a cop killer, he has made the wrong move at every turn. All this while his foreign policy continues to languish and our Secretary of State is virtually absent. In fact, her husband pulls off the best stunt of the summer by going to North Korea at the request of the captors, in order to escort two irresponsible and reckless female employees of Al Gore back to the U.S. That must have really made us look great in the eyes of the world, particularly the Iranians.

To The Healthcare Fiasco

This President has already made 32 more speeches than his total number days in office, held more press conferences than his predecessor did in his whole first term, and we still don’t know where he stands on healthcare, except that he wants the “government (public) option” and will cut Medicare by about $500 Billion to help pay for it. Meanwhile, the people of this country want reform but not a drastic overhaul of the entire system. It’s time for the President to stop blaming Republicans or Fox News for the healthcare debacle and start looking at the left wing of his party which is scaring the moderate and conservative Democrats. Many of whom are up for election in 2010 and believe they will lose their jobs if the Congress passes legislation that most of us don’t want. It is clear from the polls that the American public does not want universal healthcare, in fact, the elderly are overwhelming against it, except in the black community, but then again anything this President does is ok with them.

And Now Another Speech

And now we wait for another inspirational speech that is going to set things straight. In my many years of following politics I have never heard any speech by any great orator change public opinion in one night. The mere fact that Obama needs another speech, after all the previous speeches, TV specials, and advertising that his giant political machine has given this topic, tells us that the speech is now a political necessity. It is clear that the healthcare reform he will eventually get will be far less expensive and more incremental than he wants. It is the economy that concerns us right now, not healthcare.

I know that most of you expect this kind of commentary from me since you know I’m not a fan of this presidency, however, I have never witnessed such a shortened honeymoon for a newly elected President, particularly coming off the mountaintop from which he ascended after the election. The ironic thing is that you would never know it, if the mainstream media was your only source of information.

Connecticut - On the Road to Oblivion

2009-08-30T14:10:00.000-07:00

The great and beautiful State of Connecticut appears to be heading down the road with California, New York, and New Jersey. The road to oblivion: increased taxes, greater spending, increasing deficits, losing population, losing jobs, and disincentives to investors.

I lived in Westport, Connecticut for 4 years in the 70’s when the state had no income tax, balanced its budget every year, and became one of the richest states in the Union. Such was the case for 200 years until 1991 when Governor Lowell Weicker pushed the first ever personal income tax at 4.5%, saying it would remain flat thereafter. Thus started the era of excessive spending and pay raises for the unionized state government workers. Such is the case when a state gets more revenues, it starts spending on things it would never conceive of in the past.

Quickly, after the on-set of the income tax the state went to the top 10 in expenditures per capita. There has been a long and slow exodus of jobs, people, and businesses and Connecticut has generated no net new jobs in the past decade. During this time the nation added 22 million jobs, while right next door, Wall Street was booming. Over the last decade the state has lost population every year but one.

In addition, the state income tax was raised to 5.5% and now the Governor, Jodi Rell, has proposed a $1-billion+ income tax hike by raising the top rate to 6.5% for high income individuals in order to close the expected $8.5 billion deficit. History shows that when you have a heavy reliance for tax revenues on top income filers, tax collections will become very volatile and these swings will make governing very difficult.

The Governor also plans to eliminate the state’s death tax which has exacerbated the loss of wealthy seniors to states with no estate tax. This maybe a good idea but she also plans to use the money generated from the income tax increase to cut the sales tax, which is a bad idea. Again, history shows that when you cut the consumption tax but raise taxes on investment and small business, this is a formula for losing more jobs.

I think if the Governor just looked at what is going on next door to her in New York and New Jersey she would get some religion. Millionaires just evacuate when you focus on them and states like Florida, Texas, and Nevada benefit. Connecticut may not be as bad as its sister states yet, but like them, it certainly looks like it’s on the road to oblivion. At least California is beginning to wise up.

Robert Novak - A Brief Encounter with an Icon

2009-08-20T13:01:00.000-07:00

By now you may have heard about the passing of the famous Washington columnist and reporter, Robert Novak, who died of brain cancer on August 18th at the age of 78. Novak covered the Washington beat for over 50 years starting with the AP, the Wall Street Journal, and his syndicated column “Inside Report” with Rowland Evans, which he continued to write long after Evans retired. Most of us know him from his television persona on CNN as a host and guest on many news shows such as “The Capital Gang” and “Crossfire” where he played the curmudgeon to his peers and was called “The Prince of Darkness”, which he said referred to his pessimism about civilization, not his conservatism.

I had the privilege of a brief encounter with Novak in Florida in February of 2008 just a few months before he was diagnosed with brain cancer. The Young American Foundation (YAF) was traveling to various cities on a promotional tour and, as a long time supporter, I was invited to the event. Bob Novak was traveling with the group as an after-dinner speaker about the coming presidential election and was promoting his last book, “The Prince of Darkness”, an autobiography about his 50 years in Washington. My wife had just suffered a heart attack, had triple bypass surgery, and was recuperating at home at the time and I was reluctant to leave her for the evening. However, she knew I loved Novak and urged me to attend. The meeting was held at the Ritz Carlton and following the afternoon session I asked Ron Robinson, the President of YAF, if Novak was around because I wanted to meet him and have him sign my copy of his book. Ron directed me to the patio where people were beginning to gather for the pre-dinner cocktails.

I spotted Novak standing with some young college students who were part of the YAF entourage. I immediately went over and introduced myself and asked if he would sign his book for me. He smiled graciously and signed it with a nice salutation. Thus began a most fascinating and memorable 30 minutes, in which we discussed his past and current experiences like friends who hadn’t seen each other for years. We had great chemistry and he focused on my questions, as I was mesmerized about his observations of several Presidents. There was no pretense or omnipotent preaching, just honest observation of first hand, uncensored interactions with Johnson, Carter, Ford, Clinton, Reagan,and Bush I & II. He had particular admiration for Reagan and Johnson, who hosted his wedding party because Novak’s wife was a secretary in Johnson’s White House. He had particular disdain for Carter, who he called the biggest liar of any President he covered. Needless to say, I was taken by his naturalness, his concern for my wife’s health, and his appreciation of my recognition of his accomplishments. He was a man comfortable in his own skin and at a time in life when interaction with your public was now more important than any hills to climb.

My admiration of Robert Novak stems from his obsession with the story and the facts rather than spreading his own ideology or opinion in his reports, a lesson that should be heeded by our modern day journalists. He had the unique ability to cultivate his sources and was always loyal to them. Although he was conservative in his views, he was not a partisan. Novak was hard on Republicans as well as Democrats and was skeptical about power and the intervention of big government in our lives.

Novak converted to Catholicism in 1998, so I expect he is continuing his column for Saint Peter, writing about the big stories in Heaven. We will miss his column here on Earth and also the prince of darkness, who was really a gentle and caring man.

Term Limits for Seniors or Politicians?

2009-08-08T10:18:00.000-07:00

It’s clear that the healthcare bill that is currently before the House will require considerable savings in order to achieve the deficit neutral goal that President Obama promised when this process began. Even then, it now appears that a middle class tax increase will be required in order to supplement the significant tax revenue shortfall that is now apparent as a result of this severe recession. So the question is why do we need to junk our current healthcare system at a time when we clearly can’t afford it and there are also bi-partisan proposals presented which will reduce costs in the current system and maintain the quality of care we now have, cover those uninsured who want coverage and are qualified to receive it, without bankrupting the country. I guess Nancy Pelosi will have to answer that question.

The Real Objective Behind Healthcare
The real answer is that the Democratic Party is hell bent on single payer universal healthcare and eventually junking the Medicare system and this is Phase One of that effort. The initial focus is on seniors who represent one-fourth of Medicare costs in the final years of their life. Therefore, eliminating tests, procedures, and medications for seniors because they are no longer in their “productive” years will result in considerable savings according to some of Obama’s czars, who believe that an early exit for “non-productive” citizens will be beneficial for the economy. This philosophy has been discussed in the stimulus bill and further expanded upon in the healthcare bill and exposed in the Wall Street Journal article: http://www.defendyourhealthcare.us/assaultonseniors.html

Seniors Are Assets Not Liabilities
Well, maybe someone should inform the current administration that these seniors are mostly responsible for the economic growth and accomplishments of this country to date and have already paid into the Medicare and Social Security system for all of those who have preceded them because the government has run a giant Ponzi scheme on the funds that have gone into these programs for the last 40-75 years.

Since all legislators have their own very generous government pension and healthcare benefits for life and can continue to work their 1-2 months/year in wheelchairs and walkers, since they have no term limits and people keep voting them in because their seniority provides earmarks and pork barrel legislation for their communities, I guess they don’t care about those of us who have mandatory retirement or get “terminated” because we’re “too old”.

Perhaps they should ask how much the currently “productive” people have learned from their predecessors, how much the youth of this country relies on and seeks the wisdom of their grandparents, and how many of the world’s population want to keep their mothers and fathers with them for as long as they can?

Doctors Not Government Should Decide
Sure, we know that many people have living wills and don’t want to be kept alive artificially, but most of us want to hold on as long as our quality of life is good and our families want us around. However, we’re not talking about terminal illness here; we are talking about government making Orwellian decisions about your right to available healthcare relative to someone who they conclude has more “productive” potential.

I think we should have term limits on politicians, not on seniors, and I think it is absolutely preposterous to have to write a column about this as a citizen of the wealthiest country that ever existed on this planet.

The Israel Policy - Naive or Just Plain Dumb

2009-08-03T17:54:00.000-07:00

The good cop/bad cop policy that Biden and Obama are playing with regard to Israel appears to be a cynical attempt by Obama to placate the growing fears within the American Jewish community over his increasingly extreme pro-Arab bias in Middle East policy. How he commanded so much of the Jewish vote has always been an enigma, since his bias has always been apparent to me. I realize the liberal tendency of Jewish voters, but Obama’s stance on Israel will eventually cause him to lose that voting block in 2012 if he continues on this path.

Back in early July, Biden proclaimed on national TV that “Israel can determine for itself – it’s a sovereign nation – what’s in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran or anybody else…..Whether we agree or not. Any sovereign nation is entitled to do that. But there is no pressure from any nation that is going to alter our behavior as to how to proceed.”

This is a reversal from his statement in January 2008 that “Israel will have to reconcile itself to a nuclear Iran.” Then Obama jumps in and says that he had not given Israel a “green light” to attack Iran. His language was stunning in that he implied that Israel needs his permission to ensure its survival as a nation. This is bizarre to say the least. It sends the impression to Arab states that we dictate Israeli foreign policy and that they are a stooge of the U.S. and do not control their own sovereignty. This damages our credibility worldwide.

It seems that Obama’s remark is an attempt to placate our enemies in the Mid-East and attempt to change our “image” and show our willingness to negotiate our differences. Most of us realize that this approach has been tried by other administrations since Carter. We have found that strength is the only thing that resonates with our Mid-East adversaries. Our experience with Libya, Iraq, and Afganistan illustrate this. It certainly is Obama’s option to revert to this approach again; however, he must show progress. Thus far, Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah, have spit in his face. Things appear to be better in Syria now but they, like Libya, don’t have many options and we look like the best one at this point.

I hope that this is not the ignorance of a “community organizer” playing on the world stage. Where is our Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton? Maybe we will soon see a Mid-East Czar, or is that George Mitchell or Richard Holbrook? At least they have a track record, compared with the bevy of czars we have now.

ObamaCare - A Travesty

2009-08-03T12:16:00.000-07:00

We have been led to believe by the Obama administration that everybody wins with ObamaCare. We all will have equal right to quality healthcare, those who prefer their current plan will get to keep it, and all the currently uninsured will be covered, etc, etc., as the King says in “The King and I. Well, we have now learned that this is mostly, poppy-cock. The current plan on the table will have winners and losers and the only way to provide more care to more people and be deficit neutral is to have more losers.

Those of us with Medicare know about the shortfalls of government controlled healthcare. The government – not the doctors – determines the cost value for a particular procedure and they dictate the treatment protocols and how much the doctor can charge (or what they (Medicare) will pay), and how long a patient should remain in the hospital. Under ObamaCare, we will also have end-of-life counseling in case the government feels you’re too old to have open heart surgery, chemotherapy, or a hip replacement. “We think you should spend the rest of your life in a wheelchair because we’re trying to reduce medical costs and I have to meet my budget target on cost reduction this year”. Let’s be realistic that’s what you’re going to get with the current proposal.

In a recent New York Times/CBS poll (already, I’m sure your getting a little dubious), the pollsters concluded that most Americans are willing to pay higher taxes so that all can have health insurance and that the government could do a better job of holding down healthcare costs than the private sector. Since 10 percent of the population pays 55% of the taxes, I wonder how many of those polled actually pay taxes? It’s easy to be in favor of higher taxes when you don’t pay any.

The reality is that there will always be some people who receive less care than others under any healthcare system, depending on where you live, your social or income status, and how smart you are. Even under a free market, those who take from the system will get less care than those who pay for the system. Under Obama’s plan or that from the Democratic Congress, the government sets the standards that determines who gets care. Since most of the Obama’s czars are not accountable to anyone but him and not elected but appointed, do you want life and death decisions to be made by cronies, radicals, former criminals, and admitted communists? Do you want them making judgments on your health outcomes?

The administration and the Democrat controlled Congress have done their best to ram this legislation through before you have a chance to understand its ramifications. Their effort has failed, and now the summer recess provides the time for those legislators to get feedback from their constituency. The more we analyze this proposal the more their poll numbers will drop and the more we will realize that this is one of the worst pieces of legislation ever introduced in Congress. It is critical that we the people stop this travesty and run those legislators who support it, out of town.

The Louis Gates Affair - Black Paranoia or Discrimination?

2009-07-25T07:10:00.000-07:00

By now we all know about the circumstances surrounding the incident between Louis Gates, Jr., a Harvard scholar and professor on race relations and the Cambridge, Mass. police department. The shocking part of this is our own President, acting with typical black paranoia before he has the facts, says that the police “acted stupidly in this incident by arresting a black middle-age man with a cane in his own house”. Now that the facts are in, we see that Professor Gates and even our President have acted like black stereotypes in an incident that had nothing to do with race.

It just appears that we have the case of a liberal, intellectual, and elitist African-American (the liberal label is an assumption- but given the geographical location we’d be hard pressed to find a conservative) who thought that he was being treated like a “common” black man by the police and because of his “status” became enraged as soon as the police arrived and immediately call the policeman a racist.

There is no doubt from the police reports and witnesses that Mr. Gates exacerbated the situation and became uncontrollable, shouting insults at the police officer and causing a significant disturbance and was arrested for that reason. I realize that the persecution and abuse of blacks by the police has been a blot on our society and causes great resentment by blacks. No doubt that racial profiling is a reality, but given the fact that 70-80% of our prisons are inhabited by minorities it is obvious that the police may act aggressively in certain situations and that law abiding or educated and professional blacks would be sensitive to the race issue, in situations involving a white policeman. However, most educated people, white or black, would normally act respectful to an officer who was doing his job in a situation where he thought a break-in was involved. Apparently, Mr. Gates thought he was intellectually “superior” to this white cop and instantly proceeded with an attitude.

Massachusetts is a state with a black Governor, Cambridge has a black mayor, officer Crowley had Hispanic and African-American partners, and we have a black President. It’s time for us to get beyond this issue, however, if educated blacks continue to use the race card in a situation where racial profiling was clearly not the case, this will never happen. Also, if our President shows his own racial bias before he even knows the facts, we surely won’t get beyond this and he will antagonize his white constituency. The incident now threatens to de-rail his popularity and even his legislative agenda.

Rushing to judgment ridicules his sincerity about changing this country with respect to race relations. It also makes one wonder about his credibility as he tries to push universal healthcare down the throat of a reluctant populace without even reading the legislation. This event adds credulence to the argument about his executive inexperience in running anything except for elective office.

Like the Cambridge Police Department spokesman said yesterday “the President called the wrong party stupid”.

Hillary Joins The Apology Tour

2009-07-21T10:38:00.000-07:00

It looks like Hillary Clinton, who I thought was the only sensible one left in the Obama administration (along with Robert Gates of Defense), has succumbed to the 28 year-old social engineers who are the chief advisors to this President and write his glowing speeches. Ms. Clinton actually apologized to India yesterday for our ecological “mistakes” in growing this nation into the wealthiest and greatest nation on this planet. She then proceeded to plead for them to avoid these “mistakes” and slow down their efforts to improve the lot of their vast population for the sake of “global warming”.

She was basically apologizing for our Industrial Revolution and the economic boom during and after World War II which allowed us to defeat the Nazi and Nippon hoards and brought us out of the Great Depression. As a result we rebuilt Western Europe and Japan, won the Cold War and liberated Eastern Europe, and became the greatest economic machine in history. We may have made mistakes in the process, some related to ignorance, and some related to risk/reward decisions, but once we realized our mistakes we took actions to rectify them and pass legislation to protect our citizens and the environment. That’s more than you can say about the rest of the world.

India is one of our greatest Allies in that part of the world. A country with a strong and growing economy, a formidable army, a stable and democratic government, and a civil culture based on values built from a century of influence as a member of the former British Empire.

Is Ms. Clinton now asking them to slow down and start to evaluate the use of alternative energy sources? Wow! Does she expect them to look at wind and solar power and green gas emissions, when 2/3 of the country live in slum conditions and have no electricity? This logic is embarrassing and makes the U.S. look selfish and elitist. I don’t blame India for their retort saying that their carbon footprint is significantly less than the U.S. on a per capita basis. Well that’s right, given their GDP, poverty level, and vast population compared with the U.S. However, are we now expected to say that we will lower our carbon footprint to the average of the rest of the world? Well, that’s about what we are doing with the Waxman-Marley climate control bill.

This is just another example of the wrong tactic at the wrong time. The Democrats seem to have a propensity for this in their foreign policy decisions in recent administrations. Ms. Clinton follows in the footsteps of Brzezinski (under Carter), Warren Christopher and Madelyn Albright (under Clinton) as previous Secretary of States that weakened our status in the world and made policy that continues to plague us today.

China and India are not going to slow down their efforts to be among the major economies of the world and improve living standards for the bulk of their population and I don’t blame them. The idea of going around the world asking for forgiveness for polluting the planet, when we have dispensed much of our wealth to the rest of the world, contributed so much technology for the betterment of mankind, and are the most generous nation in recordable history, is an embarrassment to every hard working citizen in our nation.

I am shocked and dismayed that someone as intelligent as Ms. Clinton would think it appropriate to engage in such flawed logic. Portraying ourselves as a regretful, humbled, apologetic nation empowers our enemies and disappoints our allies. Needless to say, it demoralizes our citizens who are rightfully proud of our heritage and our accomplishments. President Reagan, where is that “shining city on the hill”?

The Duping of America - A National Disgrace

2009-07-18T17:21:00.000-07:00

Our history is replete with Presidents who caught the imagination of America’s voting public and were swept into office promising change and reform. Sometimes this change was driven by world events and sometimes by the fact it was time for the other party to have its chance with a new approach. Some of these elections resulted in positive change, some negative. In most cases, they caused a discernable alteration in the course of history.

The election of Andrew Jackson was a move away from legislative dominance to a stronger executive role, James Polk, the expansion of our manifest destiny, Lincoln, a test of our values as a nation, T. Roosevelt and W. Wilson, the move towards modern progressivism and away from individual rights, FDR, a move to the welfare state and big government, Kennedy, a promising change to a new generation, Carter, a reform of Washington politics, Reagan, a return to our principles and strength as a world power, and Obama, a new approach to transparency in government, “fairness” in the distribution of wealth, and a less arrogant America.

Although I sometimes voted for the “losers”, I was always assured that the American public would choose the right man at the right time because our collective wisdom as a nation had always been infallible. I must say that for the first time, I am very worried.

We have elected a man with no track record or notable achievements, one who was elected on the shear “cult of personality” sale and the fact that we were enamored that he is an African-American and illustrates the classic story of what is possible in America. In a short six months we have found that the weakness the main street media says is apparent in Sarah Palin as a presidential candidate is clearly present in Barack Obama, except unlike Palin, he is able to create an image of authority, confidence, and swagger because of his gender and his appeal to liberal women, the youth, and minorities.

Without a teleprompter, he stutters and stammers his way through interviews often with incorrect and uniformed views, he doesn’t listen to the opposition nor care what they say because he is steeped in the tradition of the liberal establishment who are his friends and associates throughout his rather narrow career experience. His grasp of international relations is appalling and naïve, at best. His socialistic view of the role of government is creating severe problems for future generations and world confidence in our currency and our economy.

With voter overreaction sweeping Democrats into Congress with one-party super majority control, we are now witnessing a reckless legislative agenda threatening to impose a European-style welfare state, in a matter of weeks, against an arbitrary deadline, and with little analysis. This agenda will result in a huge tax burden that will trickle down to the middle class and rival the taxes that currently exist in Denmark and Sweden, the standard bearers of the welfare state, and will be higher than even Canada and France. Current estimates from credible independent economic authorities and overseers of government spending, show that the U.S. average income tax will reach 52% of your income and as high as 57% for residents of NY, NJ, California, Oregon, and Hawaii if this legislation is enacted.

This is a man who campaigned as a centrist, than proceeded to break most of his promises, and is now governing as an extreme or even radical liberal. It looks like “Joe the Plumber” was one of the few who didn’t get duped. The only question is will we be duped again in 2012?

Healthcare - A Birthright?

2009-07-16T12:20:00.000-07:00

When you survey the American public, some 80% say they are happy with their health insurance. Yet our President says the system is broke and needs to be fixed and the best way to do this is for the government to run it and for everyone to have health insurance whether they want it or not. This will cost you and me trillions of dollars and most likely significantly reduce the quality of care we currently get, be fraught with fraud and bureaucratic inefficiency, and eventually be bankrupt in a few decades just like Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and other government run programs since President Roosevelt set us on this idiotic path toward big government.

The premise for this move to government controlled healthcare is the fact that there are some 30-40 million uninsured people in the U.S. However, we never break it down into what makes up this number. How many are illegal immigrants, how many can’t afford it or are chronically unemployed, how many just don’t want it because they are rich, or just think they are young and very healthy, how many are children and why won’t their parents get them covered? Is health insurance a birthright, like equality and freedom, and the pursuit of happiness which is guaranteed in our Constitution?

No one cares if you don’t buy life insurance or auto insurance or home insurance (only your lender). Also, I can’t figure out why everyone must have the same quality of healthcare. Don’t wealthier people have higher quality cars and houses, better food, better education, take better care of themselves?” As a matter of fact, in Socialist and Communist countries, the people in the government are usually the wealthiest and have better services, even though they tout equality for the masses.

What really is healthcare? The statistics say that 80% of the health costs are due to lifestyle choices which can result in obesity, diabetes, heart and cardiovascular disease, and some cancers. Why should those of us who choose to make healthier choices, pay for the health insurance of those who don’t? Obviously, most Americans are willing to pay for health insurance to protect themselves from involuntary or unwanted occurrences, but should we be required to protect others from health risks due to alcoholism, smoking, depression, or even erectile dysfunction? Why can’t we have a system of choice and have the option to select the health coverage we want in order to have premiums we can afford and forgo coverage for trivial or unnecessary procedures? Wouldn’t this be better and cheaper than guaranteeing the same healthcare for everyone?

Let’s face it people, everyone in this country can get professional healthcare whether they have insurance or not. Sure the system should be improved but we don’t have to throw it away and start all over because some people don’t have insurance. Maybe if we thought about things for awhile and studied the problem with qualified and non-political experts, we would come up with something that’s viable and less costly.

We have already seen what rushing into TARP, a new budget, and the stimulus package has done to this economy.

Climate Change Facts - Obama Lies

2009-06-29T07:43:00.000-07:00

You must know by now that the Cap & Trade legislation that I wrote about in a previous posting (3/11/09) has passed the House of Representatives by a slim seven vote margin. The fact that the Democrats, who command such a large margin, needed seven Republicans to get this through should be ample evidence to you that this is bad legislation and nothing more than the largest tax increase to the American public in history. It will prolong this recession, result in the loss of millions of jobs in the petroleum or petroleum-related industries and massive increases in the cost of energy.

All of this is predicated on a lie that has been perpetrated on the America public about the role of greenhouse gas (CO2) on the world’s climate. I’m old enough to remember a similar lie under a similar type of Administration in the 70’s (Jimmy Carter’s), at that time the planet was cooling and fossil fuels were the likely culprit and we all would freeze to death unless we developed alternative energy sources. Also, we were running out of oil reserves and government needed to intervene with massive taxpayer subsidies for other uneconomic forms of energy because we couldn’t leave it to the markets. Now, 35 years later, we’re running out of time, the planet is now getting hotter, people are to blame, and we are doomed if we don’t stop using fossil fuels.

Well, over the past 40 years we have consumed more oil than the reserves we had in 1970 and the proven oil reserves have nearly doubled from that period. The 30 year cooling trend ended in the late 70’s and has been replaced by a 20-year warming trend that peaked in 1998 and is now actually declining, regardless of what Al Gore says. The average global temperature has increased by about one degree per century since the end of the Little Ice Age 250 years ago and CO2 levels have increased by a mere 100 parts per million (ppm). It is a trace gas comprising just 4 out of every 10,000 molecules in the atmosphere. Without CO2 in the atmosphere there would be no life on this planet! The sun and water vapor are by far the biggest drivers of our climate and if CO2 is now called a “pollutant”, then we ought to call water vapor a “pollutant” also. This conclusion is preposterous.

If we do the math we also come to the conclusion that this legislation is not credible. Mr. Obama’s goal is “80 by 50” – an 80% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2050. Worldwide demand for energy will grow by 30-50% over the next 20 years and fossil fuels will supply about 85% of that demand, no matter what President Obama does. In fact, taken together, wind and solar power account for just one-sixth of 1% of U.S. energy usage; even though we have pumped in roughly $20 billion in taxpayer subsidies in the past 30 years. President Obama proposes to double wind and solar consumption by the end of his first term. It actually doubled over the last 3 years of the Bush Administration and if he doubles it again, it will grow from 1/6 of 1% to 1/3 of 1% of the total energy usage. That assumes the U.S. consumption is flat over the period which is not likely.

Thank you Mr. President! You have set an unrealistic goal; it will cost consumers $2 trillion or more over the next decade and who knows how much by 2050. In addition, you are asking the American people to reduce their carbon footprint from about 20 tons per person per year, to about 2 tons per person per year in 2050. The last time our footprint was that low John Smith was courting Pocahontas!

Let’s hope you only hang around in this job till 2012.

Global Warming and Bad Science

2009-06-11T13:19:00.000-07:00

It’s been awhile since my last post as I moved to my northern residence for the summer months. Like millions of others I am seeking a buyer so that I can live permanently in southwest Florida. During this time I have had a chance to view the rather dynamic political scene, Obama’s trip to the mid-East and Europe, continuing negative developments in the economy, and the slowly eroding public approval of the President’s policies, although he personally retains high popularity ratings.

In the coming months we will have a lot to say about this administration’s attempt to pass national healthcare legislation, a Cap and Trade environmental tax, and at the same time run our auto industry; all this with the back drop of rising unemployment, a failed stimulus program, and rising deficits. I believe we would have a lot more unrest right now had the stock market not recovered all of its 2009 losses at this point.

To make matters worse, I read about another ridiculous global warming report issued by the global Humanitarian Forum, which is based in Geneva, and headed by former U.N. Secretary General, Kofi Annan. The report warns that unless countries agree to “the most ambitious international agreement ever negotiated” at a meeting this year in Copenhagen, droughts and floods and natural disasters induced by climate change will kill 315,000 each year and cost $125 billion and it gets worse into the future. Actually, these numbers are not very ominous when one considers that malaria and AIDS kill an estimated 3 million people a year. It would seem that a focused worldwide effort using known technology to eradicate those dread diseases, would be far more cost-effective than trying to affect a multi-trillion dollar program to change the climate, which is controlled by God or other natural phenomena (depending on your religious beliefs).

The real questionable credibility of this report is its methodology, which assumes that global warming is the direct cause of climate change when no credible evidence exists other than theories and the political rhetoric of overzealous environmentalists. There is absolutely no evidence that can point to a relationship of greenhouse gas emissions and disasters. This report actually attributes Hurricane Katrina and suggests that the fighting in Somalia are products of climate change. Since the effects of climate change are long-term, it is disingenuous to attribute these recent events to change caused by global warming.

We have gotten to the point where claims such as those made in this report need to be scrutinized more carefully by credible scientists and their assessment needs to be published in the news media or otherwise we will continue to be flooded with this kind of self-serving phony science that dresses itself up when promoted by political advocates who see the money train of the green movement.

I’m afraid the Obama administration is falling into that trap as we continue to sit on the sidelines with known technology while we claim the goal of energy independence.

Torture - What Is It and Is It Ever Justified?

2009-05-24T14:15:00.000-07:00

The controversy that has abounded recently about the use of waterboarding as an “enhanced interrogation technique” for terrorist detainees is rather superfluous. Torture is different to different people, depending on your frame of reference or the “relative” circumstances. Maybe, you’re like the person who said about pornography, “I can’t describe it, but I know it when I see it”. Is that the way we see torture?

Torture is technically defined as something that causes intense suffering and/or pain particularly in the context of punishment or coercion. The legal difference between torture and other forms of ill treatment lies in the level of severity of pain or suffering imposed. In addition, torture requires the existence of a specific purpose behind the act, such as to obtain information. Methods of torture can be both physical and/or psychological and can have lasting effects.

It is really difficult to get your arms around the legal definition since courts in different countries don’t agree. For example, the European Convention of Human Rights (HCHR) definition, as interpreted by the Court of Strasbourg, considers torture as just inhuman and degrading treatment, which can mean no invasive action at all. That means, for example, all the detainees are being tortured because they are being held without trial. What about what the U.S. government did to Japanese citizens during WWII, or what police do to criminals as a matter of routine?

I think we make the mistake of getting bogged down in the definition, which is rather illusive, but should speak to the events or conditions that cause the use of torture and then make moral judgment from that.

John Locke, the 17th century English philosopher who greatly influenced our founders and is the source of our belief in the rule of law and the priority of legislative power, also believed there were situations where the rule of law did not apply. These are circumstances where the executive branch has the “power to act according to discretion, for the public good with prescription of the law, and sometimes even against it”. Remember when President Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus in 1861 when Confederate sympathizers in Maryland burned bridges and attacked federal troops. The Supreme Court ruled that only Congress could do this and ordered the release of the criminals. Lincoln disobeyed the order, saying that the executive must sometimes do things it would not do in ordinary times. Does this change how you view Lincoln or his values?

I would say that 9/11 was extraordinary, even more so than the attack on Pearl Harbor. The question is: Was the nation in danger on 9/11? Was the President justified to imprison the terrorists in Guantanamo? Were the enhanced interrogations justified? Were they useful in protecting our country and its citizens?

Our beliefs and values are such that nothing stands in the way of protecting our freedom and the safety of our people. If the world thinks less of us because we waterboarded 3 high level terrorists in the process, so be it. Let’s not dress this issue up in some righteous quest to save our reputation in the world. If you ask me, doing less to protect our freedom and the lives of our citizens would actually harm our status on the world stage, give comfort to our enemies, and send the wrong message to our friends and allies.

California, Here I Go!

2009-05-19T11:33:00.000-07:00

That’s a take-off on a song that Al Jolson made famous in the 20’s called “California, Here I Come”. I was not around at that time but we’ve come a long way from then. So long in fact, that it now looks like we will be replaying that song in reverse. As I write this, Californians will be voting on six tax initiatives aimed at saving the State from utter bankruptcy.

It now appears that a reckoning may be here for the liberal tax and spend governance that has exemplified this State for many years. I predict that the voters, weary from this perennial gouging by public unions and special interests, will reject most of these initiatives to take more of their money. I hope this rejection will be the wake-up call needed to motivate real tax reform. Otherwise, the federal government will have another bailout on its hands, for surely California is too big to fail! It also poses an interesting question the Constitution never anticipated, “How does Washington take over a State?”

These are interesting times for many States that are now facing nearly a $100B budget deficit this year. Their “soak the rich” policies have created a mass exodus that leaves a vacuum of depleted jobs and a serious brain drain of entrepreneurs and small business. It illustrates that because people, capital, and businesses are mobile they will generally go to more tax-friendly locations when given the choice, particularly in these times.

The Great Tax Myth

The notion that increasing State taxes on the rich (>$200/yr.) provides more services, better schools, and improved infrastructure which in-turn attracts people and businesses is an utter myth. In fact, the opposite is true. The Wall Street Journal recently reported data from Richard Vedder of Ohio University which showed that from 1998-2007 more than 1,100 people a day moved from the highest income tax States such as California, New Jersey, New York, and Ohio and relocated mainly to nine tax haven States like Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, and Texas. Also, these no-income tax States created 89% more jobs and had 32% faster personal income growth.

Take for example, New Jersey, a State where I lived from the age of 19-27. In the early 60’s the State had no income tax and no sales tax. It ran budget surpluses and attracted a variety of industries. Today its income and sales taxes are among the highest in the nation, yet it generates continuous deficits and its schools rank among the worst. We have seen similar trends over the years in California, where teacher’s unions have negotiated the highest salaries for classroom teachers, yet their schools have the second lowest test scores in the nation.

Let’s hope that politicians look at the Texas model which still has no State income tax and created more jobs in 2008 than all other 49 combined. It’s the economy, stupid, that generates revenues for services and growth, not the tax rate.

Good luck California, you’re beautiful but I don’t like your personality!

GM's Bankruptcy - More of the Unfairness Doctrine

2009-05-08T16:51:00.000-07:00

Developments in the bankruptcy negotiations for Chrysler and GM are excellent examples of this administration’s definition of the fairness doctrine, as they see it. It all depends on whose shoes you’re wearing. In my last post, the Chrysler bankruptcy showed how the secured lenders got swindled out of their contractual rights under bankruptcy law by government intervention. The GM bankruptcy illustrates the bias treatment of unsecured creditors due to government edict. Both these events violate the basic rules of a free market and the rule of law, which are the basic precepts of our founding fathers and our democracy.

In a conventional Chapter 11 bankruptcy, unsecured creditors are all in the same position and are usually treated by the court in a similar way, depending on their risk level and their importance to the company’s survival. In the GM case, there are three unsecured creditors in question, the bondholders (pension funds, hedge funds, investors) who bought these bonds from brokers, the United Auto Workers Union (UAW) who are owed money by GM as a result of the retiree health benefit trust set up by the company, and the U.S. Treasury who recently shelled out money in an effort to keep GM out of bankruptcy.

The bondholders hold the greatest debt at $27.2B, the union is next with $20B, followed by the U.S. Treasury with $16.2B. The government imposed solution is for the bondholders to get 10% of the ownership from converting their note to equity. That’s less than five cents on the dollar. The U.S. Treasury gets 50% of the stock and $8.1B in debt, as much as 87 cents per dollar, and the union gets 40% of the stock which covers one-half of their note and $10B more in cash over time. That’s worth approximately 76 cents on the dollar. The government and the UAW will own 90% and manage GM. How’s that for fairness? It looks like the private sector comes up short again when the government calls the shots and the guy with the largest claim gets short- changed in a rather disproportionate way.

Tell me, do you think that GM will ever get private investment capital in the future? Would private money readily come to TARP banks that are now being run by Treasury? When politics start to control business decisions, profits become less important. Witness the stagnation of business growth in the Socialist countries of the world. When growth slows the only option a Socialist government has is higher taxes. I’m afraid the cat’s out of the bag unless private interests go to the courts to block these two unfair and unjust bankruptcy charades. We better start standing up about this, because it’s our money that’s at stake. You can’t keep making something from nothing.

Chrysler Bankruptcy - Saved by Fiat ?

2009-05-02T07:08:00.000-07:00

We are now witnessing one of the most outlandish violations of business ethics in history, compliments of your U.S. government on the road to Socialism. Can you believe that our President has proclaimed that Chrysler now has a new lease on life because it’s going to be managed by Fiat? A company that makes some of the worst cars on the planet! In addition, the largest shareholder in this new company (55%) is going to be the United Auto Workers, who have single handedly caused this bankruptcy.

Fiat would actually take a 20% stake, plus warrant options, for nothing but an exchange of “know-how” – no cash, not one dollar! Fiat’s warrants will give it the opportunity to increase its ownership (equity) by up to 15 more percentage points, if it introduces efficient engines in the U.S. and rolls out a car that gets 40 miles to the gallon. The irony is that Chrysler already has this “know-how” today, but nobody wants to buy the car.

Here’s another joke. To make this deal happen, the U.S. Treasury (you and me) will contribute $3.3 billion to the plan: $2.0 billion to pay off Chrysler’s senior secured lenders at 33 cents on the dollar (wonder why they’re hacked off), and the rest of the money will be used to pay the company’s bills during the bankruptcy. The government also says that it is willing to “pitch-in” another $4.76 billion more in order to keep Chrysler running for several years. That’s on top of the $4.0 billion that the government lent Chrysler previously, a debt that will now be forgiven as part of this arrangement. With a deal like this, why do we need Fiat? Britney Spears could run this company pretty easily and continue her singing career as well!

Oh yes, what did the UAW give up to make this all happen? Well, they gave up part of their retiree health care fund which was owed $10.6 billion by Chrysler; instead they will only get $4.6 billion paid back with interest. Someone should tell them that most of us get Medicare when we retire, but of course the UAW can’t settle for that. Also, they gave up a cost-of living allowance, a Christmas bonus, two paid holidays, and they will forego vision and dental care benefits. What a pity; such a sacrifice. Maybe someone should also tell them that many workers are taking pay cuts today, but I guess that would be too much to ask. So, since the UAW has given up so much, let’s give them 55% of the company! Who negotiated this deal for the government, Barney Frank or Chris Dodd?

To top off this travesty, President Obama had a press conference to criticize the secured lenders who, according to bankruptcy law, have the contractual right to be paid off first on the $6.9 billion of secured debt they hold, but I guess Mr. Obama just rewrites the law as he goes along. Those “greedy vultures” who lent that money to Chrysler in good faith should be happy with 33 cents on the dollar. He ought to know, he won the election.

Confessions of a Reluctant Blogger

2009-04-21T15:21:00.000-07:00

Writing a blog in these times is a rather unrewarding dilemma. There are so many things that provide grist for the mill, but in turn, so many outrageous happenings that one must be very selective so as not to waste time on senseless trivia. As a person trained in the sciences and used to dealing in facts and informed theory, it’s frustrating to be bombarded with biased media, politically leaning network commentary, and raging TV pundits that deal in innuendo and speculation instead of factual and informed debate.

The moniker of this blog is “Economic Conservatism” and if you have read my posts, I obviously have conservative political leanings, but I am not a practicing economist. However, I have tried to comment on a range of topics, other than politics and economics. I have attempted to base my comments on factual information not solely my political orientation. I don’t want this blog to be just another overly zealous right-wing “rag” (there are plenty on both sides) but I certainly intend to defend traditional values, prudent fiscal policies, a strong defense, limited government, and free markets. If you have spent some time in this corner, you can tell I do not support government intervention in the private sector or my life, nor do I believe in the so-called progressive agenda and secular views of the left wing of the Democratic Party.

Unfortunately, it appears to me that we now have a President and a Congress that is controlled by this wing of the Democratic Party and I am quite concerned about “change we can’t believe in”. We now have a President that controls the major banks in this country, can fire the CEO of the largest domestic auto manufacturer, can tell GM what cars they will make, makes a pact with one of our largest companies (GE) to push his “green” agenda at great expense to the U.S. taxpayers, and is planning the largest re-distribution of wealth in the history of this country regardless of the fiscal damage to future generations. I find it very difficult to maintain a balanced view when I am fearful for the future of this country under one party control. History has taught us the tragic lessons from this kind of autocratic behavior and socialist trends.

I intend to address these issues that have befallen us from the policies in the first 100 days of this current Administration. I want to give President Obama every chance to succeed in bettering the policies of the past and accelerating our recovery from this recession, however, he must be accountable for his actions and the American electorate will give him a report card in the 2010 mid-term election.

Mr. Obama sounded like a centrist as a candidate, but governs like a left wing ideologue, and has broken most of his promises to the electorate in his first 100 days. His popularity has been adversely impacted and the moderates in his own party are beginning to break ranks. He said he hardly knew about the “tea parties” that have erupted in recent months and his followers have dismissed them as racially motivated and from “rednecks” who don’t want to pay their taxes. Mr. Obama is playing with dynamite if he believes that these demonstrations are solely about taxes. If he doesn’t listen, he is going to be in for a big surprise come 2012.

I am reluctant to sound so negative about this new President and I solicit comments from some sensible Democrats out there that have facts to present that will allay my fears. However, if you’re a left wing zealot, stay away.

Can You Believe The Polls?

2009-04-15T07:59:00.000-07:00

The other day I was watching MSNBC, the Obama network, and they reported on a New York Times/CBS News poll on President Obama’s ratings with the “public”. Given the results of the poll and when combined with the public response to the Obama tax plan, the rather dubious bills coming out of the Democratic Congress, the tea parties that are cropping up all over the country protesting the Obama tax plan, I was an immediate skeptic.

The poll results showed a rather unexplainable exuberance from the American people for Obama and is a vivid example of the media love affair with him, particularly NBC, MSNBC, CBS, and the New York Times. The poll showed that Obama’s approval rating hit a new high of 66% up from 64% the previous month. Is this significant; and was the press release from CBS or the Obama campaign? Sometimes it’s hard to tell the difference.

According to former Democratic pollster Pat Caddell (who is no longer popular with his party) and a credible poll expert, “there is a problem with the way this poll was conducted”. Caddell says that the poll showed an extreme Democratic edge on party preference of 16 points. “No other poll has such an extreme partisan gap. It appears that the NY Times and CBS News manipulated the numbers until they came up with the desired results. In effect, they reduced the Republicans in the sample by 13% and increased the Democrats by 12% while the Independent voters were only changed by 2%”.

I also bet that you didn’t know that a Pew Research Poll was conducted just before the Times/CBS poll. It showed the new President in a different light. It stated that their poll showed “Barack Obama has the most polarized early job approval ratings of any President in four decades”. Did you read about that poll in the newspapers or did you hear about that on prime news and MSNBC?

I’m not saying that polls are not indicative of public opinion; however, I am saying that the way questions are phrased and selection of the demographic base, has a significant effect on the results. It appears to me that the Obama people and certain news outlets are very good at getting the result they want, in fact, they have even mastered it better than Bill Clinton’s people who were very good at it. Remember Begala and Carvelle?

I think that pollsters like Gallup, Zagby, Rasmussen, are credible and usually objective. However, when polls are sponsored by newspapers, TV networks, and politically leaning organizations, be careful of drawing conclusions. Obama is personally very popular, most newly elected Presidents are, but the media love affair with him is very evident and not necessarily constructive for the country. Our free media has for decades been a key element in providing objective analysis for the masses and the voice of the people in our democratic society. When it becomes a tool of the government, we become no different from the worse dictators or tolitarian state.

The Estate Tax - Will It Ever Go Away?

2009-04-01T14:03:00.000-07:00

If you were planning on dying next year in order to avoid the estate tax, forget it. Buried deep in President Obama’s new budget proposal to Congress in footnote 1 on page 127 is a note which reads, “The estate tax is maintained at its 2009 parameter”. So instead of falling to zero next year as scheduled under current law, that tax will remain at 45% with an exemption level of $3.5 million (or $7 million for a couple). In essence, this is a 100% increase in the estate tax next year from current law , even though President Obama’s chief economic advisor, Larry Summers, empathic when commenting on the proposed budget said, “Let’s be very clear: There are no, no tax increases this year. There are no, no tax increases next year”. Oh yes, there are Larry. The President’s budget calls for the largest increase in the death tax in U.S. history!

Obviously, the intent was that the death tax would go to zero in the tenth year of Bush’s first tax cut in 2001, and the political likelihood was that it would never return. The election of Barrack Obama eliminated that expectation. It doesn’t matter that the revenue generated by this tax is relatively insignificant or that most of the money in an estate is already taxed when it was earned, it’s all about the liberal ideology that believes taxing the wealthy 2% of American families that pay this tax is only “fair” because they are “rich” and we want to show our constituency that we are for “working” Americans.

The truth is that this tax is a farce and totally “unfair” because it is double taxation and ignores the fact that the longevity of most small businesses is motivated by the ability to pass on wealth to the next generation. This regressive tax makes it preferable to sell or liquidate your business rather than pass it on to your heirs who can’t afford to pay the tax and keep it going.

In fact, a recent study by one, Larry Summers, shows that between 41-66% of capital stock was transferred either by bequests at death or through trusts and lifetime gifts. Therefore, a higher the estate tax lessens the incentive to reinvest in family businesses. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that eliminating the death tax would increase small business investment by $1.6 trillion. This additional investment would create 1.5 million new jobs. That’s half the jobs President Obama said he hopes to gain from his $787 billion stimulus bill. It looks like we could have saved a lot of taxpayers’ money by just eliminating this most despised and unfair of all federal taxes.

President Obama, when are you going to stop being an ideologue and start using your common sense?

Caretaker For a Great American Tradition

2009-03-31T07:32:00.000-07:00

Many of you who have read my brief bio, know that I was employed by Exxon Corporation, now ExxonMobil, for 28 of my 45 years in business. As I watch their commercials on television today and see the many capable employees they profile to discuss their work in the important technical areas to conserve energy, develop alternative fuels, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, I realize how lucky I was to be one of the caretakers of this great company for the period 1960-1988 and what great talent they continue to develop to sustain their important role in our economy.

This year is Exxon’s 127th year in business and they continue to be the biggest and most profitable corporate entity in this great country, even after they were broken up by the government in 1911. In addition, they continue to provide dividends and stock appreciation for their shareholders and are a cornerstone investment for many annuities and retirement funds of middle class America. Exxon has been through the great Depression when demand and prices for their products fell for more than 10 years, tariff wars triggered by the infamous Smoot-Hawley tariff of 1930 which caused the collapse of international trade, nationalization of its assets by dictators and rogue countries in Latin America, the Mid-East, and Russia, the strain of the great wars where their properties and ships were destroyed (they lost 60 tankers during WWII ) and they still delivered the energy our nation needed.

Yes, they had a few oil spills, particularly Valdez in Alaska, which gave them bad publicity but nobody remembers that they paid more than $8 billion dollars to clean up the spill and restore the area and kept many fishermen with fat wallets for many years. Needless to say, they are still the brunt of politicians who think they make too much money, even though their margins are much lower that most of the Silicon Valley, pharmaceuticals and many other companies. They can deliver gasoline at the pump in the U.S. for $1.00/gal (ex-taxes), cheaper than most other places in the world and yet continue to be vilified in the press and Washington.

Exxon has persevered these 127 years through economic cycles and world wars, experienced vast changes in the political landscape, advanced and adapted to major technological developments, brought important products to the industrialized world, and achieved economic success through honesty, discipline, creativity, and innovation and never ASKED ANYONE FOR A BAILOUT! You can bet that President Obama will never have the opportunity to fire Exxon’s CEO.

Now you know why I am so proud of having a small part as a temporary caretaker of a great American enterprise.

"Old Hickory" - A Model of Presidential Toughness

2009-03-23T06:12:00.000-07:00

I must say that Jon Meacham’s book on our 7th President, Andrew Jackson, “American Lion” (Random House)www.amazon.com was a mixed bag. While it failed to give an informative perspective on the history of this era, it was an excellent look at the intimates, associates, and enemies of Jackson throughout his Presidency. This was made possible by the acquisition of papers and letters in recent years from descendants of the people involved during this period.

Jackson was a powerful and transformational figure. He held a position with the public that was similar to our first military hero, George Washington; however, Jackson was a political populist. Many of our most notable Presidents used him as a model because he defined the role of his office, relative to Congress, in a way never before demonstrated by his predecessors. Previously, the focal point was the Capital and the White House was just an arm of the Congress. Jackson changed this and it never has been the same again.

The hero of the battle of New Orleans during the War of 1812, “Old Hickory” had many political enemies, particularly from abolitionists in the North and many states rights “nullifiers” in the deep South, particularly in South Carolina. Although this was some 30 years prior to the Civil War, the seeds were sown during this period. Jackson’s rather inconsistent view of equal rights is hard to rationalize based on his insensitive treatment of the American Indian and his cavalier attitude towards slavery. It is a vivid illustration of how the cultural mores of the day could dictate evil behavior in well meaning and principled individuals.

Jackson was orphaned at a very early age and lost his brother as a young adult. He never had children and his wife died during the period between his election to the Presidency and his inauguration. This is amazing when you think of the pressures on him at the time. His niece, her husband, and their children became his family and they supported his social responsibilities during his Administration. His rise above these setbacks is a testimony to his perservance and toughness and his strong spiritual make-up.

His arch enemies in the Senate were strong and elegant speakers, like John C. Calhoun and Henry Clay, giants in their own right. Some of the rhetoric in the speeches and documents revealed in this book would make the partisanship and personal attacks of today seem like child’s play. In fact, the Senate's censure of Jackson for his unilateral decision to effectively destroy the Bank of the United States and move all deposits to State Banks, was unprecedented at the time and illustrated a new more powerful role for the executive branch. This was later expunged in a hotly contested Senate vote late in his second term in a magnanimous gesture of farewell.

Jackson left many problems behind and was followed by some mediocre Presidents, particularly his groomed successor, Martin Van Buren. However, his strong leadership abilities, communication skills, and military exploits made him very popular with the people which really riled his adversaries. He certainly deserves a place as one of our most colorful and near-great presidents.

Nuclear Waste: An Imagined Problem

2009-03-16T14:40:00.000-07:00

I read an article the other day by William Tucker, author of the book, “Terrestrial Energy: How Nuclear Power Will Lead the Green Revolution and End American’s Long Energy Odyssey” (Bartleby, 2008). As some of you may know, I have a PhD in chemistry and worked early in my career as a research chemist for Exxon Corporation, trying to develop a commercial process to recover additional oil from reservoirs that have been depleted after conventional recovery methods. This was in the 60’s and even at that time the major oil companies were concerned about the depleted reserves of crude oil in the U.S. The Alaskan discovery at Prudhoe Bay in the 70’s gave us a breather, but as you can see the problem is still with us today?

As a scientist, I could never figure out why we didn’t put the effort into the use of nuclear power to meet our energy needs, particularly in the generation of electricity. This seemed obvious, since it is the most efficient, powerful, cheapest, and safest means of doing so. If the French have generated 75% of their electricity this way for the last 30 years, why couldn’t we? Good gracious, the French?

We have the technology to do this now, so why is it not even on Obama’s priority list? Obviously, the environmental lobby has convinced the liberal media and politicians that this is risky business because of the potential hazards posed by nuclear waste. The truth is, ladies and gentlemen, that there is no such thing as nuclear waste!

A typical nuclear fuel rod is made up of two forms of Uranium: U-235, the fissionable form which generates the energy upon degradation, and U-238, an inert form which remains as the carrier or packing material. Natural uranium ore contains only 0.7% of U-235 and must be “enriched” to 3% in order to qualify as reactor grade. To qualify for a nuclear weapon, the ore needs to be enriched to 90%, a difficult process, which only a few know how to do (Iran is trying right now!).

In a nuclear reactor, these fuel rods last for about 5 years before they are replaced. At that point, about 12 ounces of U-235 will have been converted to energy, enough to power the city of San Francisco for five years, with no carbon dioxide emissions or chemical waste of any kind. The depleted rods are then submerged in storage pools of water to block the radioactivity and after a few years they are stored in lead-lined casks, where they can sit for a century or so, if need be. Is this waste? Absolutely not; 95% is plain old U-238 which exists as 1% of the earth’s crust anyway, and could be put right back into the ground. The remaining 5% can be separated and 40% can be recycled as fuel and 60% has important use as medical and industrial isotopes. France actually reprocesses its recyclable material and the unused remains over the past 30 years sit beneath a single room at La Hague.

The truth is we send our depleted rods to Yucca Mountain in Nevada for storage and call it nuclear waste, when it really is material we could reuse for fuel and our $4 billion/yr. nuclear medicine industry, if we wanted to. If we had a significant nuclear industry, we would.

So, why don’t we build more nuclear power plants? I wish Greenpeace or Al Gore would tell me.

Should Al Gore Win The Booby Prize This Year?

2009-03-11T19:28:00.000-07:00

I wonder how many of you are aware of a looming burden being prepared by the liberal Democrats and their glorious leader for the U.S. economy. It’s called cap-and-trade which is devised to encourage development of alternative sources of energy by auctioning off permits to emit carbon dioxide, at a cost that is supposed to discourage the use of fossil fuels. These fuels currently generate over 80% of our energy. It’s called “climate revenue” and is predicted to generate more than $600 billion annually to the government coffers. This is really a tax on the private sector and they will view it as additional energy costs, thus reducing their gross margins. When your margins go down, you increase your prices and eventually it gets passed on to you and me.

President Obama’s energy proposals grossly underestimate the time to bring alternative fuels to compete with oil and gas on a commercial scale. As a matter of fact, his energy czar says we will need a lot more fossil fuel sources while we’re waiting and will probably have to spend $12 trillion until we get there. However, let’s leave this problem to our new czar of global warming, Mrs. Carol M. Browner, head of the FDA under Clinton. She is the new “coordinator of climate policies”, replacing God in that position. In order to take this job she left her position as a leader of the Commission for a Sustainable World Society, a group that advocates global governance, which requires “rich” countries to shrink their economies to help fight global warming. In fact,after she was named to this position Mrs. Browner’s name quickly disappeared from the rolls of another one of her affiliations, Socialist International. Get the picture?

All of these gyrations based on the premise that we are at the precipice of a global catastrophe, global warming, when the inconvenient truth is that for the last few years we appear to be on the brink of an approaching ice age, according to a new study by Russian scientists. Can’t you tell by the fact that the last few global warming conferences have been delayed by ice and blizzards. You would think they would learn to schedule these in July.

Anyway, a cap-and-trade emission trading system has been operating in Europe for the past two years and has been a dismal failure. It has been an opportunity for political manipulation, bureaucracy, and worse. Causing volatile energy prices as permit prices soar when fuel prices rise and bust when they fall.

This is another ill-timed and poorly analyzed program that will reduce our global competitiveness and cost us billions. Why not encourage more drilling on the Continental Shelf and begin a thrust in nuclear energy, which will generate millions of jobs right away and put us on the road to energy independence? No, I guess that’s too easy! Let’s continue to make hybrid cars at higher prices, build windmills all over the country, and continue to generate ethanol from corn so that corn prices soar, at a cost that must be subsidized by the taxpayers in order to ever be competitive with hydrocarbon fuels. What a mess! We can thank Al Gore for all of this. No wonder he won the Nobel Peace Prize. He really is a “piece” of work.

Small Business - Absent from Obama's Radar Screen

2009-03-07T16:28:00.000-08:00

I’ve been thinking for the last couple of days what I want to talk to you about. It’s easy to read the daily paper and continue to criticize the rather clueless Obama administration for their incredibly amateurish handling of the economic crisis, but I don’t want to bore you. What I’d like to talk about is the way real people are being impacted. I’m talking about the people who actually work for a living and pay taxes and their mortgage, people who are not looking for a handout from the government, people who own small businesses and who support their families, friends, and relatives with jobs, the small business owners who really fuel this economy.

I volunteer for an organization called SCORE, the Service Corp of Retired Executives. We are counselors to small business entrepreneurs and provide business advice, mentoring, workshops, and seminars for start-up businesses or small business owners seeking professional advice for any business issue. SCORE is supported by an on-going grant from the U.S. Small Business Administration and independent contributors and foundations who understand the importance of this work. We have 370 Chapters across the country with 11,200 volunteers covering over 600 different business skills.

In our experience these past few months, we see many people in real trouble, particularly here in Southwest Florida, where the economy is heavily weighted towards construction, housing development, retail, and services. We actually see business people in tears suffering from worry, anxiety, and depression. These individuals are very proud and many people rely on them for jobs and they now find themselves looking at the abyss they never believed would face them. They have such pride that they could not admit what has happening to them and came to SCORE too late in the game to turn things around.

Where is the help for small business in the Stimulus package? No where to be found! We readily help those people who don’t pay any taxes and then send them a tax rebate complements of those who do. Oh yes, lets now raise the tax rate for those rich small business owners who make over $250k/yr. Let’s disincentivize them from making more money, creating more jobs, and investing to grow their business. That’s what Mr. Obama just recommended to Congress. Many small business people will now be in a 40% tax bracket, and when you combine this with State, Sales, Property, etc. taxes, most will have more than half their income confiscated by our government. How would you like to work half the year for nothing? These people are the engine of our economy; there is something wrong with this scenario.

On my next posting, I want to talk about another ingenious way this Administration is seeking to confiscate money without calling it a tax. It’s called “climate revenue” and its being driven by the falsehood that global warming is caused by greenhouse gases, or carbon dioxide, being generated by businesses that use fossil fuels (which is virtually all of them). Obviously, this must be true since one of our most renowned scientists, Al Gore, says so.

The Things In Life That We Are Certain Of

2009-03-01T18:05:00.000-08:00

At mass today I was privileged to have Father Edward L. Beck, C.P. give the homily at my parish. Father Beck is the author of three books, God Underneath, Unlikely Ways Home, and Soul Provider, all published by Doubleday and available from www.amazon.com . He gives retreats and workshops on spirituality, nationally and internationally. In addition, he hosts a weekly TV show for ABC called Faith Matters Now on the ABC Now Network and his work can be found on his web site www.EdwardLBeck.com .
Father’s homily was particularly important and thought provoking, considering the environment we are all facing during these difficult times and the changes occurring in our country today. He discussed the five certitudes of life that cut to the very core of our existence and our impact on others.

1. Life is Hard: Yes, although we all prefer to focus on the good things, we all go through difficult times. We lose loved ones, our kids go astray or have problems, we have financial issues, we have health problems, we get divorced, we have addictions and mental disorders. These are things that escape no one no matter how wealthy or how poor.

2. You Are Going To Die: Yes, we can’t escape this. Do we live our lives realizing this inevitability? Have we accomplished all that we wanted? Is our life in order? Life will go on after we’ve gone just like we never existed. Yes, our loved ones will remember us fondly, we hope, but the world will not care if we ever existed. I don’t want to disillusion you but do you think you will miss this blog after I go?

3. You Are Not Very Important: Particularly in the grand scheme of things. Maybe great Presidents, leaders, and historical figures will have altered things somewhat for a time, but they too will just be names in history books as the generations go on. Are you beginning to feel more depressed?

4. Life Is Not About You: Just ask Donald Trump, right? Well, in the context that we are sent here by God to do good things for others, our role is to impact others for their good and betterment. We earn money to support our family and loved ones, we help the disabled and deprived people in our society, we use our intellect or physical skills to make a contribution to society. When we become the focal point in our lives, we become very unhappy and probably get into a lot of trouble.

5. You Have No Control: We really have no control over events in our life. Oh yes, we can plan and try to stay on course, but things usually happen that change the plans and force us to alter our journey. All those smart people in government and all the economic titans appear to have no control over the events that have befallen us. Did the passengers on the plane that crashed in the Hudson have any control on whether they lived or died? You drive a car down a road and get hit head-on by a drunk driver and are disabled for life. These are things that are controlled by what people call “fate”. Is that God’s plan? Or as an atheist would say, just a “coincidence”.

After you contemplate how bad things are, just remember the five certitudes that Father Beck pointed out in church today. It doesn't mean we are not special or unique in God's eyes, remember we are the creatures not the creator. We are special because no matter what happens we will adapt and cope, as long as we understand the five certitudes.

Why Can't We Exit Iraq With Honor?

2009-02-28T07:04:00.000-08:00

President Obama’s remarks today about the withdrawal of our combat troops from Iraq by August 31, 2010, were disgraceful. Those who have read my postings obviously assume that I am not a fan of President Obama. Therefore, if you are, you may want to stop reading at this point.
It is clear that his role as Commander-in-Chief is at odds with his training and exposure to his anti-war friends in Chicago. I don’t want to get into the Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers background again, but sometimes it’s hard to ignore this part of his past. Just as his tenure as a community organizer affects his views on the redistribution of wealth in this society.

• In the President’s remarks to our soldiers he never once mentioned the words victory, success, or democracy. He treated our soldiers as victims not victors, because of the difficult demands of this war on their personal lives. If you said that to our soldiers during WWII, the Greatest Generation, they would think you were crazy! Our soldiers were protecting our citizens from terrorism here in the U.S. and they liberated Iraq in the process. So what if it was a personal inconvenience. Are you really my Commander-in-Chief?

• Mr. Obama never gave any acknowledgement to General Petreus or President Bush for the success of the surge. This shows no class, particularly after President Bush treated Obama and his staff so graciously during the transition.

• Mr. Obama never used the word “democracy”, after we have established the only democratic country in the Mid-East with the blood of over 4,000 American youth. Iraq now has political parties, elections, and democratic debates among their legislators without a gun pointed at their heads. Do you see this in Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, or Syria?

• President Obama just focused on the fact that we were withdrawing 100,000 combat troops and leaving 35-50,000 to support the Iraqi army going forward. This war ended because we were successful in removing a dictator and murderer, who supported terrorism all over the Mid-East and virtually ruined the Iraqi economy. It ended because the war is over and we defeated Al-Qaeda and Mr. Obama contributed nothing to it other than making the announcement.

I was embarrassed by his insensitivity to our military and the people in our government who worked hard to resolve a very difficult situation. He will probably proceed to take credit for ending the war in the next presidential election.

An Invoice for Future Generations

2009-02-27T13:59:00.000-08:00

Over the past few days President Obama has laid out the most expansive and expensive domestic agenda since LBJ’s Great Society (we know how that worked out)! This followed the $2 trillion we just put into our financial system for TARP and the Stimulus (or the Economic Reinvestment and Recovery Act). We now have this Congress proposing a $410 billion omnibus bill which completes the budget for 2009 for 9 of the 12 major government agencies. The Democrats held off voting on this under Bush since they felt he would veto much of it. Now with their man in charge, it’s Gung Ho! The expenses for these agencies, or as the current administration says, the “investments” for these agencies, will jump by 80% from 2008 to $650 billion in 2009.

How do we pay for this? Mr. Obama says that raising taxes on people who make over $250k/yr, limiting deductions for mortgages and charitable donations, and getting out of Iraq, will do it. Well, the Wall Street Journal, with the help of the Tax Foundation, did the calculations and concluded this was “poppy cock”, as President Eisenhower used to say. In fact, taxes on everyone earning more than $75k/yr in 2006 would barely provide enough to cover the $4 trillion Congress will be spending in fiscal 2010. Keep in mind that over this current period, business will not be as good as it was in 2006. Thus, the likelihood of severe inflation is now very real and the reduced value of our dollar will severely affect the solvency of our nation in the years to come.

We are witnessing the greatest redistribution of wealth this country has ever seen and we are modeling our economy after the stagnated industrialized economies of Western Europe, where the emphasis is on sharing the wealth instead of growing the wealth. When will we ever get away from class warfare tax politics and move from a 44,000 page tax code to a flatter, easier to interpret tax policy, free of distortions and inequities, and one that encourages investment and growth?

The American electorate is not shy about making its voice heard in the ballot box and as we watch this President move us towards socialism we will exercise our options. The numbers will show that those who eventually will pay for this travesty are not only the so-called “rich” but the middle class, if we are to combat the inflation that will surely come.

Then Mr. Obama will have to take the political blame and this will become his Depression, not Mr. Bush’s, and he likely will be a one-term President despite his charisma and his amazing journey to the White House.

A Stirring Speech - But Is Obama's Plan Feasible?

2009-02-25T05:35:00.000-08:00

Well our President really knows how to make an uplifting speech and he succeeded last night. At my age I have heard many of these ambitious and lofty speeches that Presidents use to illustrate leadership and utilize the bully pulpit to raise their favorability ratings. I truly hope this President is successful, but I have been disappointed before by speeches that promise solutions to all our problems and promote excessive government intervention in our lives, only to see them go down in flames when bureaucrats are allowed to implement these so-called solutions without transparency or accountability.

I certainly am in favor of bold action by government resources in times like this, but solutions must come from the ideas of both sides of the aisle not with the approach that “we won and we’re going to do it our way”. Solutions should incorporate the thoughts, values, and needs of the entire electorate.

Obama outlined a very ambitious plan which includes actions aimed at the current economic crisis and proposals for programs in energy, healthcare, and education that will put his stamp on the future course of the country for many years to come. To top it off, he set the goal to reduce the current deficit in half by the end of his first term. All this leaves me with a very dubious view of the plan’s feasibility.

I took some comfort in the fact that his healthcare remarks were focused on efficiencies and preventive medicine and did not mention the word “universal”. In addition, his comments on education for teacher incentives, charter school commitment, and the goal to have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world by 2020, were very commendable. I was not encouraged by his energy pronouncements which placed emphasis on the wrong issues and not enough on cheaper and known methods of energy generation like more domestic drilling and nuclear energy. A cap on carbon footprints will surely have a negative impact on the profitability of our economy and exacerbate our current problems.

I was optimistic on his promise to make our expenditures for the war on terror more transparent and his accelerated exit from Iraq. But his comments on overcoming “extremism” in Afghanistan and Pakistan were vague. I was pleased, however, by his support for increased pay and extended healthcare for our military.

There were some great examples of American generosity and tenacity from the invited guests in the audience. The only low point was the remark that Joe Biden will oversee the effort to ensure that the stimulus money will be spent appropriately. Ouch! How about having a non-political and more objective person do that? We don’t want patronage to be a factor in delving out this money, like what occurred during the Great Depression.

I must say that the sight of Nancy Pelosi jumping up and down about 70 times during the speech with a stupid grin on her face was a little disconcerting, particularly knowing that she made absolutely no contribution to the bi-partisan effort that Mr. Obama tried to achieve in the Stimulus bill debate.

Good luck, Mr. President, you have your work cut out for you.

Consumerism: A Transformational Change in Healthcare

2009-02-22T13:49:00.001-08:00

I recently met Frank Hone, a man who has worked in the healthcare industry for twenty years. Some of this time was spent working with pharmaceutical companies in their DTC (direct-to-consumer) marketing of prescription drugs beginning in the early 90’s and then through the period after the FDA relaxed regulations on such advertising. Frank left this field when he became disheartened with the dangers of this trend and the excessive growth of such means of marketing drugs, which overshadowed other health options. In 2007, the television networks broadcast many hours of these commercials daily. That year the cost of DTC advertising was $5.2 billion.

Frank’s recently published book, “Why Healthcare Matters”, HRD Press, Inc. www.whyhealthcarematters.com, is a call to action for business leaders to drive the transformational change in our healthcare marketing model by focusing on demand-side solutions. Frank believes that the role of the consumer is vital to affecting this change, and that individual personal responsibility needs more emphasis. He provides a road map which promises to reverse the disturbing trend in health care delivery costs. He also outlines a 10-step tactical plan for implementation, that proactive companies can use to improve health care communications and increase the productivity of their employees, and describes the results of progressive companies that are leading the way.

Chronic disease is the culprit that accounts for more than 70% of health costs and saps the productivity, and eventually the profitability, from our economic system. Presenteeism, is one of these problems, it goes virtually unnoticed and is often accepted as normal. This is the lost productivity caused by employees on the job who suffer chronic ailments but are not sick enough to be absent from work.

This condition does not appear on any financial statement and too often doesn’t receive attention from management. Presenteeism, can be caused by asthma, allergies, migraines, arthritis, obesity, diabetes, and heart disease, etc. which can distract employees and limit their work output.

Studies published in the Journal of the American Medical Association estimate that U.S. companies suffer annual losses of $150 billion in at-work productivity. These same studies indicate that these losses are more costly than health care, workman’s compensation, disability, or absenteeism. Many companies are beginning to measure the cost of this problem, are educating their employees in an effort to change the health culture, and are providing tools and resources to empower them to become more essential participants in the interface with health care providers.

The American Institute of Preventive Medicine has shown that for every dollar invested in improving an employee’s health care knowledge, the employer can anticipate a return of $16. Most capital investments for businesses would not have that high a return. What are some of the ways this is being done and has it been successful; will be a subject of future posts.

Politics and Common Sense - Rarely Compatible

2009-02-20T13:43:00.000-08:00

Recently, my wife, after reading my post on the problems with the stimulus bill, said “Why don’t you talk more about there not being enough tax incentives in the bill. The average person doesn’t know anything about corporate or capital gains taxes”. I thought that was a reasonable request.

My problem with the stimulus bill is that although 35% of the bill contains some form of tax credits (not cuts), corporate or capital gains taxes are not addressed. These taxes are the ones that most influence the profitability and investment environment of our industrial base. As a result, they impact Wall Street’s view of the future, jobs, and consumer confidence. Why they were not addressed in this bill is strictly political and makes no economic sense.

Corporate Tax Rate
• Since the 1980’s corporate tax rates have been in a free fall, that is, everywhere except the U.S. On average, the top corporate rate in industrialized nations has gone from 50% to an average of 29%, according to the CATO Institute. In a global economy, competition is compelling governments to dramatically lower corporate tax rates. The U.S. is 2nd to Japan, but when you include state taxes, we have by far the highest corporate tax rate among all 33 industrialized nations in the world. Since 2000 our rate is unchanged, while virtually all other nations have dropped considerably (according to the Tax Foundation). A measurable drop in our tax rate would result in a marked rebound in our stock market, an impetus for corporate investment, and a surge in net profits. Wouldn’t that drive jobs and consumer spending?
Democrats fret over the “cost” of such a cut. However, compared to the trillion dollar spending package they just past, the effect on government revenues would be chump change. The increased corporate revenue gains from repatriated earnings, expanded production, increased income tax revenue, and lower unemployment costs, will more than offset any reduction in tax revenues going to the government.

Capital Gains Tax
• Another enigma is the reluctance to reduce capital gains taxes. Some 100 million Americans own stock, most are middle-class people. Obviously, most people will not realize capital gains on stock and in 401k’s this year, but under normal conditions a cut in capital gains tax always leads to increased revenues for the government rather than the reverse. Clinton dropped the tax to 20% in 1997 and Bush to 15% in 2002 and demonstrated this.
Most Democrats believe that a tax on investment income only affects the rich. The IRS tells us differently. In 2005, 47% of all tax returns reporting capital gains were from households with incomes below $50,000, and 79% from households with incomes below $100,000. Since this would be a middle-class tax cut, why do most Democrats oppose it? I thought that Republicans were the party of the rich. This is a stereotype that has existed for decades, but the facts don’t always bear that out.

So we risk spending 2 trillion dollars, when cuts in corporate and capital gains taxes can achieve the same result without the associated risk. That’s why politics and common sense are rarely compatible.

Rating Our Presidents

2009-02-18T06:08:00.000-08:00

While we are on the topic of rating Presidents (see post 2/17/09 ), I see that there was a news release yesterday stating that, The Times, a British publication, released the following ratings list by a panel of eight historians:

10 Best Presidents
Lincoln
Washington
F.Roosevelt
Jefferson
T.Roosevelt
Eisenhower
Truman
Reagan
Polk
Wilson

10 Worst Presidents
Buchanan
Pierce
Van Buren
Harrison
Nixon
G.Bush
Hoover
Harding
Garfield
Filmore

Rating Presidents is strictly an academic exercise. Historians generally differ based on the time they lived and the eventual course of history, which is usually a reliable indicator. The public, however, uses a different standard based more on popularity and likeability. Thus, note the absence of Kennedy and Clinton from this list, although Kennedy did finish at number 11 on the best list. My good “friend” Jimmy Carter barely managed to escape the bottom 10.

I know you probably thought I took a cheap shot at Clinton in my previous post, but the historians said that although Clinton left office with a high approval rating they considered him mediocre. They added that he passed progressive legislation (welfare reform) but saddled himself with the Lewinsky scandal and landed at number 23. One panelist, Ben MacIntyre said, “Clinton promised so much, delivered so little and embarrassed everyone”. Isn’t that what they call a con man?

As an avid student of presidential history, I would remove F. Roosevelt from the top 10, based on his dismal performance during the Great Depression. He probably gets good grades for his charisma, communication skills, and leadership qualities, particularly during WWII. I also would raise Polk even higher in the standings; he was a man with great executive and management skills who presided over our “manifest destiny” period as a nation. I also would drop Wilson out of the top 10, since most of his term was served by his wife, not him. Maybe we should give her the 10 spot.

Also, I feel sorry for Harrison and Garfield. Harrison died after 23 days in office, when he got sick because he didn’t wear a coat while giving his inaugural address in freezing weather; and poor Garfield got shot and died after 4 months in office. So why are they on the worst 10 list? Maybe we should consider them “No shows”.

Who can dispute Lincoln and Washington, our greatest Presidents. Although the challenges are different today, do you really think they would have pushed that stimulus package?

A Loveable Liar

2009-02-17T09:48:00.000-08:00

I couldn’t resist this one today! It was President’s Day yesterday and all banks and federal offices were closed so I expected no stupid news or statements from our politicians. All of a sudden I get a laugher. Former President Bill Clinton came out with the ridiculous statement that, had he been in the White House these last eight years, we would not be in a the mess we are today. Wow! No Bill, probably worse.

I guess we wouldn’t have had a 9/11 which basically accounts for the deficit growth over that time. Remember, you blew three chances to get Bin Laden and treated the Al-Qaida attacks in the U.S. as police actions, empowering them even more. Also Bill, your encouragement of home ownership, from legislation passed during the Carter years, caused those people who couldn’t afford it, to get loans from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

Bill, the best thing you did was pass welfare reform, which was forced upon you by a Republican controlled Congress and which was politically expedient for you at the time, even though your wife tried to convince you otherwise.

AOL is my computer server and on their news page they usually ask questions about topical events of the day and then ask for subscriber opinion. Well, when asked would the economy have tanked if Clinton was in charge during the last eight years, 51% said Yes, and 41% said No, with 8% not sure with 211,344 responses when I viewed it. Although this result was better for Clinton than I thought it should be, a result of this guy’s vast popularity, it still shows that most of the public don’t agree with him.

To illustrate this when asked how history would judge Clinton’s presidency, 53% said favorable, 47% unfavorable. It shows what a great con man and liar he is, particularly in front of the Grand Jury. Also, adding to the unbelievable things he said yesterday, he commented that Obama was off to a great start because of the passing of the stimulus bill. When AOL asked the same question, subscribers said 53% No, and 47% yes. This shows that most people again didn’t agree with Mr. Clinton. See my post of February 13th, 2009 about Obama’s “ugly start”.

I guess if you’re a former President and a good liar you can say anything and some people believe it, ask Jimmy Carter.

Strength Training Will Keep You Young

2009-02-13T07:45:00.000-08:00

I thought that I’d talk about some guy stuff today and give the politicians and economists a day off. The question of aging is an inevitable phenomenon that we all have to cope with and men do it differently than women. Women seem to view this process in a rather ominous fashion treating it with various concoctions of creams and make-up for their face, body, and eyes and different hairstyles with highlights. Of course, for men a tinge of gray and a few wrinkles is sexy, according to most women. And hair, well most of us men have the same hair style for life, as long as it lasts.

What bothers most men is the loss of muscle, the inexplicable disappearance of a waist after the age of forty, and losing that quick step and the competitive energy that comes with flexibility and strength. Also, it’s well known that as your body deteriorates it will also affect your brain function and emotional health.

Most of us try various forms of aerobic exercise (walking, jogging, cycling, etc) to control weight and flexibility but these kinds of activities while beneficial do not prevent muscle loss. A 10 year study of American’s best master distance runners showed a five pound muscle loss between their mid 40’s and mid 50’s which is the same rate seen in sedentary people. In fact, while we add an average of one pound of body weight yearly, we lose about 0.5 pounds of muscle and gain 1.5 pounds of fat. So our body weight may change by one pound, but body composition changes by two pounds-in the wrong direction.

The only way to maintain or improve muscle mass is to engage in some form of strength exercise regularly. About three years ago I found a system that meets my lifestyle and does not involved the conventional weight lifting programs you find at most gyms that entail a lot of grunting and sweating with unsupervised training. I described the system I use in my wife’s blog, www.maryahearn.com, it’s called High Intensity training and entails 20 minutes, 2-3 times a week and is comfortable for people up into their 80’s. In fact, age is not a barrier to muscle replacement. Seniors in their 80’s add muscle tissue at about the same rate as younger adults.

I can’t tell you how much strength training has enhanced my well being, mental attitude, and ability to perform tasks that use to be drudgery. I have included some links below for you to review should you want more information.

If you want to resist the onslaught of father time, try it, you won’t regret you did!
www.hitfitnessflorida.com
www.seriousstrength.com

Obama: Messiah or Mortal?

2009-02-13T07:26:00.000-08:00

An Ugly Start

It’s hard to believe President Obama, with a 70% approval rating, could get off to such an ugly start. The mis-steps and mistakes in the first three weeks of the Obama administration is by far the worst in recent memory. The withdrawal of New Hampshire Republican Senator Judd Gregg as Commerce nominee is just another example of screw-ups in the Cabinet selection process. The ridiculous press release of Press Secretary Gibbs saying that Senator Gregg approached President Obama seeking this nomination and then a few hours later admitting this was not so, continues to illustrate the rather lack of political savvy in the Administration and this inept Press Secretary.

Senator Gregg, a fiscal hawk, and respected Senator on both sides of the aisle, could not bring himself to be on this team due to “irresolvable conflicts”. The final straw was announcement that Rahm Emanuel, Chief of Staff, would be overseeing the next census, a prime responsibility of the Commerce Department, thus humiliating the new nominee right off the bat. If this is what our new President calls bi-partisanship, he will have a hard time getting any Republicans to believe he is serious.

In addition, the embarrassment caused by the Treasury, Labor, Performance Office, Commerce, and Health & Human Services nominees and Obama’s revelation that “he screwed up”, although noble, has quickly erased the “messiah” label. To make matters worse the performance of his Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner, announcing his plan to utilize the remaining $350 billion in TARP funds was devastating. Saying that he doesn’t have the details of his plan worked because “I’ve only been on the job for two weeks” when he has been head of the Federal Reserve from several years and presided over this mess with Paulsen and Bernake since last year, was something that “Joe the Plumber” would say. What a way to build confidence on Wall Street!

So on Monday, President’s Day, Obama will sign the ugly stimulus bill. This is a $789 billion dollar piece of legislation which is supposed to create 3.5-4.0 million new jobs in a few months, years or decades. Do you believe this? Only $282 billion or 35% involves any form of tax cuts but not the cuts we really need like capital gains, and corporate taxes, mainly because those in control, the Democrats and Mr. Obama, don’t feel this is their political ideology nor politically expedient with their constituency.

Your kids and grandchildren will pay for this mistake and your dollars will buy a lot less in the future. This is the ugly result of such an ugly start.

HEALTHCARE CONSUMERISM - SO WHY DON'T WE MEASURE UP?

2009-02-11T15:55:00.000-08:00

It's clear we have the best hospitals, doctors, and medical technology in the world and we spend more than any country on healthcare. The dichotomy is that we don’t deliver that quality to our citizens and we lag many countries in the key health metrics.

Recently, I was privileged to be invited to a talk sponsored by the Naples Community Hospital System Foundation in Naples, Florida. The guest speaker was Dr. Robert S. Galvin, who is Director of Global Healthcare for General Electric. Dr. Galvin oversees the design and performance of GE’s health programs, which totals over $3.0 billion annually, and he is responsible for medical services, encompassing over 220 medical clinics in more than 20 countries. Dr. Galvin had some interesting observations.

Despite the fact that healthcare represents 16.6% of our GDP and is expected to reach 19.5% by 2017, we lag many countries in life span, infant mortality, patient satisfaction, and many other measures of healthcare delivery. There are essentially four major factors that drive our spiraling health costs according to Dr. Galvin:

1 .There is a preponderance of unhealthy lifestyle practices.
2. Excessive doctor pay due to the trend towards specialization and away from family medicine.
3. Wasteful practices in the health administrative and delivery system.
4. Unnecessary, redundant, and expensive tests and treatments.

All of these contribute to our poor standing among nations who spend far less than we do.

There is no doubt that we excel at crisis medicine. Where we lag is in preventive medicine and chronic disease. Both these issues are a matter of consumer education and lifestyle modification. Most of the proposed healthcare reform legislation focuses on getting more people insured, whether they want it or not, and not enough on these issues.

Why is medicine unlike any business?

As a businessman, I could never understand why the medical profession follows none of the conventional economic principles. For example:

• Supply and demand has nothing to do with price or vice versa.
• Price is not set by value or quality (i.e. outcome) nor is the consumer able to readily measure quality.
• The consumer never asks about price nor is there a price list where he can choose alternative therapies or treatments.
• The supplier (provider) controls the sale and price process rather than the consumer.

This passive behavior of the consumer may be related to the fact that someone else pays the bill, thus, the consumer doesn’t pay attention to health issues until he is sick, and obviously, not when he is well. Good health is taken for granted or relegated to genetic “luck”. The truth is if the medical consumer was more like the conventional consumer and employers were more proactive about their employee’s wellness and disease prevention, the upward spiral of medical costs will be reversed.

You’ll read more about this in future postings.

Obama's First Press Conference a B-

2009-02-09T18:58:00.000-08:00

I thought that President Obama did fairly well in his first press conference tonight. He appeared to be informed and engaged in the fiscal issues but his facts continue to be skewed and partisan and his answers tended to be very cautious, particularly on foreign policy questions related to Iran. In addition, many of his answers were long-winded and somewhat boring.

Although no one yet knows how bad this recession is compared to previous ones, I question his continued use of fear tactics to create a sense of urgency about the passage of the stimulus bill. Frankly, I'm more interested in what the Treasury Secretary has to say tomorrow, which is very important to the housing and credit situation which is currently in limbo. When pressured on these tactics the President backed off his previous statement that "this crisis can turn into a catastrophe that we may never recover from". Sounds like the end of the world as we know it!

He also continues to put blame on the previous administation for the crisis and his "inheritance" of this giant deficit. This is quite disingenuous because the seeds for this began as far back as the Carter administration, was exascerbated during the Clinton years, actually stalled under Bush until the waning months of his term in office, and was catalyzed by Dodd and Frank during that time. Also,being driven into a war we didn't want and never started was a significant contributing factor. To say that the opposition presided over a doubling of the deficit sounds like the old political rhetoric that transformational leaders try to avoid.

His comment that we know tax cuts did not work in the past is totally incorrect. We have seen that tax cuts invariably increase government revenues and stimulate investment and the economy. FDR raised taxes during the Great Depression and prolonged the crisis. He also said that Japan failed to act boldly during its great recession in the 90's and paid the consequences. Well, Japan actually quadrupled its national debt with large government spending programs, we're only doubling ours, does that mean we're not acting boldly enough? He also said that Republicans are against government intervention (some Democrats are too),this is not really true. It's not intervention that bothers the GOP, its the type of intervention that is the issue. FDR's failed policies of the 30's is a great example of that.

I can't help but be amazed at the soft questions this Washington press corps threw at Obama. What ever happened to the hard-nosed, mature reporters of the past who didn't have to read their questions and didn't look like scared kids? The only mature reporter left is Helen Thomas and she should have retired decades ago. She asked if the President believed if "so-called" terrorists are hiding in Pakistan. Do you believe that? And what did she mean by "so-called"?

P.S. I thought Obama handled the A-Roid question real well, but it seemed out of place given all the weighty topics being discussed.

Whatever Happened to Our Political Debate?

2009-02-08T05:05:00.000-08:00

My Mother always told me to not talk about religion and politics because these were "sensitive" topics with people. My experience over the years, however, has been to the contrary. I have always been able to address these topics with friends and co-workers without getting into character assassination and personal vindictiveness. Even the politicians of my generation were able to debate issues in a civil way and then go to the bar for a few drinks. In the turmoil in the 60's, 70's and 80's, we had some significant crises. The assassination of John and Bobby Kennedy, and Martin Luther King, the race riots, Watergate, the Cold War, and the malaise of the Carter years. Still political debate was civil and the media was balanced.

The optimism of the Reagan years, the end of the Cold War, and our victory in the Gulf War was a period where we reached a high point in national unity and pride.

It seems to me that civility and bipartisanship began to exit our political scene during the first congressional election of Clinton's first term. This marked the first time in some 50 years that the Republicans took control of both houses of Congress and the rhetoric started to get vitriolic. Democrats reacted badly to the demotion and Republicans gloated at their new-found power. The Republicans instituted the "Contract with America" which changed the political culture and philosophy that had been in place for decades.

All this followed the rather polarizing campaign of the Clinton/Bush election which catalyzed extremists on both sides to begin a debate that used character degradation as the norm of our political rhetoric. This reached a peak during the Clinton sex scandal and continues today as talk radio and political blogs flood the airways and the Internet with over zealous ideologues who destroy people they don't agree with.

It is also the denigration of America that has become the focus of our political debate and the assertion, even by our newly elected President, that we no longer have the values we once had.

If we have lost our reputation in the world, as many people claim, why are people clamoring to get here and why does no one want to leave? What country is as generous as ours? Who is first on the scene when there is a famine or Aids epidemic in Africa, an earthquake in Pakistan, a tsunami in Indonesia, genocide in Eastern Europe, and when a demented Nazi dictator tries to take over the European continent because he believed he belonged to some master race?

I'll talk more about this in future postings but it's time for you to get off your duffs and reject this notion that we have deserted our principles just because we have water-boarded three terrorists, or have over 100 war criminals in Gitmo and haven't yet brought charges (too bad). There are three thousand innocent people who had their lives snuffed out in one morning because these religious fanatics think we are evil because we support people whom they despise.

You need to stand up to this demoralization of America that seems to be at the center of our political debate and start to look at what's great about America. Our allies know we are not perfect but they also know that we stand by our friends no matter what. That's why they love us, that's why they try to emulate us, and that's why we are the standard to which they aspire.

Don't let anyone tell you different!

Can Government Actually Prolong a Depression?

2009-02-06T18:55:00.000-08:00

This is not a political posting nor do the words here reflect a bias towards any party or ideology. However, from time to time I may comment on a book that I think deserves some attention, particularly if it is germane to the problems we face today. One such books is “New Deal or Raw Deal” by Burton W. Folsom, Jr. which describes the Roosevelt Administration and its action in coping with the worse economic depression in our history following the stock market crash of 1929.

The perception of the public has always been that the New Deal ended the Great Depression and, therefore, New Deal policies are needed to pull us out of our current crisis. Well, nothing could be further from the truth.

This book covers the years of FDR’s presidency from 1933 until his death in 1945 and describes the policies he instituted and the way he used them to control Congress and eventually attempted to stack the Supreme Court with judges who would support his “progressive” agenda. Many of his policies were eventually declared unconstitutional by this same court and were rescinded.

I think it is important to read this book because it provides a benchmark on how not to approach the dilemma we now face and how excessive government intervention can restrict a free economy and actually make matters worse. The United States was one of the last nations to recover from that depression; in fact, the unemployment rate in 1939 was over 20%, ten years after the great crash. This was greater than it was in 1933 when FDR first took office. Since FDR’s objective was to get the country working again; clearly he failed and the Great Depression continued long after his ascent to the presidency.

FDR has enjoyed a status among many presidential historians that puts him among the greats, at least in the top five. After reading this book you may change your mind. He just dropped to somewhere in the middle of my list. In fact, his policies actually worsened unemployment, prolonged the Depression, and introduced concepts that continue to divide us today. Maybe our politicians should review this period of our history before they push through any so-called “stimulus” package. What we need now is cool, calm, and prudent analysis followed by effective bipartisan action. Clearly, this is an issue that transcends Left versus Right or Democrat versus Republican.

Our New Leader - Or Follower?

2009-02-06T18:42:00.000-08:00

Ladies and gentlemen I just witnessed a very scary thing. Our new leader just interrupted all the cable programs Thursday evening, 2/5/09, at 8:30pm (prime time) in order to show us his talk to a bunch of Democratic senators and congressmen who were congregating at a resort in Virginia (paid for by us), most of who appear to have had too much to drink. I might say that the President also looked like he sipped one or two before this ridiculous speech.

He continues to predict the Armageddon of our entire economy and nation because the most learned economists tell him that it is so. Has anyone told him that an equal number on the other side say something completely different? He says that this “stimulus” bill needs to be at least 800 billion dollars, but he doesn’t say why the number is so important and he mentions nothing about the substance. He says that he’s tired of arguments on the other side, which talk about corporate and capital gains tax cuts.

Why?

Is it because he just wants to show we only need to throw money at this problem?

In my lifetime I have never seen a leader who struts around like a pop star without any apparent involvement in the process. Leaving it to the others to “work” the problem.

In this speech, he acknowledged Nancy Pelosi calling her a “rock”. Just the previous day, she emphatically declared that if this preposterous House stimulus bill was not passed right away, we would lose 500 million jobs a month for the remainder of the year!

She repeated this twice.

Somebody should tell her that only 300 million people live in the U.S.!

Her prediction is that everyone, plus 200 million more people will be out of work in the next month. This shows she has no grasp of numbers and the difference between millions, billions, trillions, etc. Apparently, it’s just a few more zeros to her.

With people like this in charge, we are in deep doo doo.

The FDR administration has already shown us that throwing money and government programs at the problem failed to create jobs and curtail a Depression and here we are repeating the story. It only leads to patronage and political leverage and control.

I’m afraid we have an amateur in charge.

I hope I’m not bursting your bubble, but someone with no experience at making critical decisions like this and spending his time on TV establishing his image and playing HORSE in the White House gym in the afternoon at a time like this, is a scary thought.

In addition, some of his cabinet appointees and his inept Press Secretary leave much to be desired.

This President needs a lot of help and he is greatly over-rated. We need more than a lofty speech right now. We need calm and prudent analysis and well-crafted legislation. Not 700 pages of crap ginned up in two days and read by no one.

Fasten your seat belts; we’re in for a bumpy ride!