Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Que Sarah: Sarah:

Whatever will be will be. The future's not ours to see. Que Sarah: Sarah: The future may hold one undeniable truth. Sarah Palin is the ultimate anti elitist politician, and therefore she should position herself as thus. President Obama prepares his summer vacation at Blue Heron Farm, in Martha's Vineyard, near the small town of Chilmark, which the Vineyard Gazette said in 2007 was the most expensive small town in America. Heron farm rents at a weekly rate of $50,000 dollars. It has practice golf facilities, a basketball court, beach access and a swimming pool. Perfect for a president leading us through, in his words, "the worst economy since the great depression." A vacation spot for his Washington cronies to come and party on $100 a lb. Japanese imported steak, and impromtu Chicago style pizza parties, with a chef flown in on a private jet. Meanwhile, Sarah continues to be the champion of the common man. That may be why even some beltway conservatives, like David Brooks, David Frum, and ex Reagan speech writer Peggy Noonan have all trashed Sarah. Being a media conservative in Washington sometimes has it's drawbacks. You must kowtow to attain gigs on, This Week, and Meet The Press, and characterizing Sarah Palin as in Peggy's words "stupid," will ensure that. After all, Sarah is the elite media's favorite punching bag, especially since Bush has exited stage left.

The GOP top dogs, better watch how they treat this Alaskan interloper, because there is a huge anti elitist sentiment growing in the country, with Obama being the poster boy. If the Republican party continues it's slide to Democrat lite, there may be an uprising of monumental proportions, with Sarah leading the way. She should keep the photo ops coming, wearing her waders, picking fish out of nets, while the media feverishly tries to catch Obama hobnobbing with the rich and powerful at Martha's Vineyard.

She should continue to expose this administration as wasting our hard earned tax dollars, while living the life of privilege. Present them as synonymous with the old Soviet Politburo, that routinely imposed their egalitarian Utopia, while they themselves lived the life of unbridled avarice. While this administration continues to feed the flames of class warfare they are a class onto themselves, and they know it.

So, Sarah, keep the images of picking fish and watching snow machine races, and holding your precious baby, even though the elites in Washington will continue to characterize you as unsophisticated, old fashioned, and ill equipped. Keep speaking common sense, instead of nuance and complexity. Your connection with the common man will continue. And remember this, no matter what they say, the common man votes, and there are more of them, than snobby elites!..

Friday, July 24, 2009

Is Obama an angry black man?

President Obama definitely raised some eyebrows when he answered a reporters question about the disorderly conduct arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. He said, even though he admitted not a lot of knowledge of the facts of the case, that he didn't know what role race played in his arrest. This is troubling, that the president of the United States assumes that because a black man was arrested for disorderly conduct, that race played a role. He went on to say, even though admitting he didn't know the facts of the case that the Cambridge police acted stupidly. As more comes out about this incident, it is becoming clearer that the only one who injected race into this incident is professor Gates, and now our president, and there is no reason to assume that officer Crowley would have acted any differently if he was confronting a white professor who became verbally abusive.

This comment all took place in the context of a press conference about health care, where vague and incomplete answers were the rule of the night, that is up until this question. The president had the perfect opportunity to take a huge step forward into the post racial era by simply stating, as Charles Krauthammer said," professor Gates is a friend of mine, and thus I'm inclined to believe him, but not knowing the facts of the case I'll decline comment." Instead he fell back into his default position, "blacks in America are victims of institutional racism," something probably ingrained from twenty years of Reverend Wright's sermons.

Tuesday, July 21, 2009

GOP's best friend

As the media keeps pounding the GOP for having no leader after two devastating election cycles, it is becoming abundantly clear that they do have an unexpected ally. Barack Obama. This president's insistence on running up massive deficits, expanding government, and intentionally decimating free market capitalism, is just what the GOP needed. While moderate Democrats, independents, and guilty white Republicans are having buyers remorse, for voting for what they thought was a post partisan candidate, Obama and the democrats in congress continue to tack left. Polls are beginning to show an undeniable downward trend in his approval ratings, and his ability to handle the economy, deficits, and health care. The next question is, will the GOP take advantage of this golden opportunity, or simply try to moderate the Dem's policies and continue on this recent trend to become democrat lite. Maybe they should return to the conservatism of small government, low taxes, individual freedoms, and strong national defense. Maybe the referendum on the 2010 elections should be a warning to both political parties, "shrink the fed, or we'll have your head." Or how about "stop the spending, cuz your demise is pending."

Monday, July 20, 2009

The Immorality of redistribution

When Barack Obama told Joe the plumber that we want to spread the wealth around, he pretty much admitted that his administration was going to institute a redistribution policy. On the surface the progressive tax code seems fair and just. People who do well and prosper should pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes to help supplement the less fortunate. But, let's examine what is really behind this policy. Free market capitalism inevitably will lead to income inequality. People make varied personal choices that determine their lot in life. Some are satisfied with a mediocre job with mediocre compensation. Some want and work for more. Some put whatever capital they have at risk to start a small business. Many put countless hours and sweat into these ventures, all the time working for a better future for their families. Some won't even accept the extra shift, choosing rather to have a beer with the buddies. Others have opportunities to start their own businesses, but for whatever reason choose the security of their current job. None of these choices are wrong, because we live in a free society. But, what is immoral is the government telling one group of people you have to sacrifice your life's energy and supplement the income of those that have chosen their lot. The American way has, up until now, been equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.

Let's suppose for a moment, that redistribution, has the desired effect, and the rich are dropped down a peg or two, and the poor are raised up. Great an egalitarian society is now in the making, everyone is more equal, and the central planners are patting each others backs.
But, are there any unintended consequences? Two huge ones. First the recipients begin to develop an entitlement mentality, and instead of working for their own best interest they look to Washington for their needs, which by the way is really what this administration wants. You dependent on them. Secondly, the so called rich now have less disposable income to invest, expand, and hire, so the economy inevitably shrinks, employment stagnates, and every one's standard of living drops. You need not look any further then Europe. Those countries with high taxation and huge entitlements have a much larger constant unemployment rate, and a much lower standard of living.

Wealth creation is the biggest boom to employment and a higher standard of living for all. Wealth is accumulated by putting capital at risk. Those dependent on government assistance are not the risk takers. The wealthy are constantly looking for ways to become wealthier, and have disposable capital to put at risk. That is until the redistribution advocates have their way and enact extra fees and taxes on them.

Now the central question is, do these people really care about the poor, or are they simply using redistribution as a way to attain and keep power? As an entitlement mentality and the bureaucracy, which divvies out the largess, grows, much of that confiscated wealth is eaten up before it ever gets to the intended recipients. There comes a point of critical mass, where the entitlement community, and a huge bureaucracy begin to outgrow the producers, and everybody simply votes their best interest, and therefore the social engineers win. We must as a country stop this insidious attempt to enslave our citizens in an entitlement mindset, and squash the human spirit from reaching it's full potential.

Friday, July 17, 2009

affirmative action reaches new heights.

During this last campaign cycle I was very impressed with the glowing and lofty rhetoric of Barack Obama. And even though I'm a conservative, I was impressed to the point of wanting to support him, and do away with the stereotype that America is a racist country, once and for all. But after reviewing his senate voting record, and radical associations, I knew I couldn't support him. Well, his election was nonetheless historic, and he certainly did run a masterful, albeit relatively unchallenged campaign. The media which is historically referred to as democracy's watchdog, seems to have turned into Obama's lapdog. It was very clear, they had found their standard bearer. Extremely liberal, although he hid that well, and a minority candidate. Now that he's been elected they seem to have a vested interest in making sure he succeeds. The question is, would another liberal with the identical policies of Barack Obama, that was not a minority, have ever been elected.

Now six months in, we have trillion dollar deficits and an unprecedented foray into the private sector by this administration. These extreme liberal policies come with the backdrop that 40% of Americans identify themselves as conservative and only 21% as liberal. A recent Gallop poll shows a strong majority still support his job performance, citing his hard work and effort tackling hard issues. But, the same majority are troubled by huge deficit spending and government takeovers. Why the disconnect?

Could it be that a heartfelt shame of past racism has brought affirmative action to the office of president? Is our first African American president getting preferential treatment, and a green light go ahead, simply because he's our first African American president? Is there a soft bigotry that infers special allowances? Are we rooting for him because of his race? Could it be that we are willing to sacrifice our personal liberties, and free market capitalism, simply to assuage our collective guilt? Even though this mindset may be sincere and well intended, it falls far short of Martin Luther King's admonition, that, "we should judge a man on the content of his character, not on the color of his skin"!

Wednesday, July 8, 2009

The liberal response to Palin

It's becoming hilarious watching the mainstream, Eastern media elites reaction to Sarah Palin. I'm still trying to figure out if it comes solely from a visceral hatred of all she stands for, or is it the threat she poses, to their values, or lack there of. They say she's unsophisticated and inarticulate. Her folksiness, and some would call straight forward way of speaking, send them screaming and covering their ears, while at the same time they envy her connection to the great unwashed. Remember the descriptions of the last two Democratic presidendial nominees articulations of policy. They were described as nuanced and complex. In others words, no one could understand where they stood. Not so with Sarah. They abhor her homegrown values and absolutes. In their minds, no one should be that certain about what they believe. After all, it should take years of post graduate, Ivy League education before you even attempt to form opinion, and be welcomed at D.C. cocktail parties.

So, as their readership continues to fall, like the northern glaciers into Al Gores rising ocean levels, the Aurora Borealis, shines brighter over Alaska. Could Sarah be the answer to the founding fathers original intention? A citizen legislator? You Betcha!

Wednesday, July 1, 2009

Ponzi Schemes

Bernie Madoff was sentenced to 150 years for his elaborate ponzi scheme, but there's a ponzi scheme in D.C. that would make even Bernie boy blush. First, the president told us they had to pass the stimulus bill quickly or unemployment might reach 8%. Of course it was shoved through on a Friday, without anyone reading it, and the president was vacationing in Chicago with the first lady and didn't come back to sign it until Tuesday. Unemployment is now 9.4% and rising. Then He said I have no interest in Running companies, while his administration, after bailout mania, is now calling the shots at AIG, Chrysler, GM. etc. Next the house passed the so called cap and trade bill, claiming it will create, in Nancy Pelosi words, jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs. And of course we all believe that now, don't we? And now, the president is claiming that his health care initiative will cover another 47 million, while reducing cost and improving care. Wow, if you believe that, I'm sure you're convinced he is the messiah and can feed 5 thousands with a loaf and 2 fish.

The problem with this ponzi scheme is that the sentence is going to be handed out to the American people. 150 years of hard labor, and generations of a lower standard of living. Maybe Obama should command his GM minions to create a new fleet of turnip trucks so the public can continue to fall off of them. Wake up people, your future is being spent exponentially.