Just finished Michael Lewis' fine book about the housing crash called "The Big Short". I would highly recommend this read to anyone. I have read just about everything I can get my hands on regarding the Too Big to Fail scenario. All of what I have read to date has been from the perspective of the top of the heap (i.e.) Paulson, Bernenke, Geithner and the heads of the big investment banks. This book is fascinating as it analyzes the same events from the bottom of the pyramid. He follows a handful of hedge fund managers that early on figured out the housing mess and shorted the market to make huge profits. It is a remarkable tale of how they determined everyone in the mainstream was either wrong, crooked or so greedy that they didn't want to change the status quo.
The real tragedy of course is that they were the only ones that saw the fallacy of the economy at that time. As a result we are all still paying a heavy price for the greed and malfeasance of the oligarchy that runs the banking industry in this country.
In any event if you have the interest & the time I highly endorse this book.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Afghanistan Commander Ousted
I am not sure what to think just yet regarding this McChrystal controversy. I have read the Rolling Stone article and really didn't find it that objectionable. Most of the piece was rather benign and the elements that seemed to agitate the DC folk were mostly attributed to his subordinates. What is clear is that there was a lack of good judgment by having a journalist privy to these comments that seemed to be made amongst compatriots behind closed doors.
I am certain that this is another problem for the Obama Administration. This is another irritant that when added to all the other stuff on their platter provides a significant challenge to their ability to adhere to the task at hand.
Within the besieged White House they must be starting to feel like a large prey such as a bear or buffalo being taken down by a pack of wolves - none of the wolves in and of themselves could challenge the larger prey but with each of them distracting and nipping at the large beast they eventually prevail.
The most common question at the West Wing today must be - what can happen next?
These are the times when experience matters - we know that the adults in both the Bush Administrations persevered, we know that the Clinton people had executive experience and acquitted themselves well; what will historians say about the Obama people? The problem is that we will not have the benefit of coolly studying these times through the lens of history - we are living them & the stakes are incredibly high on all fronts.
I am certain that this is another problem for the Obama Administration. This is another irritant that when added to all the other stuff on their platter provides a significant challenge to their ability to adhere to the task at hand.
Within the besieged White House they must be starting to feel like a large prey such as a bear or buffalo being taken down by a pack of wolves - none of the wolves in and of themselves could challenge the larger prey but with each of them distracting and nipping at the large beast they eventually prevail.
The most common question at the West Wing today must be - what can happen next?
These are the times when experience matters - we know that the adults in both the Bush Administrations persevered, we know that the Clinton people had executive experience and acquitted themselves well; what will historians say about the Obama people? The problem is that we will not have the benefit of coolly studying these times through the lens of history - we are living them & the stakes are incredibly high on all fronts.
Sunday, June 20, 2010
Civil Liberties Under Attack in Arizona
An interesting editorial in today's New York Times - "Another Bad Idea From Arizona". The fact that there is support in that jurisdiction (in fact overwhelming support) for these ideals is concerning. One has to ask - "What does this say about Arizonans and those that support such policies?". Weren't these the kind of concerns that enlightened people had about the Jim Crowe laws in the Deep South during the time of the Civil Rights Movement? Just because something is popular doesn't make it right - clearly social justice and civil liberties are being ignored by these recent legal movements in Arizona.
In my opinion this is an example of the ramifications of 9/11. These actions would not have even been given consideration pre 9/11 and would have been identified for what they were - the ranting of a fringe element in our society.
Instead, 9/11 provided credibility to these voices because their intolerant statements are now couched in terms of national security as opposed to the racist undertones and attitudes that feed these concepts. The general public would not have even considered such things if concerns for national security due to 9/11 hadn't made these types of conversations mainstream.
It is during these trying times that civil liberties must be defended - the undocumented have been targeted, now the US born citizens of the undocumented are being attacked; who is next & where does it stop? At what point do defenders of civil liberties step up & take the appropriate actions? Aren't these the questions that were never answered in 1930's Western Europe? Mass persecution of identifiable segments of society doesn't happen instantly - it is the result of a gradual erosion of civil liberties and the resulting desensitization of the masses that permits such an intolerable consequence.
The following was contributed to the Washington Post as commentary to an opinion piece submitted by Kirk Adams the Speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives entitled "The Truth Behind Arizona's Immigration Law" .
"Having read AZ Senate Bill 1070, listened to the debate and now having read this defense of the legislation presented by the Speaker of the AZ House of Representatives I feel compelled to raise some questions.
Mr. Adams points to the fact that polls indicate that people "overwhelmingly support this law" as evidence that AZ's statute is both legal and morally appropriate. In fact, overwhelming support of a position does not necessarily make it legal or morally right. Case in point would the Jim Crowe/ segregation laws adopted by States during the period prior to enactment of federal Civil Rights legislation be considered legal or morally right by any standard? Can there be any doubt that those discriminatory laws enjoyed "overwhelming support" by the citizens of their State - Mississippi et al for example.
The argument is that S.B. 1070 merely mirrors federal law "by making it a state crime to be in this country illegally". However, S.B. 1070 actually goes further and amends the law of trespass to create an additional category of criminal trespass to the effect that "any person" (legal or illegal) is guilty of trespass if they are present in any "public or private land" in the State of AZ and cannot produce documented evidence of their status.
An American citizen would be suspected of committing trespass in any part of the State of AZ if they were not carrying documented evidence of their status. In other words everyone must be prepared to present "their papers" or be arrested on suspicion of trespass. This new definition of criminal trespass is the thin edge of the wedge that permits the authorities to make the "lawful contact" required by the AZ statute. An officer merely has to suspect the person of violating this expanded definition of trespass (physically being in AZ without "papers" whether of legal status or not)in order to make the "lawful contact". This is the investigation of "another violation or crime" that allows the inquiry and demand for "papers".
A blue-eyed, blond female of Scandinavian descent born in Phoenix who was not carrying documented evidence of her citizenship and/or legal status would be in violation of this new expanded definition of trespass and thus would be subjected to detention & delivery to ICE for the ultimate determination of legality of her being present within the boundaries of the State of AZ. The State Representative would say that this wouldn't happen. The only reason it wouldn't happen to the blond perp/ suspect is that she would have been "profiled" as not being a potential offender. Of course, a male Hispanic, waiting at the side of the road for any purpose would be "profiled" as a potential offender of this new, expanded offense of trespass. If this unfortunate Hispanic male was an American citizen who was not carrying "papers"/ documentation proving his legal status then he will be arrested and delivered to ICE while being charged under the AZ Criminal Code with criminal trespass & face the penalties contained therein including fines & payment of his jail costs. He must hire defense counsel & prove that he "maintains authorization from the federal government to remain in the United States". Where is the presumption of innocence, where is the requirement that the prosecution has the burden of proving the offence?
The burden shifts to the accused to "prove" his presence in the State of AZ is lawful. If an American born Hispanic male cannot prove his legal status he would be subject to conviction. Shouldn't the prosecution be required to prove that that the person is there without legal status?
Interestingly the AZ law places a positive obligation on law enforcement to apply the new law of trespass. Should the officer try & release the blond that can't produce her "papers" he could himself be subject to prosecution for not detaining her & anyone can initiate the complaint. (Note that the AZ law encourages anonymous reporting of violations.)
Lastly Mr. Adams attempts to justify the actions of the AZ Legislature by drawing attention to the fact that CA, one of the largest critics of the proposed law, may even have similar laws on its books. He cites CA Penal Code s. 834b as support for this proposition. Firstly this section pertains to the obligations of a peace officer in effecting an "arrest". It does not expand the definition of trespass or create any new criminal offenses. Secondly, s. 834b (a) serves as the preamble for the cited law and provides as follows: "Every law enforcement agency in CA shall fully cooperate with the US Immigration & Naturalization Service (sic - now ICE) regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws." Therefore, the person must first be "arrested" - this is a much higher standard than "lawful contact"; and, the agency's requirement is to "cooperate" with federal immigration authorities not co-opt their authority."
Isn't it time for the ACLU or other entity prepared to defend all of our civil liberties to step up to the plate?
In my opinion this is an example of the ramifications of 9/11. These actions would not have even been given consideration pre 9/11 and would have been identified for what they were - the ranting of a fringe element in our society.
Instead, 9/11 provided credibility to these voices because their intolerant statements are now couched in terms of national security as opposed to the racist undertones and attitudes that feed these concepts. The general public would not have even considered such things if concerns for national security due to 9/11 hadn't made these types of conversations mainstream.
It is during these trying times that civil liberties must be defended - the undocumented have been targeted, now the US born citizens of the undocumented are being attacked; who is next & where does it stop? At what point do defenders of civil liberties step up & take the appropriate actions? Aren't these the questions that were never answered in 1930's Western Europe? Mass persecution of identifiable segments of society doesn't happen instantly - it is the result of a gradual erosion of civil liberties and the resulting desensitization of the masses that permits such an intolerable consequence.
The following was contributed to the Washington Post as commentary to an opinion piece submitted by Kirk Adams the Speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives entitled "The Truth Behind Arizona's Immigration Law" .
"Having read AZ Senate Bill 1070, listened to the debate and now having read this defense of the legislation presented by the Speaker of the AZ House of Representatives I feel compelled to raise some questions.
Mr. Adams points to the fact that polls indicate that people "overwhelmingly support this law" as evidence that AZ's statute is both legal and morally appropriate. In fact, overwhelming support of a position does not necessarily make it legal or morally right. Case in point would the Jim Crowe/ segregation laws adopted by States during the period prior to enactment of federal Civil Rights legislation be considered legal or morally right by any standard? Can there be any doubt that those discriminatory laws enjoyed "overwhelming support" by the citizens of their State - Mississippi et al for example.
The argument is that S.B. 1070 merely mirrors federal law "by making it a state crime to be in this country illegally". However, S.B. 1070 actually goes further and amends the law of trespass to create an additional category of criminal trespass to the effect that "any person" (legal or illegal) is guilty of trespass if they are present in any "public or private land" in the State of AZ and cannot produce documented evidence of their status.
An American citizen would be suspected of committing trespass in any part of the State of AZ if they were not carrying documented evidence of their status. In other words everyone must be prepared to present "their papers" or be arrested on suspicion of trespass. This new definition of criminal trespass is the thin edge of the wedge that permits the authorities to make the "lawful contact" required by the AZ statute. An officer merely has to suspect the person of violating this expanded definition of trespass (physically being in AZ without "papers" whether of legal status or not)in order to make the "lawful contact". This is the investigation of "another violation or crime" that allows the inquiry and demand for "papers".
A blue-eyed, blond female of Scandinavian descent born in Phoenix who was not carrying documented evidence of her citizenship and/or legal status would be in violation of this new expanded definition of trespass and thus would be subjected to detention & delivery to ICE for the ultimate determination of legality of her being present within the boundaries of the State of AZ. The State Representative would say that this wouldn't happen. The only reason it wouldn't happen to the blond perp/ suspect is that she would have been "profiled" as not being a potential offender. Of course, a male Hispanic, waiting at the side of the road for any purpose would be "profiled" as a potential offender of this new, expanded offense of trespass. If this unfortunate Hispanic male was an American citizen who was not carrying "papers"/ documentation proving his legal status then he will be arrested and delivered to ICE while being charged under the AZ Criminal Code with criminal trespass & face the penalties contained therein including fines & payment of his jail costs. He must hire defense counsel & prove that he "maintains authorization from the federal government to remain in the United States". Where is the presumption of innocence, where is the requirement that the prosecution has the burden of proving the offence?
The burden shifts to the accused to "prove" his presence in the State of AZ is lawful. If an American born Hispanic male cannot prove his legal status he would be subject to conviction. Shouldn't the prosecution be required to prove that that the person is there without legal status?
Interestingly the AZ law places a positive obligation on law enforcement to apply the new law of trespass. Should the officer try & release the blond that can't produce her "papers" he could himself be subject to prosecution for not detaining her & anyone can initiate the complaint. (Note that the AZ law encourages anonymous reporting of violations.)
Lastly Mr. Adams attempts to justify the actions of the AZ Legislature by drawing attention to the fact that CA, one of the largest critics of the proposed law, may even have similar laws on its books. He cites CA Penal Code s. 834b as support for this proposition. Firstly this section pertains to the obligations of a peace officer in effecting an "arrest". It does not expand the definition of trespass or create any new criminal offenses. Secondly, s. 834b (a) serves as the preamble for the cited law and provides as follows: "Every law enforcement agency in CA shall fully cooperate with the US Immigration & Naturalization Service (sic - now ICE) regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws." Therefore, the person must first be "arrested" - this is a much higher standard than "lawful contact"; and, the agency's requirement is to "cooperate" with federal immigration authorities not co-opt their authority."
Isn't it time for the ACLU or other entity prepared to defend all of our civil liberties to step up to the plate?
Friday, June 18, 2010
Obama Sliced & Diced by Hofstra Prof
I have been reading everything I can get my hands on regarding the reactions to President Obama's Oval Office Speech. Mainly I see this debacle as indicative of his inadequacies as a leader and as the turning point at which the people, the press and others in government can finally admit we were conned by this guy during the last election cycle & that in many respects the Clinton Campaign was right. He is not qualified, he has no executive experience and as such he would be dangerous as President.
However, and I think this is important, he is the current President of the United States and the putative leader of the free world. That fact can not be changed - at least not easily and probably not until 2012. Therefore our best alternative, given that we are all in this together, is to use our efforts to help him help us. I have concluded that the best way to accomplish this task is to demonstrate to him & others (especially the main stream media) that "the Emperor as no clothes". It is my opinion that so long as the pandering press, mind numbed extreme left and tentative right behave as if Obama is the Anointed One, above criticism; he will never face the fact that he is not currently up to the task at hand.
Fortunately, his continued mishandling of the situation in the Gulf and the awful Oval Office Address has caused many of those that had been blind supporters to open their eyes and consider the possibility that maybe, just maybe, he isn't the smartest guy in the world; in fact, it seems that he might not even be competent enough to capably handle the basic requirements of the Office. We need to assist him in his "on the job training" - this is actually our fault; we elected this guy. It appears that we are no better than the Democrat voters in the South Carolina Senate Primary.
Today an interesting detailed analysis of the Address appears in Common Dreams written by David Michael Green a political science professor at Hofstra University in New York entitled "President Obama Doesn't Strike Again".
Professor Green takes no prisoners in his scathing parsing of the speech which he calls "absolutely pathetic". He concluded with a summary that nails the concerns that are dominating those of us that are fearful that Obama is incompetently leading this country to ruin:
However, and I think this is important, he is the current President of the United States and the putative leader of the free world. That fact can not be changed - at least not easily and probably not until 2012. Therefore our best alternative, given that we are all in this together, is to use our efforts to help him help us. I have concluded that the best way to accomplish this task is to demonstrate to him & others (especially the main stream media) that "the Emperor as no clothes". It is my opinion that so long as the pandering press, mind numbed extreme left and tentative right behave as if Obama is the Anointed One, above criticism; he will never face the fact that he is not currently up to the task at hand.
Fortunately, his continued mishandling of the situation in the Gulf and the awful Oval Office Address has caused many of those that had been blind supporters to open their eyes and consider the possibility that maybe, just maybe, he isn't the smartest guy in the world; in fact, it seems that he might not even be competent enough to capably handle the basic requirements of the Office. We need to assist him in his "on the job training" - this is actually our fault; we elected this guy. It appears that we are no better than the Democrat voters in the South Carolina Senate Primary.
Today an interesting detailed analysis of the Address appears in Common Dreams written by David Michael Green a political science professor at Hofstra University in New York entitled "President Obama Doesn't Strike Again".
Professor Green takes no prisoners in his scathing parsing of the speech which he calls "absolutely pathetic". He concluded with a summary that nails the concerns that are dominating those of us that are fearful that Obama is incompetently leading this country to ruin:
"So this is what it has come to now, huh? A Democratic president, with all the power of the presidency at his disposal, refusing to act, refusing to be bold, refusing to lead, and now praying for the courage that he lacks, and calling on us to pray to some unseen fantasy in the sky for a solution to turn off this oily catastrophe in the Gulf? (Why the deity turned it on in the first place is, of course, not discussed.)
If I had to draw a portrait of the absolute depth of presidential impotence, that would be it. Hammered by adversaries, never punching back, afraid to seek real solutions to major problems, slow to even speak, and reliant upon the lamest of historical analogies to make a case before a tuned-out nation. And now, for the coup de grâce, kneeling on the train tracks, asking for Zeus or Ba'al or Jesus or some other mythical dude in the clouds to come rescue us from our drought or pestilence or famine.
Christ, if we're down now to begging our deities for solutions to our problems, what's the point of having a president anyhow?
We can be stupid and frightened pagans on our own.
We're actually quite good at it."
A tidal wave of understanding is gaining momentum thanks to the continued arrogant ineptitude of Obama. Better late than never - it has cost us dearly in the past year and a half. The stimulus bill that will be a burden on taxpayers for generations, the health care bill that will benefit health insurance companies at our expense, the near nationalization of the auto industry, the ineffective actions towards Wall Street that have changed nothing, the continuation of high unemployment with all the consequences that flow through our society, the maintenance of a failed foreign policy in Central Asia, and the systematic transfer of power to Unions such as the SEIU have all been achieved by this Administration in that short period of time.
Imagine the destruction and havoc that would result if the Oil Spill hadn't come along to show us that Obama is actually incompetent - that event seems to have rallied both the Left & the Right as well as awakened responsible journalists to their ultimate responsibilities.
Imagine the destruction and havoc that would result if the Oil Spill hadn't come along to show us that Obama is actually incompetent - that event seems to have rallied both the Left & the Right as well as awakened responsible journalists to their ultimate responsibilities.
It's almost half time for the Obama Presidency and if we are fortunate the mindless cheer leading by the Left & the journalistic profession will not continue. There is still time for America to prevail - we just need to get our leader on track.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Obama's First Oval Office Address
Gulf Oil Spill – Obama Leadership
Pre Oval Office Address Notes:
Obama to speak from the Oval Office tonight as he starts to rehabilitate his popularity over this Gulf Oil Spill fiasco. Watch for him to say that the buck stops with him and that he takes full responsibility but that the spill & failures with the fix & clean up were someone else's fault - (i.e.) BP, the Bush Administration, Congress, the agencies within government populated with Bush appointees that failed to properly regulate etc.
Interestingly, there is a Poll out today that indicates that a majority of Americans prefer Hillary over Obama as President.
Former Federal Judge Napolitano calls Obama's rumored actions trying to force BP to create a multi-billion dollar escrow account to compensate the victims of the Spill close to dictatorial as there is no legal basis for such an action.
Lots of irritated people out there right now. If ever there was a time for a strong leader it is now - however, it is also at times like this that the atmosphere encourages fascists, dictators and charismatic movements. The masses look for an easy answer to their problems, willingly hand over control to a central authority in exchange for a dilution of their civil liberties. Watch for a rise of McCarthy style hearings in DC looking for someone or something to be responsible for the current problems & decline. First victims will be people of foreign extraction - Hispanics, Muslims etc.
Post Oval Office Address Notes:
Eugene Robinson is very liberal, black & an Obama apologist yet he too is asking the same questions we all have on our minds. This is why I believe that this will define Obama's tenure & currently exposes his inadequacies. Those that support him need to mete out some tough love otherwise he will charm his way into failure. Time for substance not his normal pompousness. His first step to recovery is to admit he is out of his depth and requires help in leading the country properly. Audacity is required not more of his arrogance.
He is pompous & he is a pseudo-intellectual; he has received breaks his entire life & no need to place the blame on previous Administrations as he has been President for almost 1/2 of his 1st term.Like almost every President that has preceded him (except maybe Lincoln & Washington) he is just another guy. The dangerous part is that he doesn't seem to recognize that fact because he has been permitted to get by on charm and personalityhis entire career - from his days at Occidental College right through to Harvard; he has never actually accomplished anything. He has extraordinary charm and is able to get people to sympathize with him while at the same time overlooking his lack of credentials and qualifications. His "intelligence" is his ability to be all things to all people & reiterate information he has been fed. Where is the original thought, the development of something unique & effective. Other than 2 ghost-written books what original material, paper, thesis, thought, idea has he actually generated.
It is important that people see that the emperor has no clothes. It is only then that he can start being himself (whatever that is) and grow into the Office. He is the President of the USA, he has a tremendous burden & responsibility and the USA as well as the world relies upon him & his Administration doing the right thing for everyone. He no longer is a Democrat, a partisan, a community organizer, or merely the 1st Black President of the USA - he actually is the leader of the free world at a time when the economy is on shambles (everywhere), where there is strife around the world, where there are environmental disasters happening right in his own back yard - this isn't a game anymore, there is too much at stake, even if he is the smartest guy in the world it actually doesn't matter if he doesn't start actually leading & effecting solutions.
Those that continue to apologize for him or spew the nonsense about how he is so wonderful & smart do him an injustice. He needs feedback that drives him to fulfill his potential and quite possibly his destiny. Blindly accepting as fact information from his public relations machine will be self destructive - we all have a dog in this fight & it is in all of our best interests that he start performing as an effective leader.
One needs to objectively observe this mere mortal & help him help the USA and the rest of the world. Like it or not he occupies the most powerful office on the globe and what he does or doesn't do has consequences. I prefer that he succeed and am willing to do whatever is necessary to assist in that regard. Continually pandering to him does us all a great disservice - including him.
Those that accuse his critics of conducting a personal vendetta are mistaken as I merely state that based on the evidence and performance to date he isn't a good leader and that he seems incompetent. This is based on his track record to date. He has shown that he is not up to the task at hand. There is still time if he takes off the blinders. I am sure that he is a very personable individual & probably the most popular person in any room he is in - but, the last time I checked that isn't necessarily the #1 qualification for being President of the United States.
Obama’s followers’ blind devotion to dogma as opposed to an open mind capable of assessing him objectively is my paramount concern. What benefit is it to Obama to have sycophants constantly telling him how great he is when in fact what he needs is constructive criticism.
If I am wrong what harm has been caused? All I would have done is motivate the most extraordinary person on the globe to lead the world to a better place. If I am wrong we all win. However, if I am right - what then? who loses? Is it that difficult for the best & brightest man in the world to prove me wrong? If I am right there are many losers. Is the most intelligent man in the world so thin skinned that criticism from someone like me or anyone for that matter will throw him off his game and distract him from the issues at hand?
There is an election coming soon. Again, as in all elections recently, the best & the brightest will be on the sidelines & we will have to choose from amongst career political hacks. Where are the leaders, innovators, revolutionaries? Until recently they have been on Wall Street, Redmond WA, Silicon Valley etc. They sure haven't been seen anywhere near Washington DC.
Unfortunately the Obama supporters find themselves less and less pointing to his abilities, leadership & accomplishments as the basis for his deserving our vote. Rather they point to the potential alternatives (i.e. Sarah Palin) as if it would be better to support Obama as the lesser of 2 evils. Why can't we instead actually strive for a leader that is the best.
By the way, I am not a particularly strident Palin supporter except to say that - she is only the 2nd woman in history to run for the 2nd most powerful office in the world. As a man that was a supporter of the feminist movement I am thrilled that we have evolved to the point that now each of the major political parties in the USA have deemed it appropriate, not radical, to nominate a female to that position. I guess the fact that avowed feminists around the world feel comfortable criticizing her as much as they would criticize a man is evidence that the feminist movement is now mainstream.
Obama followers say they are insulted by the comment that people shouldn't blindly follow Obama or any other leader? Yet they typically state: "I maintain and you will never convince me otherwise, that Obama is an extraordinary mind and man, and that time may prove you all wrong." How many other people in history received such accolades and then were proven through factual determination to be otherwise. What could possible make Obama immune from such a determination after sober analysis? Are they not open to the mere possibility that they could be wrong? Is that not blind devotion to dogma? These people have better minds than that – they should not insult themselves.
Whether he is the "brightest and best" or "most intelligent man in the world" is moot (although I am heartened to see that many are apparently beginning to not subscribe to that particular dicta). What would be a response to my scenario? What is the harm if I am wrong? What is the harm if I am right? This seems like a sure bet - if I am wrong we all win; if I am right there are losers. Where's the harm in holding his feet to the fire and demanding performance? It is the only way to assure that there are no losers & the stakes have never been higher.
Many say the USA is ungovernable and as to the Presidency: “Who would want the job?” Well, apparently most of the dangerous ego maniacs currently populating the USA. Where is it best for the globe that we have the best & the brightest sitting on the bench while the 2nd, 3rd & 4th stringers play the most important game in our lifetime?
My concerns are that the man that currently occupies the most powerful office in the world is not up to the task. Those that raise the issue of Sarah Palin are bringing something to the table that is not pertinent to that discussion. As we speak, who is more potentially dangerous? Sarah Palin, a private citizen, or a President that isn't effectively performing his duties?
Let's keep our eye on the ball.
There is no vitriol dripping from my pen - there is no more fervent supporter of the President of the United States than me; no one wants him to succeed more than me. However, wishing & hoping isn't getting it done. All I have to offer him to assist in his task at hand is constructive criticism & a sense of reality. Would I tell my child that she is doing a great job & to keep it up if she was achieving failing grades in school? Have I not been clear in this?
The issue is whether the current President of the United States is up to the task at hand. The almost universal opinion of informed commentators across the political spectrum is that it is worthy of an honest & open discussion.
Now, on the other hand, individual apologists defense efforts are not without precedent as it is the strategy of those that do not wish to analyze the Obama Presidency to try and obfuscate & distract.
Even the usually Obama supporting New York Times Editors are skeptical after the Oval Office speech. Basically saying words are cheap currency; action & results are required. Rumors of a $20 Billion Escrow Fund will make many happy that something is being done. Others will question the legality of that action.
The video from Countdown on MSNBC after the Oval Office speech was heavily critical. Bear in mind that the 3 commentators from the program (Keith Obermann, Howard Fineman and Chris Matthews) have been the most strident voices for the left and till recently they were in absolute lock step with Obama. In effect they are the anti-Fox News.
Additionally the satiric commentary from Jon Stewart on The Daily Show was hilarious and dangerously on point. Especially the clip going back 8 previous Administrations showing the same messages being foisted on the American public.
I agree with all of them in this instance 100%.
This again speaks to my point that this is a crucial time in the Obama Presidency. Clearly he has no support from the Right. Now he has rallied the Left against him. He can solve all of this by demonstrating leadership.
Today's announcement re: the BP Escrow Fund will help. But, we will need to know more about the terms that will govern the administration of this fund.
This is a critical time & even countries other than the USA will be impacted. There needs to be some attention given this growing problem (i.e. - leadership vacuum) as we all will be paying a very dear price.
I don't mean to open another vitriolic conversation but rather I mean this as a call to action - he must be coerced into taking a leadership role. That is the message from all parts of the political spectrum.
Pre Oval Office Address Notes:
Obama to speak from the Oval Office tonight as he starts to rehabilitate his popularity over this Gulf Oil Spill fiasco. Watch for him to say that the buck stops with him and that he takes full responsibility but that the spill & failures with the fix & clean up were someone else's fault - (i.e.) BP, the Bush Administration, Congress, the agencies within government populated with Bush appointees that failed to properly regulate etc.
Interestingly, there is a Poll out today that indicates that a majority of Americans prefer Hillary over Obama as President.
Former Federal Judge Napolitano calls Obama's rumored actions trying to force BP to create a multi-billion dollar escrow account to compensate the victims of the Spill close to dictatorial as there is no legal basis for such an action.
Lots of irritated people out there right now. If ever there was a time for a strong leader it is now - however, it is also at times like this that the atmosphere encourages fascists, dictators and charismatic movements. The masses look for an easy answer to their problems, willingly hand over control to a central authority in exchange for a dilution of their civil liberties. Watch for a rise of McCarthy style hearings in DC looking for someone or something to be responsible for the current problems & decline. First victims will be people of foreign extraction - Hispanics, Muslims etc.
Post Oval Office Address Notes:
Eugene Robinson is very liberal, black & an Obama apologist yet he too is asking the same questions we all have on our minds. This is why I believe that this will define Obama's tenure & currently exposes his inadequacies. Those that support him need to mete out some tough love otherwise he will charm his way into failure. Time for substance not his normal pompousness. His first step to recovery is to admit he is out of his depth and requires help in leading the country properly. Audacity is required not more of his arrogance.
He is pompous & he is a pseudo-intellectual; he has received breaks his entire life & no need to place the blame on previous Administrations as he has been President for almost 1/2 of his 1st term.Like almost every President that has preceded him (except maybe Lincoln & Washington) he is just another guy. The dangerous part is that he doesn't seem to recognize that fact because he has been permitted to get by on charm and personalityhis entire career - from his days at Occidental College right through to Harvard; he has never actually accomplished anything. He has extraordinary charm and is able to get people to sympathize with him while at the same time overlooking his lack of credentials and qualifications. His "intelligence" is his ability to be all things to all people & reiterate information he has been fed. Where is the original thought, the development of something unique & effective. Other than 2 ghost-written books what original material, paper, thesis, thought, idea has he actually generated.
It is important that people see that the emperor has no clothes. It is only then that he can start being himself (whatever that is) and grow into the Office. He is the President of the USA, he has a tremendous burden & responsibility and the USA as well as the world relies upon him & his Administration doing the right thing for everyone. He no longer is a Democrat, a partisan, a community organizer, or merely the 1st Black President of the USA - he actually is the leader of the free world at a time when the economy is on shambles (everywhere), where there is strife around the world, where there are environmental disasters happening right in his own back yard - this isn't a game anymore, there is too much at stake, even if he is the smartest guy in the world it actually doesn't matter if he doesn't start actually leading & effecting solutions.
Those that continue to apologize for him or spew the nonsense about how he is so wonderful & smart do him an injustice. He needs feedback that drives him to fulfill his potential and quite possibly his destiny. Blindly accepting as fact information from his public relations machine will be self destructive - we all have a dog in this fight & it is in all of our best interests that he start performing as an effective leader.
One needs to objectively observe this mere mortal & help him help the USA and the rest of the world. Like it or not he occupies the most powerful office on the globe and what he does or doesn't do has consequences. I prefer that he succeed and am willing to do whatever is necessary to assist in that regard. Continually pandering to him does us all a great disservice - including him.
Those that accuse his critics of conducting a personal vendetta are mistaken as I merely state that based on the evidence and performance to date he isn't a good leader and that he seems incompetent. This is based on his track record to date. He has shown that he is not up to the task at hand. There is still time if he takes off the blinders. I am sure that he is a very personable individual & probably the most popular person in any room he is in - but, the last time I checked that isn't necessarily the #1 qualification for being President of the United States.
Obama’s followers’ blind devotion to dogma as opposed to an open mind capable of assessing him objectively is my paramount concern. What benefit is it to Obama to have sycophants constantly telling him how great he is when in fact what he needs is constructive criticism.
If I am wrong what harm has been caused? All I would have done is motivate the most extraordinary person on the globe to lead the world to a better place. If I am wrong we all win. However, if I am right - what then? who loses? Is it that difficult for the best & brightest man in the world to prove me wrong? If I am right there are many losers. Is the most intelligent man in the world so thin skinned that criticism from someone like me or anyone for that matter will throw him off his game and distract him from the issues at hand?
There is an election coming soon. Again, as in all elections recently, the best & the brightest will be on the sidelines & we will have to choose from amongst career political hacks. Where are the leaders, innovators, revolutionaries? Until recently they have been on Wall Street, Redmond WA, Silicon Valley etc. They sure haven't been seen anywhere near Washington DC.
Unfortunately the Obama supporters find themselves less and less pointing to his abilities, leadership & accomplishments as the basis for his deserving our vote. Rather they point to the potential alternatives (i.e. Sarah Palin) as if it would be better to support Obama as the lesser of 2 evils. Why can't we instead actually strive for a leader that is the best.
By the way, I am not a particularly strident Palin supporter except to say that - she is only the 2nd woman in history to run for the 2nd most powerful office in the world. As a man that was a supporter of the feminist movement I am thrilled that we have evolved to the point that now each of the major political parties in the USA have deemed it appropriate, not radical, to nominate a female to that position. I guess the fact that avowed feminists around the world feel comfortable criticizing her as much as they would criticize a man is evidence that the feminist movement is now mainstream.
Obama followers say they are insulted by the comment that people shouldn't blindly follow Obama or any other leader? Yet they typically state: "I maintain and you will never convince me otherwise, that Obama is an extraordinary mind and man, and that time may prove you all wrong." How many other people in history received such accolades and then were proven through factual determination to be otherwise. What could possible make Obama immune from such a determination after sober analysis? Are they not open to the mere possibility that they could be wrong? Is that not blind devotion to dogma? These people have better minds than that – they should not insult themselves.
Whether he is the "brightest and best" or "most intelligent man in the world" is moot (although I am heartened to see that many are apparently beginning to not subscribe to that particular dicta). What would be a response to my scenario? What is the harm if I am wrong? What is the harm if I am right? This seems like a sure bet - if I am wrong we all win; if I am right there are losers. Where's the harm in holding his feet to the fire and demanding performance? It is the only way to assure that there are no losers & the stakes have never been higher.
Many say the USA is ungovernable and as to the Presidency: “Who would want the job?” Well, apparently most of the dangerous ego maniacs currently populating the USA. Where is it best for the globe that we have the best & the brightest sitting on the bench while the 2nd, 3rd & 4th stringers play the most important game in our lifetime?
My concerns are that the man that currently occupies the most powerful office in the world is not up to the task. Those that raise the issue of Sarah Palin are bringing something to the table that is not pertinent to that discussion. As we speak, who is more potentially dangerous? Sarah Palin, a private citizen, or a President that isn't effectively performing his duties?
Let's keep our eye on the ball.
There is no vitriol dripping from my pen - there is no more fervent supporter of the President of the United States than me; no one wants him to succeed more than me. However, wishing & hoping isn't getting it done. All I have to offer him to assist in his task at hand is constructive criticism & a sense of reality. Would I tell my child that she is doing a great job & to keep it up if she was achieving failing grades in school? Have I not been clear in this?
The issue is whether the current President of the United States is up to the task at hand. The almost universal opinion of informed commentators across the political spectrum is that it is worthy of an honest & open discussion.
Now, on the other hand, individual apologists defense efforts are not without precedent as it is the strategy of those that do not wish to analyze the Obama Presidency to try and obfuscate & distract.
Even the usually Obama supporting New York Times Editors are skeptical after the Oval Office speech. Basically saying words are cheap currency; action & results are required. Rumors of a $20 Billion Escrow Fund will make many happy that something is being done. Others will question the legality of that action.
The video from Countdown on MSNBC after the Oval Office speech was heavily critical. Bear in mind that the 3 commentators from the program (Keith Obermann, Howard Fineman and Chris Matthews) have been the most strident voices for the left and till recently they were in absolute lock step with Obama. In effect they are the anti-Fox News.
Additionally the satiric commentary from Jon Stewart on The Daily Show was hilarious and dangerously on point. Especially the clip going back 8 previous Administrations showing the same messages being foisted on the American public.
I agree with all of them in this instance 100%.
This again speaks to my point that this is a crucial time in the Obama Presidency. Clearly he has no support from the Right. Now he has rallied the Left against him. He can solve all of this by demonstrating leadership.
Today's announcement re: the BP Escrow Fund will help. But, we will need to know more about the terms that will govern the administration of this fund.
This is a critical time & even countries other than the USA will be impacted. There needs to be some attention given this growing problem (i.e. - leadership vacuum) as we all will be paying a very dear price.
I don't mean to open another vitriolic conversation but rather I mean this as a call to action - he must be coerced into taking a leadership role. That is the message from all parts of the political spectrum.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)