WEEK OF MARCH 22, 2009 Sieg Heil, Mein Oberfuhrer: the Sequel A
little over a month ago, I posted an article here entitled Sieg Heil, Mein
Oberfuhrer! Things have not changed
since then, so a sequel seems to be in order. Columnist Lona Manning, writing at American Thinker, reported today that "Pledge Project Canvass," the group of over employed
holdover workers from the Obama campaign, would be hitting the streets beginning
tomorrow, “knocking on doors and accosting folks in parking lots and sidewalks
to ask them to sign a pledge to support Obama's policies for health care, energy and
education reform.” (Obama
wants you to pledge loyalty to him tomorrow). Sieg Heil! Since I spend a lot of time sequestered in my home office searching
for issues to write about here at The D&C, there is little likelihood that I will be
accosted in some remote parking lot. If, however, one of these robots rings my doorbell
and I hear it, which I hope, now that I think about it, actually happens. I will first
express surprise that the robot is not wearing a brown shirt, but since it is probably a
product of our public education system, that little quip will prbably pass right over the
robot's thought-processing circuitry. I will then merely inform the robot that I not only
refuse to sign that pitiful loyalty oath, but instead I will continue to do everything
that I can to defeat his policies and bring down his Administration as well. I will also
tell it that I am a supporter of the Constitution, which Oberfuhrer Obama is not; that I
believe in freedom and liberty, which Oberfuhrer Obama does not; that I believe in the
capitalistic system, which Oberfuhrer Obama does not; and that I believe in personal
responsibility, which Oberfuhrer Obama professes to do, but does not. Then any one of several things could happen. I could be called a
racist; I could be called a Neanderthal; I could be called a relic of the past; or, if the
robot has a sense of humor, it could ask me to explain how I really feel. We would
then both have a good laugh. Is RETURN TO ARCHIVES PAGE RETURN TO HOME PAGE
Sticking It to the Wounded Vets There is intelligence. And then there is wisdom. The two are not the
same, nor does one presuppose the other. Intelligence is to be applauded. Wisdom is to be
cherished. It is not the intelligent that history remembers most. It is those with wisdom. Yesterday a firestorm broke out that, fortunately, was quickly
extinguished today. A writer who I admire immensely, not only for the content of his
articles but for his style as well, Jeff Schreiber, was one of the first to report it at America’s
Right, in his article Abandoner In Chief -
Obama's attitude towards veteran healthcare indicative of Democrats' disdain for military.
That is where I first read the news that the Obama Administration was recommending that
American veterans should be required to retain private health insurance which would be
used to help pay for their war-related injuries. Until now, health care costs associated
with war-related injuries were covered totally by the Veterans’ Administration, a
concept that President Abraham Lincoln put in place during the Civil War. The thought
behind the change, according to the Obama Administration, was to save $540million of his
Stimulus Package that could be used elsewhere… for new hybrid cars to be used by the
government motor pool, for example. Jeff’s article was so indignant (rightfully so)
and so forceful, that the fifty or sixty response comments made me wonder if we were going
to have a new civil war in our country. This very graphic display about the differences between intelligence
and wisdom made be skeptical, so I set out to research the issue. I read another article
at Yahoo News that Jeff had referenced and it merely
reinforced what Jeff had written. My skepticism persisted. Continuing my investigation, I submitted the articles to a group of
classmates inquiring if they knew anything more about it. The first response came from a
very liberal member of the group, who stated that the report was part of a deception being
pushed by insurance companies over a disagreement with the VA regarding payment for health
care that the VA had administered to veterans. Knowing how I soon learned that FOX News was reporting the story, and some of my sources referred me to other articles that substantiated what I had first read. Apparently, the story was indeed true, and it troubled me greatly. That is how my day ended yesterday. I went to bed very troubled that members of our government had sunk to such unscrupulous depths that such a proposal could have be made. The research began again this morning, all pointing in the same
direction. There were reports that some Congressional Democrats had warned the
Administration to remove this provision from the Bill. One of them went so far as to state
that if it were not removed, the entire bill would be “dead on arrival” when it
got to Congress. Once again, we see the difference between intelligence and wisdom. Wisdom
includes pragmatism or, to phrase it differently, understanding how you get to stay in
office. About 6:00pm today one member of the group forwarded me an email stating that “the day was saved”, and provided a link to an article by David Goldstein at McClatchy Newspapers website, entitled White House caves on veterans plan, but what was it thinking? The article states that,
The uproar was over, but as the
article asks, what was the Administration thinking? We will probably never know who the
author of the idea was. It would not be at all surprising that it was Barack Obama
himself. More likely, however, it was some member of the White House Staff and, if there
was any wisdom whatsoever present in the White House, that person would be on an airplane
right now heading for a new post as the Housekeeping Assistant to the Third Deputy U.S.
Ambassador to Bangladesh. That such a proposal could have been seriously considered is almost
unbelievable, especially in light of all of the other unnecessary examples of pork that
our children’s and grandchildren’s money is being thrown at by this
Administration and Congress. Then again, maybe it isn’t so surprising. Anyone who
would throw his pastor friend of 20 years as well as his grandmother “under the
bus” would probably be willing to do the same with RETURN TO ARCHIVES PAGE RETURN TO HOME PAGE
On Michael Steele and Republican Strategy for 2012 Michael Steele’s recent comments about social issues were, to be
generous, very poorly stated. He was correct when he asserted that he accepted Roe v Wade
as "stare decisis" -- accepted legal precedent. It indeed is accepted legal
precedent, whether one agrees with it or not (I do not). However, as he stated it, or as
Ms. Parker interpreted it, it sounded as if this fact were, to Mr. Steele, acceptable. In
other words, his statements came across as a very middle-of-the-road, moderate Republican
position. She then went on to describe other statements that had been made by the new RNC
Chairman that were equally out of synch with the most recent Republican Party Platform.
The overall thrust of her article was that Mr. Steele was not conservative enough to hold
the position of titular head of the Republican Party. A year ago, I would have disagreed with her assertion. At that time,
most of the major Republican candidates either had dropped out of the race or were too far
behind John McCain to be in serious contention. I convinced and still am that a moderate
Republican backed by moderate/center party leadership stood the best chance of beating
either of the Democratic candidates, Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. I would have favored
a more conservative nominee than John McCain, but I felt that the public’s
misconception that George Bush was a typical conservative minimized the chances for anyone
other than McCain. Since President Obama has been in office and Americans are starting
to get a taste of his liberal agenda, it appears that the pendulum may be swinging back to
a more conservative outlook. While many things could happen between now and 2012 to change
to political environment, such as another 9/11 or a major conflict breaking out in the
Middle East, it is more likely that the single major issue facing the voters will continue
to be the nation’s economy. I do not believe that the current approach to fixing the
economy as characterized by liberal spending and a move towards Socialism will be
successful, and many Americans will be ready to go back to the old way of doing things,
relying on capitalism and the marketplace to right the ship. Therefore, a more
conservative Republican candidate would be called for in 2012. But just any conservative
would not be the answer. The party’s candidate should be first and foremost a fiscal conservative, one who could affectively focus and express conservative economic principles and policies. Although this candidate should also espouse conservative thought on social and national security issues, he or she should not be seen primarily as either a social conservative or a national security conservative. Unless things change significantly between now and then, focusing on those issues would be counter-productive, regardless of how important they may be to individual conservatives. In the next election, the Republican candidate will have three priorities: to provide the American people with a serious and credible alternative to the Democrat incumbents; to hold together the coalition that is the Republican Party; and to provide sufficient appeal to independent voters and young voters to bring significant numbers into the conservative fold. That is no small task, and at the present time there does not appear to be anyone on the Republican horizon who could successfully do all three. The “moderate” image that RNC Chairman Michael Steele has presented thus far, at least relating to social issues, is inconsistent with this three-pronged strategy in that it threatens to alienate the important social conservative wing of the Republican Party. Nonetheless, I think that it is premature to call for his resignation. RETURN TO ARCHIVES PAGE RETURN TO HOME PAGE
Hope, Change, and Buyer’s Remorse When we were playing kids’ games, if something did not turn out
the way we planned we would ask for “do-overs”. More often then not, an argument
would ensue, and we would take our marbles or our jacks or our baseball bats and go home.
It is beginning to look like more and more Americans are wishing that we could have
do-overs of last November’s election. According to polls recently conducted by
Messrs. Rasmussen and Zogby, the president’s approval rating has fallen lower in his
first sixty days in office than any other president in modern history, and even some of
his strongest supporters have begun asking questions or expressing doubts after watching
his performance. To those of us who were on the negative side of the approval
statistics long before the November election, two questions arise: “What took so
long?” and “Weren’t you listening?” Very little of what President
Obama has undertaken since his inauguration has come as a surprise or differed
significantly with what he said he would do during the presidential campaign. The fact
that a few members of the media have now begun to question Obama simply proves that they
were too distracted by the tingly feeling that they were getting in their legs to either
question or try to understand what he had been saying. Then there are some members of the
media who have been strangely quiet or have been hiding out in the neutral corner lest
they be perceived as having been duped. Finally, there are those, probably the most, who
continue to play along with the big schemes, but I would expect that to drop significantly
when Obama’s approval ratings drop below 50%. The biggest issue, of course, is the prospect of having the national
debt doubled over the next ten years to $23trillion. That is not my figure, ladies and
gentlemen, that is the promise of the Obama Administration itself. How much is
$23trillion, you ask? It is roughly $75,000 of debt for every man, woman, and child in the
The President has been taking the heat, of late, from his own
original supporters as well as from members within the Democratic Party. The problem, as
they see it, is that the Administration is adhering to the principle explained by White
House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel as, "Never let a serious crisis go to waste."
It is difficult for normally staunch Obama supporters such as political theorist William
Galston and businessman Warren Buffet to understand how digitizing all Americans’
medical records will help put people back to work. It is just as mystifying how taxing
coal-fired power plants will help straighten out the banking system. Yet jobs and the
failure of the banking system are the problems that a stimulus package is supposed to
cure. Instead, Obama is using these problems as an excuse to launch all of his favorite,
big-dollar social programs that will have little if any positive influences the overall
health of the economy. Meanwhile, Democrats in Congress are beginning to express serious
reservations about the Administration’s big spending habits, especially some of those
who are facing re-election contests in 2010. At the same time, Republicans in Congress are
beginning to flex their muscles. Look for it to be more difficult for each successive
spending bill to get through that body. Will Barack Obama face a difficult time being re-elected in 2012? It
is too early to tell, and there are far too many variables. The single biggest variable
today is, of course, the economy. I foresee that during the next four years, there will be
some improvement there, but not to the extent that we will return to the glory days of
2005 and 2006. Also by then I expect that Americans will see across-the-board tax
increases to offset the huge spending programs that have already been put in place during
Obama’s first sixty days in office, not to mention those still to come. The other significant variable is whether or not Republicans will be able to challenge him with a strong candidate and whether they can focus on the real issues that are of the greatest concern to Americans at the time.
RETURN TO ARCHIVES PAGE RETURN TO HOME PAGE
|